FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Debian > Debian User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-24-2010, 02:30 PM
Mark Neidorff
 
Default Monitor question

Hi Folks,

Running Lenny updated.
I'm wondering what I lose if I switch to a large wide screen monitor. I
currently have a "regular" 17" Viewsonic (VP171s). Works fine, but since my
eyes are getting older, I'm tempted by the crop of wide screen 25" monitors
on the market. If you want to tell me how great a particular brand of
monitor is, please e-mail me off the list (I don't want to start a flame war
on the list). My systems currently use the on-board video that comes with
the motherboards. (I have multiple systems connected to the monitor) For my
server, I want to keep using the on-board video, but for my desktop machine,
putting in a video card is not out of the question.

So, questions:
1. Will my on-board video cards be able to drive a new monitor to full
resolution? If not, will I be able to run the GUI in a usable fashion or
will I get a fuzzy display or will there be other compromises?

2. Are there monitors that do not support text mode out there? I'm asking
because I do as much work on my server as possible in text mode, only using X
when absolutely necessary. I also feel the need to watch the boot messages
go by at times. If a monitor can't display text mode, then it will be
useless to me.

3. Are there any other general suggestions about the wide screen monitors that
I should be aware of?

Thanks,

Mark


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 201012241030.58022.mark@neidorff.com">http://lists.debian.org/201012241030.58022.mark@neidorff.com
 
Old 12-24-2010, 04:57 PM
godo
 
Default Monitor question

On 12/24/2010 04:30 PM, Mark Neidorff wrote:

Hi Folks,

Running Lenny updated.
I'm wondering what I lose if I switch to a large wide screen monitor. I
currently have a "regular" 17" Viewsonic (VP171s). Works fine, but since my
eyes are getting older, I'm tempted by the crop of wide screen 25" monitors
on the market. If you want to tell me how great a particular brand of
monitor is, please e-mail me off the list (I don't want to start a flame war
on the list). My systems currently use the on-board video that comes with
the motherboards. (I have multiple systems connected to the monitor) For my
server, I want to keep using the on-board video, but for my desktop machine,
putting in a video card is not out of the question.

So, questions:
1. Will my on-board video cards be able to drive a new monitor to full
resolution? If not, will I be able to run the GUI in a usable fashion or
will I get a fuzzy display or will there be other compromises?

Probably will but that depends on video card specification.
If your video card is capable of XxY resolution and your monitor will
have the same than everything will be ok.


2. Are there monitors that do not support text mode out there?


I don't think so.

3. Are there any other general suggestions about the wide screen monitors that
I should be aware of?

Thanks,

Mark


Probably everything will work just fine. In Lenny period I switched from
19" CRT to 24" LCD without a problem.


--
Bye,
Goran Dobosevic
Hrvatski: www.dobosevic.com
English: www.dobosevic.com/en/
Registered Linux User #503414


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4D14DF14.7050603@dobosevic.com">http://lists.debian.org/4D14DF14.7050603@dobosevic.com
 
Old 12-24-2010, 05:39 PM
John Foster
 
Default Monitor question

On 12/24/2010 9:30 AM, Mark Neidorff wrote:

Hi Folks,

Running Lenny updated.
I'm wondering what I lose if I switch to a large wide screen monitor. I
currently have a "regular" 17" Viewsonic (VP171s). Works fine, but since my
eyes are getting older, I'm tempted by the crop of wide screen 25" monitors
on the market. If you want to tell me how great a particular brand of
monitor is, please e-mail me off the list (I don't want to start a flame war
on the list). My systems currently use the on-board video that comes with
the motherboards. (I have multiple systems connected to the monitor) For my
server, I want to keep using the on-board video, but for my desktop machine,
putting in a video card is not out of the question.
Well the obvious issues are: what type of CPU are you using: What type
of video is onboard (does it use dedicated RAM);
how much memory are you using for the entire system. Lenny is very
capable of doing what you want, If you do decide to buy a new monitor
then I can reccommend a Viewsonic as a good fairly inexpensive model. I
recently built a new server & have a 23" Viewsonic doing nicely. Be sure
to watch for rebates also, some good deals out there now. If you do buy
a new one with a new video card, make sure you get both that have HDMI
inputs & outputs. ATI video cards use propriatary drivers but they are
fairly up to date in Debian now & you can actually get installable ones
from ATI themselves. I personally like the Gigabit cards with ATI
chipsets. I use a dual card setup with the crossfire mode activated. It
allows streaming live full 1080p video. I'm sure there are many
solutions for your concerns, these are just from my own experience & YMMV!

