24 x 80 is too small. -- MIDRANGE-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

Subject: 24 x 80 is too small.
From: CZE Midrange <CZEMidrange@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 08:51:01 -0500
List-archive: <http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l>
List-help: <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=help>
List-id: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion <midrange-l.midrange.com>
List-post: <mailto:midrange-l@midrange.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l>, <mailto:midrange-l-request@midrange.com?subject=unsubscribe>

   Many days I have received application requests for data extendi= ng past
   80 columns and 20 rows. I heard somewhere that you can co= de a DSPF to 25
   x 132 but how would one go about this?
    </DI= V>
   Thanks.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow-Ups:

Re: 24 x 80 is too small. , Al Barsa
Re: 24 x 80 is too small. , Booth Martin
Re: 24 x 80 is too small. , Michael Naughton
Re: 24 x 80 is too small. , rob
Re: 24 x 80 is too small. , trevor perry

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.