Hi!
I've read all FAQs high and low and asked google a lot of stuff. But my situation is the following:
I want to play games on either a 3D Monitor (a BenQ XL2420T) or a 3DTV (a Panasonic TX-P55VT50E). I have now a couple of questions that I couldn't find the answers to.
1. Is there any difference in the quality of the 3D image between 3DTV play on the TV and 3D Vision on the monitor? I am myself aware of the fact that I can go only up to 720p@60Hz on the TV and up to 1080p@60Hz on the monitor. But besides? Differences in e.g. brightness or the popouts itsself?
2. If there is any one out who tested both setups, can you give a (subjective) opinion on which you prefer and why?
I'd really like to play on the TV due to the larger image, but I'm afraid of the resolution and I'm not sure if maybe the quality of the 3D Vision picture and glasses is better than that from the Panasonic TVs.
Any help is much appreciated!
I've read all FAQs high and low and asked google a lot of stuff. But my situation is the following:
I want to play games on either a 3D Monitor (a BenQ XL2420T) or a 3DTV (a Panasonic TX-P55VT50E). I have now a couple of questions that I couldn't find the answers to.
1. Is there any difference in the quality of the 3D image between 3DTV play on the TV and 3D Vision on the monitor? I am myself aware of the fact that I can go only up to 720p@60Hz on the TV and up to 1080p@60Hz on the monitor. But besides? Differences in e.g. brightness or the popouts itsself?
2. If there is any one out who tested both setups, can you give a (subjective) opinion on which you prefer and why?
I'd really like to play on the TV due to the larger image, but I'm afraid of the resolution and I'm not sure if maybe the quality of the 3D Vision picture and glasses is better than that from the Panasonic TVs.
Also consider 3D Vision Surround which goes up to 5760 x 1080 (on average) when you think about the size of the field of view. I know from my own experience that when you go above 50 inch with this resolution (720p) picture is not sharp enough and quite blurry ( there you go quality concern ). Nothing will give you greater immersion then wide field of view (of course when you got Stereo3D picture already) and with this resolution quality is amazing!
Also consider 3D Vision Surround which goes up to 5760 x 1080 (on average) when you think about the size of the field of view. I know from my own experience that when you go above 50 inch with this resolution (720p) picture is not sharp enough and quite blurry ( there you go quality concern ). Nothing will give you greater immersion then wide field of view (of course when you got Stereo3D picture already) and with this resolution quality is amazing!
1. a. A huge difference in quality. HDTV uses 3dtvPlay through hdmi. hdmi is limited to 1080p24hz or 720p60hz. So if you want smooth gaming you're cutting resolution. If using passive 3d, resolution is cut further (however your panasonic is active). 3d Vision on the monitor uses dual-link dvi, which has enough bandwidth for full 1080p60hz 3d experience.
b. Probably a negligable difference in brightness. Both are active shutter systems. Most games have a brightness adjuster anyway.
c. Popout? Well, thats not dependant on screen at all. Thats an adjustment of depth and convergence while playing 3d games. You can get (almost) any game to have "popout" if you wish.
2. I have a 3dtv (3dtvplay) and 3d Vision. While its nice to game on my tv at times for it's size, I still prefer my monitor. Native resolution, full 60hz per eye. Very sharp 3d gaming. Plus, when depth is cranked, the gameworld can seem huge, even on a smaller screen.
Hope that helps. But, if you already got both the TV and the monitor, just get 3d Vision. You get 3dtv play free, by plugging in the emitter, and play on both. If not, I'd say go with the monitor and full 3d vision.
1. a. A huge difference in quality. HDTV uses 3dtvPlay through hdmi. hdmi is limited to 1080p24hz or 720p60hz. So if you want smooth gaming you're cutting resolution. If using passive 3d, resolution is cut further (however your panasonic is active). 3d Vision on the monitor uses dual-link dvi, which has enough bandwidth for full 1080p60hz 3d experience.
b. Probably a negligable difference in brightness. Both are active shutter systems. Most games have a brightness adjuster anyway.
c. Popout? Well, thats not dependant on screen at all. Thats an adjustment of depth and convergence while playing 3d games. You can get (almost) any game to have "popout" if you wish.