So, questions:
1. Will my on-board video cards be able to drive a new monitor to full
resolution? If not, will I be able to run the GUI in a usable fashion or
will I get a fuzzy display or will there be other compromises?

pretty much answered above.



2. Are there monitors that do not support text mode out there? I'm asking
because I do as much work on my server as possible in text mode, only using X
when absolutely necessary. I also feel the need to watch the boot messages
go by at times. If a monitor can't display text mode, then it will be
useless to me.

No problem there with any of them.

3. Are there any other general suggestions about the wide screen monitors that
I should be aware of?


Can only be answered if we know what you want form the monitor.
FYI: if you just want an easier to read screen text resolution, then
reset it in the boot menue.
X will be reset anyways to what ever is avaliable on the monitor. & is
easily finetuned.

Thanks,

Mark




--
John Foster


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 4D14E8E6.7090303@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/4D14E8E6.7090303@gmail.com
 
Old 12-27-2010, 02:57 PM
Camaleón
 
Default Monitor question

On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 10:30:57 -0500, Mark Neidorff wrote:

> Running Lenny updated.
> I'm wondering what I lose if I switch to a large wide screen monitor. I
> currently have a "regular" 17" Viewsonic (VP171s). Works fine, but
> since my eyes are getting older, I'm tempted by the crop of wide screen
> 25" monitors on the market. If you want to tell me how great a
> particular brand of monitor is, please e-mail me off the list (I don't
> want to start a flame war on the list). My systems currently use the
> on-board video that comes with the motherboards. (I have multiple
> systems connected to the monitor) For my server, I want to keep using
> the on-board video, but for my desktop machine, putting in a video card
> is not out of the question.

When it comes to LCD/TFT, you have to pay attention to native resolution.
Look, 17" displays tend to use the same resolution (dots per inch) than
19" ones (1280x1024) so people tend to think they gain when buying a 17"
screen because they get the same viewable area but they pay less (17"
monitors are cheaper).

But I prefer to stick to 19" LCD screens (and avoid as much as I can
those wide/narrow screens, 16:9 or 16:10) because text and icons are
larger than in 17" displays and I get a good resolution (1280x1024 is
better than a wide screen (1280x800).

As per display brand, I like Eizo the most. They are very expensive but
they provide a superb quality :-}

> So, questions:
> 1. Will my on-board video cards be able to drive a new monitor to full
> resolution? If not, will I be able to run the GUI in a usable fashion
> or will I get a fuzzy display or will there be other compromises?

Modern cards, yes, they are capable of managing higher resolutions. Check
your card specs to be sure.

> 2. Are there monitors that do not support text mode out there? I'm
> asking because I do as much work on my server as possible in text mode,
> only using X when absolutely necessary. I also feel the need to watch
> the boot messages go by at times. If a monitor can't display text mode,
> then it will be useless to me.

I don't think so. You will only have to setup the resolution that fits
your needs.

> 3. Are there any other general suggestions about the wide screen
> monitors that I should be aware of?

None that I can think, just care about resolution, it can be "misleading".

OTOH, you can always adjust your DPI to a higher value (i.e., 120dpi) so
while you keep your current/recommended resolution, all, icons and text
will display bigger and your eyes will suffer less :-)

Greetings,

--
Camaleón


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: pan.2010.12.27.15.57.30@gmail.com">http://lists.debian.org/pan.2010.12.27.15.57.30@gmail.com
 
Old 12-28-2010, 12:00 AM
Chris Jones
 
Default Monitor question

On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 10:57:31AM EST, Camaleón wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 10:30:57 -0500, Mark Neidorff wrote:

[..]

> When it comes to LCD/TFT, you have to pay attention to native
> resolution.

I agree. And the highest you can get.

> Look, 17" displays tend to use the same resolution (dots per inch)
> than 19" ones (1280x1024) so people tend to think they gain when
> buying a 17" screen because they get the same viewable area but they
> pay less (17" monitors are cheaper).

Being near-sighted, a 17" monitor suits me best: with larger monitors,
I am so close to the display that I constantly have to move my head to
the right, to the left, to the right.. and end up with a crick in the
neck. :-)

> But I prefer to stick to 19" LCD screens (and avoid as much as I can
> those wide/narrow screens, 16:9 or 16:10) because text and icons are
> larger than in 17" displays and I get a good resolution (1280x1024 is
> better than a wide screen (1280x800).

