[gentoo-user] OT: Monitor resolutions

[gentoo-user] OT: Monitor resolutions

[JimD]

Does anyone know whey monitor resolutions go:

1024x768, 1152x864, 1280x1024

Shouldn't that last number be: 1280x960?  I have a 17" and a 19" LCD and
I have been wondering why both do 1280x1024 by default.

Jim
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: Monitor resolutions

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Tuesday 28 March 2006 01:38, JimD wrote:
> Does anyone know whey monitor resolutions go:
>
> 1024x768, 1152x864, 1280x1024
>
> Shouldn't that last number be: 1280x960?  I have a 17" and a 19" LCD and
> I have been wondering why both do 1280x1024 by default.
>

stupidity? Some very dumb group of persons must be responsible for 
1280x1024....

I am using 1280x960 with my 17" crt and used it with my (now dead after a 
loooong life) 20" crt. 1280x960 is even a valid vesa mode. So use it, if you 
want. At least with 1280x960 the aspect ratio is correct, circles are circles 
and fonts are much less ugly than with 1280x1024.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: Monitor resolutions

[Manuel McLure]

JimD wrote:
> Does anyone know whey monitor resolutions go:
> 
> 1024x768, 1152x864, 1280x1024
> 
> Shouldn't that last number be: 1280x960?  I have a 17" and a 19" LCD and
> I have been wondering why both do 1280x1024 by default.

Mostly history, I think. However, most monitors and video cards will do 
1280x960 just fine so you can have your high resolution and square 
pixels too :) I use that resolution regularly for gaming (if 1600x1200 
taxes my video card too much.)


-- 
Manuel A. McLure KE6TAW <manuel@mclure.org> <http://www.mclure.org>
...for in Ulthar, according to an ancient and significant law,
no man may kill a cat.                       -- H.P. Lovecraft
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: Monitor resolutions

[JimD]

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 15:52:41 -0800
Manuel McLure <manuel@mclure.org> wrote:

> Mostly history, I think. However, most monitors and video cards will
> do 1280x960 just fine so you can have your high resolution and square 
> pixels too :) I use that resolution regularly for gaming (if
> 1600x1200 taxes my video card too much.)

That would be a plus!  Though both of my monitors have a "native"
resolution of 1280x1024@60Hz.  I guess changing to 1280x960@60Hz
wouldn't cause any issues?

I have always used CRTs up till now.  I actually would like to trade
my monitor in for a good old 19" short-neck CRT.  I think graphics were
always more crisp on CRTs.

Jim
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: Monitor resolutions

[JimD]

On Mon, 27 Mar 2006 18:38:05 -0500
JimD <Jim@keeliegirl.dyndns.org> wrote:

> Does anyone know whey monitor resolutions go:
> 
> 1024x768, 1152x864, 1280x1024
> 
> Shouldn't that last number be: 1280x960?  I have a 17" and a 19" LCD
> and I have been wondering why both do 1280x1024 by default.
> 
> Jim

OK, I switched to 1280x960 and noticed something weird.  Here is the
xdpyinfo for both resolutions.

1280x1024:
screen #0:
  print screen:    no
  dimensions:    1280x1024 pixels (339x271 millimeters)
  resolution:    96x96 dots per inch
  depths (7):    24, 1, 4, 8, 15, 16, 32

1280x960:
screen #0:
  print screen:    no
  dimensions:    1280x960 pixels (339x271 millimeters)
  resolution:    96x90 dots per inch
  depths (7):    24, 1, 4, 8, 15, 16, 32

Why is the dpi hosed when it is at 1280x960?

Jim
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: Monitor resolutions

[Manuel McLure]

JimD wrote:
> OK, I switched to 1280x960 and noticed something weird.  Here is the
> xdpyinfo for both resolutions.
> 
> 1280x1024:
> screen #0:
>   print screen:    no
>   dimensions:    1280x1024 pixels (339x271 millimeters)
>   resolution:    96x96 dots per inch
>   depths (7):    24, 1, 4, 8, 15, 16, 32
> 
> 1280x960:
> screen #0:
>   print screen:    no
>   dimensions:    1280x960 pixels (339x271 millimeters)
>   resolution:    96x90 dots per inch
>   depths (7):    24, 1, 4, 8, 15, 16, 32
> 
> Why is the dpi hosed when it is at 1280x960?

The dpi is calculated from the size that the monitor reports 
(339mmx271mm) and the number of dots across and down. It appears that at 
1280x1024 the monitor is reporting square pixels, and at 1280x960 it 
reports "tall" pixels.

If the "339x271 millimeters" is correct, that means that the display is 
a little taller than the standard 4:3 ratio (which would give 339x254) - 
perhaps 1280x1024 *is* the correct resolution for this monitor. I'd 
measure the physical dimensions of the monitor and if the ratio is 5:4 
instead of 4:3, use the 1280x1024 resolution. I did some research and it 
appears that this is the case for at least some LCD 1280x1024 monitors 
(for example the ViewSonic 17" has a viewable area of 13.3" (horizontal) 
X 10.6" (vertical); 17.0" diagonal which works out to 4:5 - the 
ViewSonic 19" monitors also have a 5:4 ratio.)

So it's probably best to run at the native resolution.

-- 
Manuel A. McLure KE6TAW <manuel@mclure.org> <http://www.mclure.org>
...for in Ulthar, according to an ancient and significant law,
no man may kill a cat.                       -- H.P. Lovecraft
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT: Monitor resolutions

[Richard Fish]

On 3/27/06, Manuel McLure <manuel@mclure.org> wrote:
> So it's probably best to run at the native resolution.

I would say this is especially true on an LCD, where a non-native
resolution can have some really ugly effects on fonts.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list