From: MLINDROOS@finabo.abo.fi (Marcus Lindroos INF)
Subject: Re: CallForDiscussion: A*BETTER* HP95LX?
Organization: Abo Akademi University, Finland
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 10:58:37 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.23

In <1avf2bINNhug@uwm.edu> anthony@csd4.csd.uwm.edu writes:

> In article <1992Oct7.150618.1160@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> williams@nssdcs.gsfc.nasa.gov (Jim Williams) writes:
> 
> >HP95 uses characters that are 5x7 is a matrix that is 6x8.  This is
> >the smallest usable character format I know of.  You seem to think
> >that you can produce readable characters (the *entire* code page 850
> >set, remember!) with characters only 3 pixels wide, with one pixel
> >space between!  Show me such a character set and I'll eat the next set
> >of batteries that come out of my '95.  "Effortlessly" display 80x8 in
> 
> Well, there are several programs on the old Atari 8 bit and Commodore
> 64 machines that would do 80x24 characters in 320x192 pixels.  Two of
> them for the Atari are SpeedScript-80, a word processor and VT-10^2, a
> VT-100 terminal emulator.  You can see the programs for yourself at
> atari.archive.umich.edu:/atari/8-bit/{Editors,Telecomm}.  I've used
> both programs and the text is quite readable, although certain
> characters like "m" and "n" look rather similar.  Good thing alkaline
> batteries now have low mercury content, eh? :-)  Seriously, doing the
> entire CP 850 set would be difficult, perhaps impossible, without
> arbitrary symbols.  As I noted before, at least one person has already
> written such dense text software for the HP.  There are packages
> for the old TRS-80 Model 100 that got up to 60 columns in a display
> about the same as the HP's.

I did check out the various options here before posting (it's easy, just draw
the characters you want using a PCX-compatible graphics program like WINDOWS
Paintbrush, then transfer it to the 95LX as your TopCard graphics file) my
article. Basically, 5*12 (or 5*11) pixels work even better than the current
6*8 format - I've always felt that wide characters aren't as easy to read as
standard-PC CGA/EGA/VGA letters. 4*12 is a bit trickier because there are so
few pixels horizontally but it does work - if you use the additional vertical
space for making the characters sufficiently different (like "m" and "n", still
tough as you need at least 5 pixels for a distinct "M" letter). Even 4*7-pixel
character matrices work, but you can only display block letters and numerals.
---
The only sub-notebook computer I've examined in detail is the Vortec produced
by Samsung. This is roughly the size of a Zeos, Compaq or Gateway notebook with
a 154mm-wide screen, so there's no reason why a slightly larger 95LX screen
shouldn't be good enough to support an 80-column mode. Now, as the fellow from
Denmark (don't remember his name!) pointed out, achieving a 480 pixel-wide
154mm display on the 95LX isn't impossible - if the number of pixels per inch
is increased to 50.4, which is the current value for the 95LX's vertical 
resolution. With 154*48, 80*12 characters would be the default option to most
users. Of course, cost and power consumption(sp) are the main obstacles here
but I am confident that removing Lotus 1-2-3 could cut down prices by 25% 
at least.  
  
> >ABSOLUTELY NOT!  This is a pocket computer.  It can not get any
> >bigger!  If you want a better keyboard, buy a ZEOS or Gateway
> >sub-notebook.
> 
> Right, if I can't carry it everywhere, I can't use it.

OK, but an extra 15mm wouldn't hurt - especially if HP could find a way to make
a slimmer unit.
 
> >A built in programming language would also be nice.  A custom GWBASIC,
> >with access to Jaguar graphics and system manager functions, would be
> >quite acceptable.  This would make it possible to hack up SM compliant
> >apps directly on the machine!
> 
> Sparcom has a special Basic with these features.
> --
> <-:(= Anthony Stieber	anthony@csd4.csd.uwm.edu   uwm!uwmcsd4!anthony

MARCU$