Have you had too much champagne over the holiday? :-)

Last time I looked, all _affordable_ monitors I could find were 16:9
aka. Hollywood's preferred 1080p. And as far as recent laptop models are
concerned, they are all 16:9. From what I understand, the manufacturers
have stopped making proper _computer_ displays.

The 4:3 aspect ratio displays that I like.. or the possibly even better
5:4 that you recommend are pretty much a thing of the past. If I had the
money, I might purchase a couple of QSXGA 2560x2048 screens right now..
while they last. But apart from the fact that I am unsure they would
play well with X/linux and run-of-the-mill hardware, the price of such
fiends is rather a deterrent.

[..]

> OTOH, you can always adjust your DPI to a higher value (i.e., 120dpi) so
> while you keep your current/recommended resolution, all, icons and text
> will display bigger and your eyes will suffer less :-)

Yes, that's usually the sensible approach when you want to stick with
the native resolution of your physical screen (as you should) and
globally adjust the size of your fonts, icons, etc. to whatever suits
your particular preferences or your eyesight's idiosyncrasies.

I have noticed that out of the box, and before you fool him by running
X with a lower dpi (such as 96), gnome presents you with large fonts and
icons that make your high-res display look as if it were a 1024x768 or
less. Rather than change font sizes in all kind of never obvious places,
reduce the height or the panels, etc. it is considerably easier and more
reliable to change the dpi and restart X.

cj


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 20101228010017.GA4048@pavo.local">http://lists.debian.org/20101228010017.GA4048@pavo.local
 
Old 12-28-2010, 12:46 AM
Stan Hoeppner
 
Default Monitor question

Chris Jones put forth on 12/27/2010 7:00 PM:
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 10:57:31AM EST, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Fri, 24 Dec 2010 10:30:57 -0500, Mark Neidorff wrote:
>
> [..]
>
>> When it comes to LCD/TFT, you have to pay attention to native
>> resolution.
>
> I agree. And the highest you can get.

Not necessarily. This is highly dependent on the users(s) of the monitor.

I built my folks a new PC last year (Athlon II X2 Rigor 2.8 w/ ATI north
bridge video) and got them a 24" Asus widescreen LCD to go with it. Dad
is 73 Mom is 68. Dad wears trifocals and Mom bifocals. No matter what
font size (WinXP) I selected, the native 1920x1080 panel res just didn't
work for them although it was perfect for me. I ended up setting the
res at 1280x720 with small fonts. It's not as sharp (to me) but perfect
for them, and they can't fathom how they got along with a 17" MAG CRT
for for the 5 prior years. Dad no longer has to lean forward and tilt
his head back simultaneously. I'm surprised the old 17" CRT didn't
cause a permanent craning of his neck.

--
Stan



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 4D19417E.10800@hardwarefreak.com">http://lists.debian.org/4D19417E.10800@hardwarefreak.com
 
Old 12-28-2010, 06:24 AM
George
 
Default Monitor question

On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Mark Neidorff <mark@neidorff.com> wrote:

> I'm tempted by the crop of wide screen 25" monitors on the market.

snip

> 2. Are there monitors that do not support text mode out there? *I'm asking
> because I do as much work on my server as possible in text mode, only using X
> when absolutely necessary. *I also feel the need to watch the boot messages
> go by at times. *If a monitor can't display text mode, then it will be
> useless to me.

If you do your work in text mode, why do you want a widescreen monitor?
Widescreen is good for films but horrible when it comes to reading, which is
what you normally use your computer for.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/AANLkTinBwBjou39Kuxrm56WBhfXd_03ZfUycDu7hb@mail.g mail.com
 
Old 12-28-2010, 10:13 AM
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI
 
Default Monitor question

On Seg, 27 Dez 2010, Stan Hoeppner wrote:

I built my folks a new PC last year (Athlon II X2 Rigor 2.8 w/ ATI north
bridge video) and got them a 24" Asus widescreen LCD to go with it. Dad
is 73 Mom is 68. Dad wears trifocals and Mom bifocals. No matter what
font size (WinXP) I selected, the native 1920x1080 panel res just didn't
work for them although it was perfect for me. I ended up setting the
res at 1280x720 with small fonts. It's not as sharp (to me) but perfect
for them, and they can't fathom how they got along with a 17" MAG CRT
for for the 5 prior years. Dad no longer has to lean forward and tilt
his head back simultaneously. I'm surprised the old 17" CRT didn't
cause a permanent craning of his neck.


Windows (at least XP, I'm not sure if Vista/7 changed that) suck a lot
in this regard (and others too, but I digress). Linux does much better.