2. I have a 3dtv (3dtvplay) and 3d Vision. While its nice to game on my tv at times for it's size, I still prefer my monitor. Native resolution, full 60hz per eye. Very sharp 3d gaming. Plus, when depth is cranked, the gameworld can seem huge, even on a smaller screen.
Hope that helps. But, if you already got both the TV and the monitor, just get 3d Vision. You get 3dtv play free, by plugging in the emitter, and play on both. If not, I'd say go with the monitor and full 3d vision.
AsRock X58 Extreme6 mobo
Intel Core-i7 950 @ 4ghz
12gb Corsair Dominator DDR3 1600
ASUS DirectCU II GTX 780 3gb
Corsair TX 950w PSU
NZXT Phantom Red/Black Case
3d Vision 1 w/ Samsung 2233rz Monitor
3d Vision 2 w/ ASUS VG278HE Monitor
Well what I did on my LG 32" TV was use the Acer edid inf. So now it sees my monitor as an Acer passive so now it uses 3dvision not 3dplay and at 1080p through HDMI. Got it through reading on 3dvision blog com forums.
Well what I did on my LG 32" TV was use the Acer edid inf. So now it sees my monitor as an Acer passive so now it uses 3dvision not 3dplay and at 1080p through HDMI. Got it through reading on 3dvision blog com forums.
First a caveat: I don't own a TV.
With my XL2410T my viewing distance is approximate 2 feet.
When I tried to sit as close as possible comfortably from my new 27" VG278H
I ended up with a viewing distance of 1.5 feet.
This gives an extreme viewing angle of 66.3 degrees.
The more normal setup with my Benq has a viewing angle of 46.4
If we match the viewing angle as reference this leads to a viewin distance
of 4.66 feet where normal viewing distance from couch to TV can often be around 10 feet.
A small screen nearby can be significantly larger than a big screen far away.
Unless you are close enough to your TV that the resulting image appears larger than using
your computer monitor you will in effect have a smaller gaming area on a larger screen.
I believe the choice will come down to preference and the type of game.
Another thing to take into account is that for a given 3D image the 3D effect
depends on the size of the screen. Having just watched Hobbit in 3D on a 765" screen
I know that the imprinted 3D effects are optimized for a large screen and
when later watched at home on Blu-ray 3D the percieved depth will be much reduced.
But we are talking dynamic content with 3D Vision where there the depth slider is different
depending on screensize. 100% depth on your Benq produces images that would require
233% depth on your 55" TV.
With bigger screen you are further away and gets less crosseyed with
pop-out which means that you can dial it up to 11 and get items closer than half the viewing distance without getting too crosseyed. 100% depth is less extreme which means much more depth.
As depth increases with distance from screen.
As you have both (perhaps lacking a 3D Vision kit) you should probably try both.
They offer very different experience as the more extreme images when using a
small monitor makes you look around objects to a much larger extent and while
you can not exceed pop-out of half the viewing distance without getting completely
crosseyed any pop-out will appear really close to your face because of the short viewing distance.
For the reasons mentioned and the reduced resolution + scaling you will probably end up at your
normal viewing location with pretty large viewing distance. You should not notice resolution loss
and by maxing out anti aliasing instead jaggies should be gone.
Big screen + big distance = more depth
Possibility of large pop-out
With my XL2410T my viewing distance is approximate 2 feet.
When I tried to sit as close as possible comfortably from my new 27" VG278H
I ended up with a viewing distance of 1.5 feet.
This gives an extreme viewing angle of 66.3 degrees.
The more normal setup with my Benq has a viewing angle of 46.4
If we match the viewing angle as reference this leads to a viewin distance
of 4.66 feet where normal viewing distance from couch to TV can often be around 10 feet.
A small screen nearby can be significantly larger than a big screen far away.
Unless you are close enough to your TV that the resulting image appears larger than using
your computer monitor you will in effect have a smaller gaming area on a larger screen.
I believe the choice will come down to preference and the type of game.
Another thing to take into account is that for a given 3D image the 3D effect
depends on the size of the screen. Having just watched Hobbit in 3D on a 765" screen
I know that the imprinted 3D effects are optimized for a large screen and
when later watched at home on Blu-ray 3D the percieved depth will be much reduced.
But we are talking dynamic content with 3D Vision where there the depth slider is different
depending on screensize. 100% depth on your Benq produces images that would require
233% depth on your 55" TV.
