Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Viewsonic VP201s disappoints my wife

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 4, 2004 12:44:21 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

My wife has been using a 17" (more like 16") CRT for years. She has
been complaining about eye strain recently so we went out and bought a
Viewsonic VP201S -- the 20" LCD monitor.

She feels that the LCD is even harder on her eyes than was the CRT. I
am wondering why this might be and what I can do about it.

There are several possible problems. I would appreciate comments.

1. We connected it using the analog port to a 3-year-old computer.
Maybe the video card is not up to the task of making this monitor look
as good as it is capable of looking. I do notice some funny colors in
the background -- like the video card can't quite keep up.

If this is (or might be) the problem. Should I get a new video card?
If so, which one?

2. The new resolution makes the screen images too small. I have it set
at its native 1600x1200. I tried a couple of other settings. She likes
the sizes better, but not the jagged effect.

If this is the problem, maybe I should return the 20" and get a 19".
Her old 16" CRT was set at 1024x768. With a viewing area of 12.6x9.5,
I believe that works out to 82x81 dpi. The 20" LCD runs at 1600x1200.
With a viewing area of 16.1 x 12.1, that's 99x99 dpi -- a 22%
increase. 19" LCDs running at 1280x1024 with a view space of 14.8x11.9
net out at 86x86 dpi. That's a lot closer to what she is used to.

3. It's just new and she will need time to get used to it. Has anyone
else had an initial dislike for LCDs and then gotten used to them?

4. This is not a quality product. Does anyone else have one?

Thanks

--
For email, use Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 4, 2004 4:48:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

I suspect that she would be much happier with a 19" and its native
resolution. That is what I have now and am most pleased. The step up
to 20" makes text "appear" much smaller.

Norm

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:44:21 -0700, Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>My wife has been using a 17" (more like 16") CRT for years. She has
>been complaining about eye strain recently so we went out and bought a
>Viewsonic VP201S -- the 20" LCD monitor.
>
>She feels that the LCD is even harder on her eyes than was the CRT. I
>am wondering why this might be and what I can do about it.
>
>There are several possible problems. I would appreciate comments.
>
>1. We connected it using the analog port to a 3-year-old computer.
>Maybe the video card is not up to the task of making this monitor look
>as good as it is capable of looking. I do notice some funny colors in
>the background -- like the video card can't quite keep up.
>
>If this is (or might be) the problem. Should I get a new video card?
>If so, which one?
>
>2. The new resolution makes the screen images too small. I have it set
>at its native 1600x1200. I tried a couple of other settings. She likes
>the sizes better, but not the jagged effect.
>
>If this is the problem, maybe I should return the 20" and get a 19".
>Her old 16" CRT was set at 1024x768. With a viewing area of 12.6x9.5,
>I believe that works out to 82x81 dpi. The 20" LCD runs at 1600x1200.
>With a viewing area of 16.1 x 12.1, that's 99x99 dpi -- a 22%
>increase. 19" LCDs running at 1280x1024 with a view space of 14.8x11.9
>net out at 86x86 dpi. That's a lot closer to what she is used to.
>
>3. It's just new and she will need time to get used to it. Has anyone
>else had an initial dislike for LCDs and then gotten used to them?
>
>4. This is not a quality product. Does anyone else have one?
>
>Thanks
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 4, 2004 4:48:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 12:48:34 GMT, NSN <nsn@mail.com> wrote:

>I suspect that she would be much happier with a 19" and its native
>resolution. That is what I have now and am most pleased. The step up
>to 20" makes text "appear" much smaller.

It's definitely a quality product. I've had mine for a couple of weeks
now and I love it. As a veteran of a couple of major eye surgeries (my
vision is fine now), I find the VP201B easier on my eyes than my
previous Viewsonic A90f+ CRT. And, at the VP201's native 1600x1200
resolution, I find that everything is so much easier to read than on
the CRT (at the same resolution) I had.


Kevin Miller

"Either way, it is bad for Zathras."
Related resources
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 5:43:08 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

How well does the VP201 interpolate other resolutions?

