Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RFI\]\s+Disappointing\s+NEC\s+Monitor\s+\&\s+a\s+query\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RFI\]\s+Disappointing\s+NEC\s+Monitor\s+\&\s+a\s+query\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. [RFI] Disappointing NEC Monitor & a query (score: 1): Author: k0il@arrl.net" <k0il@arrl.net (Ed - K0iL); Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 15:47:13 -0600; Tnx for the heads up Dave. I've always wondered how the newer NECs stacked up vs. the older C500 models. Say, does anyone on the list know how the Dell Monitors (like their E551) stack up in the EMI; /archives//html/RFI/2002-03/msg00053.html (7,470 bytes)
2. [RFI] Disappointing NEC Monitor & a query (score: 1): Author: rbodine@cpinternet.com (Dick); Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 18:09:47 -0600; I sent this to the reflector about two weeks ago but have yet to see it appear. So here goes again. I've been doing some testing of LCD monitors and of the two, one Gateway (FPD 1520) and a NEC LCD15; /archives//html/RFI/2002-03/msg00054.html (7,213 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]