With bigger screen you are further away and gets less crosseyed with
pop-out which means that you can dial it up to 11 and get items closer than half the viewing distance without getting too crosseyed. 100% depth is less extreme which means much more depth.
As depth increases with distance from screen.
As you have both (perhaps lacking a 3D Vision kit) you should probably try both.
They offer very different experience as the more extreme images when using a
small monitor makes you look around objects to a much larger extent and while
you can not exceed pop-out of half the viewing distance without getting completely
crosseyed any pop-out will appear really close to your face because of the short viewing distance.
For the reasons mentioned and the reduced resolution + scaling you will probably end up at your
normal viewing location with pretty large viewing distance. You should not notice resolution loss
and by maxing out anti aliasing instead jaggies should be gone.
Big screen + big distance = more depth
Possibility of large pop-out
Thanks to everybody using my assembler it warms my heart.
To have a critical piece of code that everyone can enjoy!
What more can you ask for?
With a 120Hz "INPUT" Display, there's an added bonus of gaming at 120Hz in 2D as well as 3D, which can offer an advantage in player vs player games.<----this is true 120Hz with no frame interpolation and without the inherent lag thats associated with frame interpolation
So a lot depends on the type of games you play and your tolerance for lag.
120 Hz inputs > 60Hz inputs all day, every day.
TVs are limited to 60Hz input via HDMI.
With a 120Hz "INPUT" Display, there's an added bonus of gaming at 120Hz in 2D as well as 3D, which can offer an advantage in player vs player games.<----this is true 120Hz with no frame interpolation and without the inherent lag thats associated with frame interpolation
So a lot depends on the type of games you play and your tolerance for lag.
Considering he already has a 120hz monitor and what I expect to be a good 55" Panasonic 3DTV he will have a lot of flexibility if he buys a 3D Vision kit. In 2D 120hz clearly beats 60hz but some games might be more suited to a TV. In 3D both offer 60hz for each eye and the reduced quality of the image on the TV might not be that noticable in practice as the viewing distance tend to be pretty far.
There is a reason why 720p TVs can win a blind test against 1080p panels.
Normal viewing distances are pretty far away.
The biggest 1080p60hz solution supported by 3D Vision is as far as I know the 27" monitors.
What I'm trying to say is that a bigger screen at a fixed viewing distance will always be an improvement. In 3D there are additional benefits to screensize as discussed above.
Considering he already has a 120hz monitor and what I expect to be a good 55" Panasonic 3DTV he will have a lot of flexibility if he buys a 3D Vision kit. In 2D 120hz clearly beats 60hz but some games might be more suited to a TV. In 3D both offer 60hz for each eye and the reduced quality of the image on the TV might not be that noticable in practice as the viewing distance tend to be pretty far.
There is a reason why 720p TVs can win a blind test against 1080p panels.
Normal viewing distances are pretty far away.
The biggest 1080p60hz solution supported by 3D Vision is as far as I know the 27" monitors.
What I'm trying to say is that a bigger screen at a fixed viewing distance will always be an improvement. In 3D there are additional benefits to screensize as discussed above.
Thanks to everybody using my assembler it warms my heart.
To have a critical piece of code that everyone can enjoy!
What more can you ask for?
[quote="Flugan"]
What I'm trying to say is that a bigger screen at a fixed viewing distance will always be an improvement. In 3D there are additional benefits to screensize as discussed above.[/quote]
But that is not true, it will not be an "improvement" if the larger display has "noticeably" more lag that makes gameplay intolerable.
Been there, done that, no ty
Flugan said:
What I'm trying to say is that a bigger screen at a fixed viewing distance will always be an improvement. In 3D there are additional benefits to screensize as discussed above.
But that is not true, it will not be an "improvement" if the larger display has "noticeably" more lag that makes gameplay intolerable.
Well, lag will always make the experience worse, no question about that. However Flugan did only talk about the benefits of larger displays. Larger screens are not automatically connected to more lag.
Well, lag will always make the experience worse, no question about that. However Flugan did only talk about the benefits of larger displays. Larger screens are not automatically connected to more lag.
As I only talked about input Hz a few posts earlier.
Again I quote he says "Will always be an improvement"
Makes it seem like a "constant", a "given", but it's not.
It's very much a variable with many factors that must be added together to come up with the equitable solution to the end result that will be correct for the end user.
If he wants to state that larger displays generally give a greater immersion, I'd agree fully.