I am considering getting either this or the Benq 2091 (very similar specs).

Greg


"Kevin Miller" <crow66@halo.net> wrote in message
news:vbn1h09n5oumqflocsiugoskhd33eq4i4t@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 12:48:34 GMT, NSN <nsn@mail.com> wrote:
>
> >I suspect that she would be much happier with a 19" and its native
> >resolution. That is what I have now and am most pleased. The step up
> >to 20" makes text "appear" much smaller.
>
> It's definitely a quality product. I've had mine for a couple of weeks
> now and I love it. As a veteran of a couple of major eye surgeries (my
> vision is fine now), I find the VP201B easier on my eyes than my
> previous Viewsonic A90f+ CRT. And, at the VP201's native 1600x1200
> resolution, I find that everything is so much easier to read than on
> the CRT (at the same resolution) I had.
>
>
> Kevin Miller
>
> "Either way, it is bad for Zathras."
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 5:43:09 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:43:08 GMT, "Greg Mac"
<nospam@nsw.bigpond.net.au> wrote:

>How well does the VP201 interpolate other resolutions?
>
>I am considering getting either this or the Benq 2091 (very similar specs).

We found the text to be very ragged at anything but the native
1600x1200. Graphics, such as wallpaper, etc., didn't seem to matter
much, if at all.

--
For email, use Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 6:24:55 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

It COULD be the card; but before you go out and get another one, you
can try a few things ...

First, are you running the monitor at "native" resolution? For yours
it would be 1280 x 1024 (you say 1600x1200 but that seems a little
high to me, but if that IS the native resolution per the operating
manual, so be it. Still, give a slightly lower resolution a try and
see what happens)

Second, you can go into your windows control panel and increase the
font size at native resolution

Third, turn on "Clear type" option, which will help a lot with jagged
letters.

Viewsonic is a good manufacturer. Also, people usually find LCD
screen to be immediately a step up in terms of clarity, etc. I
certainly did.




Good luck.


On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:44:21 -0700, Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>My wife has been using a 17" (more like 16") CRT for years. She has
>been complaining about eye strain recently so we went out and bought a
>Viewsonic VP201S -- the 20" LCD monitor.
>
>She feels that the LCD is even harder on her eyes than was the CRT. I
>am wondering why this might be and what I can do about it.
>
>There are several possible problems. I would appreciate comments.
>
>1. We connected it using the analog port to a 3-year-old computer.
>Maybe the video card is not up to the task of making this monitor look
>as good as it is capable of looking. I do notice some funny colors in
>the background -- like the video card can't quite keep up.
>
>If this is (or might be) the problem. Should I get a new video card?
>If so, which one?
>
>2. The new resolution makes the screen images too small. I have it set
>at its native 1600x1200. I tried a couple of other settings. She likes
>the sizes better, but not the jagged effect.
>
>If this is the problem, maybe I should return the 20" and get a 19".
>Her old 16" CRT was set at 1024x768. With a viewing area of 12.6x9.5,
>I believe that works out to 82x81 dpi. The 20" LCD runs at 1600x1200.
>With a viewing area of 16.1 x 12.1, that's 99x99 dpi -- a 22%
>increase. 19" LCDs running at 1280x1024 with a view space of 14.8x11.9
>net out at 86x86 dpi. That's a lot closer to what she is used to.
>
>3. It's just new and she will need time to get used to it. Has anyone
>else had an initial dislike for LCDs and then gotten used to them?
>
>4. This is not a quality product. Does anyone else have one?
>
>Thanks
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 6:24:56 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:24:55 GMT, Palladium <nowhere@netnone.net>
wrote:

>It COULD be the card; but before you go out and get another one, you
>can try a few things ...
>
>First, are you running the monitor at "native" resolution? For yours
>it would be 1280 x 1024 (you say 1600x1200 but that seems a little
>high to me, but if that IS the native resolution per the operating
>manual, so be it.

See
http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktopdisplays/lcddi...

>Still, give a slightly lower resolution a try and
>see what happens)

Ragged text at 1280x1024 and the next 2 lower resolutions.