I don't know how exactly it is done, but Linux takes into account the
actual size of the display (which is reported along its supported
resolutions) and not only the resolution to determine font sizes (and
maybe icon sizes or other dimensions of the visual UI, but I have not
experimented with that). So you get reasonably easy to read (for
people with good eyesight, at least) fonts at all displays, at all
resolutions. Under WinXP, if you use a high resolution, you get tiny
fonts.




--
Talk is cheap because supply always exceeds demand.

Eduardo M KALINOWSKI
eduardo@kalinowski.com.br


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Archive: 20101228091300.771465aoy73knqio@mail.kalinowski.co m.br">http://lists.debian.org/20101228091300.771465aoy73knqio@mail.kalinowski.co m.br
 
Old 12-28-2010, 10:39 AM
Andrei Popescu
 
Default Monitor question

On Ma, 28 dec 10, 09:13:00, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
>
> I don't know how exactly it is done, but Linux takes into account
> the actual size of the display (which is reported along its
> supported resolutions) and not only the resolution to determine font
> sizes (and maybe icon sizes or other dimensions of the visual UI,
> but I have not experimented with that). So you get reasonably easy
> to read (for people with good eyesight, at least) fonts at all
> displays, at all resolutions. Under WinXP, if you use a high
> resolution, you get tiny fonts.

Am I the only one experiencing this?
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=23705

(Summary: Xorg forces 96 DPI and it is impossible to change it)

Ok, it doesn't happen with the non-free nvidia driver (and possibly also
not with fglrx), but I expected a lot more people to use free drivers
here.

Regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
 
Old 12-28-2010, 01:40 PM
Klistvud
 
Default Monitor question

Dne, 28. 12. 2010 08:24:22 je George napisal(a):

If you do your work in text mode, why do you want a widescreen
monitor?
Widescreen is good for films but horrible when it comes to reading,
which is

what you normally use your computer for.


It's also horrible for web browsing, and for many other tasks. It
actually only has two uses I can think of: widescreen movies and
side-by-side document viewing. Given that movies are best viewed on
large TV sets anyway, the usefulness of widescreen computer monitors is
further reduced to just side-by-side document viewing. Arguably, even
for that task, dual-head setups are better.


Why is it then that the widescreen standard has taken over the computer
market so preponderously? Well, forcing the widescreen format allows
the manufacturers to charge us the *same* amount of money for a
*reduced* screen real estate. It's all about marketing (also called
indoctrination, or brainwashing): making buyers gladly accept less bang
for the buck. Sadly, as many times before, we, the consumers, have
allowed them to force this new obnoxiousness upon us without moving a
finger.


Let me give examples which will hopefully corroborate my assertions
(the numbers given are however just illustrations and far from
accurate).


The widescreen fad allows a vendor to make a LCD panel having the
overall area of a 15" classic panel (roughly), and market it as a 19"
monitor. To get (roughly) the same vertical size as with a classic 32"
TV, you now have to buy a 42" widescreen TV set. Of course, a 42"
widescreen TV is much wider than a classic 32", no arguing with that:
it may also be seen as a "widened" 32" TV, a 32" TV expanded with two
additional lateral "bands". Incidentally, a figure of 42 is also a lot
more impressive (and easier to market) than a humble 32.


Maximum laptop width is limited -- by ergonomic and other factors --
roughly to ca. 40 cm. Well, with the widescreen format, that limitation
allows a far smaller screen real estate than classic 4:3 screens did.
In other words, the usefulness of laptops for serious display-dependent
work has arguably *decreased* over the last decade or so. This trend is
further enhanced with laptops progressively becoming more convenient,
and more of a "toy" than a "work tool".


About a decade ago, the absolute minimum resolution for LCD laptop
screens was 1024x768. Finding 800x600 laptops was becoming increasingly
difficult, and the standard was moving toward higher resolutions, such
as 1600x1200 etc. A decade later, additionally spurred by the netbook
fad, the absolute minimum is again set back to around 1024x600 or less,
with entry-level laptops generally having a meagre 1360x768 resolution.
Compare these numbers to, say, CPU speeds or hard drive capacities over
the same period, and tell me the LCD marketing guys aren't sheer
geniuses!


Of course, this is strictly my personal, and quite biased, point of
view.


--
Cheerio,

Klistvud
http://bufferoverflow.tiddlyspot.com
Certifiable Loonix User #481801 Please reply to the list, not to
me.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 1293547219.5868.0@compax">http://lists.debian.org/1293547219.5868.0@compax
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:26 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org