Everything he says about distance to the display and field of vision is spot on.
Other than his 233% notion, no idea where that comes from.
As I only talked about input Hz a few posts earlier.
Again I quote he says "Will always be an improvement"
Makes it seem like a "constant", a "given", but it's not.
It's very much a variable with many factors that must be added together to come up with the equitable solution to the end result that will be correct for the end user.
If he wants to state that larger displays generally give a greater immersion, I'd agree fully.
Everything he says about distance to the display and field of vision is spot on.
Other than his 233% notion, no idea where that comes from.
[quote="Evil_Dobermann"]Hi!
I've read all FAQs high and low and asked google a lot of stuff. But my situation is the following:
I want to play games on either a 3D Monitor (a BenQ XL2420T) or a 3DTV (a Panasonic TX-P55VT50E). I have now a couple of questions that I couldn't find the answers to.
1. Is there any difference in the quality of the 3D image between 3DTV play on the TV and 3D Vision on the monitor? I am myself aware of the fact that I can go only up to 720p@60Hz on the TV and up to 1080p@60Hz on the monitor. But besides? Differences in e.g. brightness or the popouts itsself?
2. If there is any one out who tested both setups, can you give a (subjective) opinion on which you prefer and why?
I'd really like to play on the TV due to the larger image, but I'm afraid of the resolution and I'm not sure if maybe the quality of the 3D Vision picture and glasses is better than that from the Panasonic TVs.
Any help is much appreciated![/quote]
Good morning.
Let me just piont out something here and explain why 120hz monitors suck imho when compring with a plasma, there small and need 120hz to achive what plasma's achive at 60hz/60fps
27" 120hz in 2d gives smooth motion with hardly any blurring/ghsoting of fast moving images, so thats 1080p and 120hz needed.
1080p 3d is achieved.
55" plasma in 2d at 60hz gives the same effect as 120hz on a lcd but at half the gpu power !
In 3d it can only achieve 720p from 3dtvplay or 1080p sbs via tridef.
So thats no blurring/ghosting with fast moving objects but at 60hz instead of a wasted 120hz :) :)
There is alot of quality difference bewteen the 2 softwares, 3dtplay at 720p is still very playable, much more playable on the plasma i have, not very playable on a passive system, and i love big scvreen gaming, i've looked at the 27 " before many times and just could'nt see myself enjoying 3d on such a small screen but then i have allways been a tv man and not a monitor dude.
I've read all FAQs high and low and asked google a lot of stuff. But my situation is the following:
I want to play games on either a 3D Monitor (a BenQ XL2420T) or a 3DTV (a Panasonic TX-P55VT50E). I have now a couple of questions that I couldn't find the answers to.
1. Is there any difference in the quality of the 3D image between 3DTV play on the TV and 3D Vision on the monitor? I am myself aware of the fact that I can go only up to 720p@60Hz on the TV and up to 1080p@60Hz on the monitor. But besides? Differences in e.g. brightness or the popouts itsself?
2. If there is any one out who tested both setups, can you give a (subjective) opinion on which you prefer and why?
I'd really like to play on the TV due to the larger image, but I'm afraid of the resolution and I'm not sure if maybe the quality of the 3D Vision picture and glasses is better than that from the Panasonic TVs.
Any help is much appreciated!
Good morning.
Let me just piont out something here and explain why 120hz monitors suck imho when compring with a plasma, there small and need 120hz to achive what plasma's achive at 60hz/60fps
27" 120hz in 2d gives smooth motion with hardly any blurring/ghsoting of fast moving images, so thats 1080p and 120hz needed.
1080p 3d is achieved.
55" plasma in 2d at 60hz gives the same effect as 120hz on a lcd but at half the gpu power !
In 3d it can only achieve 720p from 3dtvplay or 1080p sbs via tridef.
So thats no blurring/ghosting with fast moving objects but at 60hz instead of a wasted 120hz :) :)
There is alot of quality difference bewteen the 2 softwares, 3dtplay at 720p is still very playable, much more playable on the plasma i have, not very playable on a passive system, and i love big scvreen gaming, i've looked at the 27 " before many times and just could'nt see myself enjoying 3d on such a small screen but then i have allways been a tv man and not a monitor dude.
