However, DLP has its own problems (the rainbow effect is awesome!). LCoS is just another LCD-based technology (assuming I understood the wiki page on LCoS correctly), just with the LCD directly mounted on a mirror instead of projecting through it (and therefore I assume it has the same problem with light getting through "black" as a through-projection LCD). The Wikipedia article on LCoS has an uncited statement that LCoS is better contrast than projecting through an LCD, but doesn't mention black level at all.

LED backlights are no good on very large panels, because they use LED strips around the edge or on one side and a large light diffuser, which still produces an uneven result at large panel sizes. ELP is far better (it's a full panel sized light over the whole display), but far more expensive, and can still have trouble getting even illumination.

Digital projectors often suffer the same problem, as they use a much stronger light projecting a small LCD, it tends to bleed through the black.

There are projectors which dim their bulb for dark images just like you described flat panel TVs doing.

Probably a problem with larger TVs only, which can only use strong backlights around the edges, causing a lot of problems trying to light the middle.

My 22" computer monitor has no trouble what-so-ever with black. Or contrast.

Which drivers?

XP x64 has been my primary/gaming PC's OS (through three (IIRC) PC parts upgrades) since MS did the free XP to XP x64 upgrade for people with "64 bit" PCs which only had a 32-bit XP on.

Driver support is pretty awesome. Even my no-brand webcam works.

However an IO bottleneck will have a tendency to freeze any programs using the same IO device in blocking mode. e.g. trying to browse the web while bittorrent is going at full speed often causes the browser to time out.

Even then that's due to lack of a decent IO scheduler. IIRC XP's is first come first served, aka greedy git takes all. In XP the greedy process even gets disk IO priority over the Windows kernel trying to page another process back in from page file, meaning a disk and ram-usage heavy program can practically lock up the entire pc, by forcing other processes (including explorer) to completely page out to disk and then consuming all the disk IO, denying them a chance to page back in. You can't even start task manager and kill the offending process while this is happening, because Windows can't get any disk IO time to read the tiny taskman.exe.

I think this was fixed in Vista.

I always thought "disks" were those square magnetic things and "discs" were those round mirrored things.

Unfortunately, 16-bit Windows 9x apps can't be run on Windows x64 either, and dosbox can't run them...

Unfortunately IE seems to ignore that completely.

And in the case of the server specifying multiple accepted charsets (say ISO-8859-1 and UTF-8), there is no standard for how the client should inform the server which charset it used.

However, having remote access to the host of a bunch of virtual machines would be the equivalent of physical access to those virtual machines. You can change the mounted media, reboot them...

Forcing the browser to utf-8 doesn't fix the corrupted text, so Slashdot is obviously mangling it server-side.

I never said it was.
I said browsers submit forms (e.g. the comment form) in either the page's charset or in utf-8 if that isn't possible, but don't tell the server which. Which implies that the page's charset isn't already utf-8.

It's possible that the server is safely storing and handling utf-8 data, and it is just the charset being sent by the server in the content-type header which is causing the BROWSER to screw up the rendering. I'll check.

It's not just slashdot, it's also the fact that HTML/HTTP provides no way to know what charset a form was submitted in. Some browsers append a charset to the content-type http header they send, but most try to send in the same charset as the page, or utf-8 if that's not possible, but don't tell the server which...

I.E. is even better, as it ignores the charset the server sends in its HTTP content-type header and tries to guess instead, unless you put a content-type meta tag in the page.

That sounds familiar...

Work: PC with two monitors (1680x1050 and 1440x900). The lower res monitor is the right size to have the same DPI as the higher res one, so it isn't too bad. HD "Ready" TV on the left with 360 and PS3 devkits attached.
Does that count as two or three? The computer has two displays, but I use all three displays on the desk at once.

Home: PC with single 22" 1680x1050 display, also connected to the ancient 800x600 digital projector that I use as my tv. (Does that count as one or two displays?)
My 360 is also connected to the "tv".
Mostly-file server with no displays at all, which I only access through RDP or SMB (or, remotely, HTTP) unless it breaks down. It makes a pretty efficient room heater too, as it is too old to be able to scale cpu frequency back when it is idle, so runs at 200W continuously.
EEEPc laptop with one 9" 1024x600 display. I put the Windows 7 beta on it for fun.

So I use anywhere from a single low-res 9" display to 3 decent ~20" monitors to a single ~40" low-res projected display.

I answered "two".

Apparently they actually patented various things to do with that burger: http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=US&NR=4653685&KC=&FT=E

Wow, I've got +1 Flamebait.
I'm not actually trying to be flamebait, I do actually find the idea of a gay coming on to me repulsive. I think a lot of other people also think like that, only they extend it to hatred of gays themselves instead of the live and let live attitude I take.

I've been friends with gay people before (and one bisexual), and I don't have anything against them as people. They're perfectly normal, just a little different to me.