F17 video annoyances, old hardware

Sat Mar 31 23:00:55 UTC 2012

On 2012/03/31 15:27 (GMT-0700) Adam Williamson composed:

> On Sat, 2012-03-31 at 12:20 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

>>  Ever tried to get VESA to produce 2048x1152, 1366x768, 1680x1050, 1600x900 or
>>  1920x1080?

>>  Have you tried to buy a 4:3 display lately? Do all your CRTs work
>>  as well now as they did when new if at all? Are you familiar with what
>>  1024x768 and 1280x1024 look like on a 1920x1080 display?

> They look better than an error message telling you your X server won't
> run.

Only when the message isn't a lie. Just because it didn't start doesn't 
necessarily mean it can't be made to start. 'Tis better just a message than a 
literally distorted untruth.

> (you're wrong anyway; vesa is perfectly capable of 16x9 resolutions. It

Not all I listed are TV (16:9) modes, nor did I list every possible native 
mode of current and recent displays, much less future displays. Did you try 
1280x800, 1680x1050 or 1920x1200?

> does 1600x900 fine on my Vaio Z, and it did 1600x768 on my Vaio P after
> some poking of ajax).

2.08:1? Velly intellestink.

Some cards provide extra modes, but most widescreen modes are not in any VESA 
standards I've seen, and thus nothing close to all cards can be counted on to 
support a wide display's native mode.

>...it's still better than no X.

I don't think everyone would agree. Some might take as an inducement to 
figure out why and end up with satisfactory support instead of VESA molasses 
or funhouse.
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

  Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/