Gigabyte x99 gaming 5p Intel 5930k 16gb Kingston Fury Sli Kfa Hof 980ti 500gb Samsung Evo Ssd Corsair hx v2 850w HafX Case + Full set of Demciflex filters Sony 8505 4k 3d
As a PC gamer all the way back to 286 and MS DOS 5 I have always gamed with a small monitor within arms reach. Big screen gaming appears to me to have more similarities with console gaming.
I havn't used a TV for console gaming since the eighties and they weren't that big (14-20").
Thus I'm not very used to big screen gaming and I would still find using excel, World of Warcraft, Counter-strike 1.6, Civilization V and StarCraft and StarCraft 2 to be pretty strange on a big screen.
I'm clearly not used to it. My guess a lot of people use both small and large screen depending on use.
As a PC gamer all the way back to 286 and MS DOS 5 I have always gamed with a small monitor within arms reach. Big screen gaming appears to me to have more similarities with console gaming.
I havn't used a TV for console gaming since the eighties and they weren't that big (14-20").
Thus I'm not very used to big screen gaming and I would still find using excel, World of Warcraft, Counter-strike 1.6, Civilization V and StarCraft and StarCraft 2 to be pretty strange on a big screen.
I'm clearly not used to it. My guess a lot of people use both small and large screen depending on use.
Thanks to everybody using my assembler it warms my heart.
To have a critical piece of code that everyone can enjoy!
What more can you ask for?
I've read all FAQs high and low and asked google a lot of stuff. But my situation is the following:
I want to play games on either a 3D Monitor (a BenQ XL2420T) or a 3DTV (a Panasonic TX-P55VT50E). I have now a couple of questions that I couldn't find the answers to.
1. Is there any difference in the quality of the 3D image between 3DTV play on the TV and 3D Vision on the monitor? I am myself aware of the fact that I can go only up to 720p@60Hz on the TV and up to 1080p@60Hz on the monitor. But besides? Differences in e.g. brightness or the popouts itsself?
2. If there is any one out who tested both setups, can you give a (subjective) opinion on which you prefer and why?
I'd really like to play on the TV due to the larger image, but I'm afraid of the resolution and I'm not sure if maybe the quality of the 3D Vision picture and glasses is better than that from the Panasonic TVs.
Any help is much appreciated!
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198014296177/
b. Probably a negligable difference in brightness. Both are active shutter systems. Most games have a brightness adjuster anyway.
c. Popout? Well, thats not dependant on screen at all. Thats an adjustment of depth and convergence while playing 3d games. You can get (almost) any game to have "popout" if you wish.
2. I have a 3dtv (3dtvplay) and 3d Vision. While its nice to game on my tv at times for it's size, I still prefer my monitor. Native resolution, full 60hz per eye. Very sharp 3d gaming. Plus, when depth is cranked, the gameworld can seem huge, even on a smaller screen.
Hope that helps. But, if you already got both the TV and the monitor, just get 3d Vision. You get 3dtv play free, by plugging in the emitter, and play on both. If not, I'd say go with the monitor and full 3d vision.
AsRock X58 Extreme6 mobo
Intel Core-i7 950 @ 4ghz
12gb Corsair Dominator DDR3 1600
ASUS DirectCU II GTX 780 3gb
Corsair TX 950w PSU
NZXT Phantom Red/Black Case
3d Vision 1 w/ Samsung 2233rz Monitor
3d Vision 2 w/ ASUS VG278HE Monitor
With my XL2410T my viewing distance is approximate 2 feet.
When I tried to sit as close as possible comfortably from my new 27" VG278H
I ended up with a viewing distance of 1.5 feet.
This gives an extreme viewing angle of 66.3 degrees.
The more normal setup with my Benq has a viewing angle of 46.4
If we match the viewing angle as reference this leads to a viewin distance
of 4.66 feet where normal viewing distance from couch to TV can often be around 10 feet.
A small screen nearby can be significantly larger than a big screen far away.
Unless you are close enough to your TV that the resulting image appears larger than using
your computer monitor you will in effect have a smaller gaming area on a larger screen.
I believe the choice will come down to preference and the type of game.
Another thing to take into account is that for a given 3D image the 3D effect
depends on the size of the screen. Having just watched Hobbit in 3D on a 765" screen
I know that the imprinted 3D effects are optimized for a large screen and
when later watched at home on Blu-ray 3D the percieved depth will be much reduced.
But we are talking dynamic content with 3D Vision where there the depth slider is different
depending on screensize. 100% depth on your Benq produces images that would require
233% depth on your 55" TV.
With bigger screen you are further away and gets less crosseyed with
pop-out which means that you can dial it up to 11 and get items closer than half the viewing distance without getting too crosseyed. 100% depth is less extreme which means much more depth.
As depth increases with distance from screen.
As you have both (perhaps lacking a 3D Vision kit) you should probably try both.
They offer very different experience as the more extreme images when using a
small monitor makes you look around objects to a much larger extent and while
you can not exceed pop-out of half the viewing distance without getting completely
crosseyed any pop-out will appear really close to your face because of the short viewing distance.
For the reasons mentioned and the reduced resolution + scaling you will probably end up at your
normal viewing location with pretty large viewing distance. You should not notice resolution loss
and by maxing out anti aliasing instead jaggies should be gone.
Big screen + big distance = more depth
Possibility of large pop-out
Thanks to everybody using my assembler it warms my heart.
To have a critical piece of code that everyone can enjoy!
What more can you ask for?
donations: ulfjalmbrant@hotmail.com
So a lot depends on the type of games you play and your tolerance for lag.
120 Hz inputs > 60Hz inputs all day, every day.
TVs are limited to 60Hz input via HDMI.
There is a reason why 720p TVs can win a blind test against 1080p panels.
Normal viewing distances are pretty far away.
The biggest 1080p60hz solution supported by 3D Vision is as far as I know the 27" monitors.
What I'm trying to say is that a bigger screen at a fixed viewing distance will always be an improvement. In 3D there are additional benefits to screensize as discussed above.
Thanks to everybody using my assembler it warms my heart.
To have a critical piece of code that everyone can enjoy!
What more can you ask for?
donations: ulfjalmbrant@hotmail.com
But that is not true, it will not be an "improvement" if the larger display has "noticeably" more lag that makes gameplay intolerable.
Been there, done that, no ty
Mb: Asus P5W DH Deluxe
Cpu: C2D E6600
Gb: Nvidia 7900GT + 8800GTX
3D:100" passive projector polarized setup + 22" IZ3D
Stereodrivers: Iz3d & Tridef ignition and nvidia old school.
Again I quote he says "Will always be an improvement"
Makes it seem like a "constant", a "given", but it's not.
It's very much a variable with many factors that must be added together to come up with the equitable solution to the end result that will be correct for the end user.
If he wants to state that larger displays generally give a greater immersion, I'd agree fully.
Everything he says about distance to the display and field of vision is spot on.
Other than his 233% notion, no idea where that comes from.
Good morning.
Let me just piont out something here and explain why 120hz monitors suck imho when compring with a plasma, there small and need 120hz to achive what plasma's achive at 60hz/60fps
27" 120hz in 2d gives smooth motion with hardly any blurring/ghsoting of fast moving images, so thats 1080p and 120hz needed.
1080p 3d is achieved.
55" plasma in 2d at 60hz gives the same effect as 120hz on a lcd but at half the gpu power !
In 3d it can only achieve 720p from 3dtvplay or 1080p sbs via tridef.
So thats no blurring/ghosting with fast moving objects but at 60hz instead of a wasted 120hz :) :)
There is alot of quality difference bewteen the 2 softwares, 3dtplay at 720p is still very playable, much more playable on the plasma i have, not very playable on a passive system, and i love big scvreen gaming, i've looked at the 27 " before many times and just could'nt see myself enjoying 3d on such a small screen but then i have allways been a tv man and not a monitor dude.
Gigabyte x99 gaming 5p Intel 5930k 16gb Kingston Fury Sli Kfa Hof 980ti 500gb Samsung Evo Ssd Corsair hx v2 850w HafX Case + Full set of Demciflex filters Sony 8505 4k 3d
I havn't used a TV for console gaming since the eighties and they weren't that big (14-20").
Thus I'm not very used to big screen gaming and I would still find using excel, World of Warcraft, Counter-strike 1.6, Civilization V and StarCraft and StarCraft 2 to be pretty strange on a big screen.
I'm clearly not used to it. My guess a lot of people use both small and large screen depending on use.
Thanks to everybody using my assembler it warms my heart.
To have a critical piece of code that everyone can enjoy!
What more can you ask for?
donations: ulfjalmbrant@hotmail.com