>Second, you can go into your windows control panel and increase the
>font size at native resolution

If you are referring to the system font, we did try that. It was a
littel weird. Of course, it only affects the system font and there are
side effects, such as the toolbar labels running together.

>Third, turn on "Clear type" option, which will help a lot with jagged
>letters.

Is that a Win XP option? I can't find it on my Win 2K system.

>Viewsonic is a good manufacturer. Also, people usually find LCD
>screen to be immediately a step up in terms of clarity, etc. I
>certainly did.


--
For email, use Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 6:51:53 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

for clear type:


Control panel > display > appearance (tab) > effects





On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 19:42:43 -0700, Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:24:55 GMT, Palladium <nowhere@netnone.net>
>wrote:
>
>>It COULD be the card; but before you go out and get another one, you
>>can try a few things ...
>>
>>First, are you running the monitor at "native" resolution? For yours
>>it would be 1280 x 1024 (you say 1600x1200 but that seems a little
>>high to me, but if that IS the native resolution per the operating
>>manual, so be it.
>
>See
>http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktopdisplays/lcddi...
>
>>Still, give a slightly lower resolution a try and
>>see what happens)
>
>Ragged text at 1280x1024 and the next 2 lower resolutions.
>
>>Second, you can go into your windows control panel and increase the
>>font size at native resolution
>
>If you are referring to the system font, we did try that. It was a
>littel weird. Of course, it only affects the system font and there are
>side effects, such as the toolbar labels running together.
>
>>Third, turn on "Clear type" option, which will help a lot with jagged
>>letters.
>
>Is that a Win XP option? I can't find it on my Win 2K system.
>
>>Viewsonic is a good manufacturer. Also, people usually find LCD
>>screen to be immediately a step up in terms of clarity, etc. I
>>certainly did.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 6:51:54 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:51:53 GMT, Palladium <nowhere@netnone.net>
wrote:

>for clear type:
>
>
>Control panel > display > appearance (tab) > effects

After Control Panel > Display, I have 6 tabs:
Background, Screen Saver, Appearance, Web, Effects, and Settings.

Under the Appearance tab, I do not see Effects.

Under the Effects tab, I do not see anything that looks liker Clear
Type. There is a checkbox labelled "Smooth edges of screen fonts".

>
>On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 19:42:43 -0700, Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:24:55 GMT, Palladium <nowhere@netnone.net>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>It COULD be the card; but before you go out and get another one, you
>>>can try a few things ...
>>>
>>>First, are you running the monitor at "native" resolution? For yours
>>>it would be 1280 x 1024 (you say 1600x1200 but that seems a little
>>>high to me, but if that IS the native resolution per the operating
>>>manual, so be it.
>>
>>See
>>http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktopdisplays/lcddi...
>>
>>>Still, give a slightly lower resolution a try and
>>>see what happens)
>>
>>Ragged text at 1280x1024 and the next 2 lower resolutions.
>>
>>>Second, you can go into your windows control panel and increase the
>>>font size at native resolution
>>
>>If you are referring to the system font, we did try that. It was a
>>littel weird. Of course, it only affects the system font and there are
>>side effects, such as the toolbar labels running together.
>>
>>>Third, turn on "Clear type" option, which will help a lot with jagged
>>>letters.
>>
>>Is that a Win XP option? I can't find it on my Win 2K system.
>>
>>>Viewsonic is a good manufacturer. Also, people usually find LCD
>>>screen to be immediately a step up in terms of clarity, etc. I
>>>certainly did.


--
For email, use Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 3:53:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 19:34:45 -0700, Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 01:43:08 GMT, "Greg Mac"
><nospam@nsw.bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>
>>How well does the VP201 interpolate other resolutions?
>>
>>I am considering getting either this or the Benq 2091 (very similar specs).
>
>We found the text to be very ragged at anything but the native
>1600x1200. Graphics, such as wallpaper, etc., didn't seem to matter
>much, if at all.

I actually think that the VP201 interpolates fairly well for an LCD
monitor. Just my opinion, of course.

Kevin Miller

"Either way, it is bad for Zathras."
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 4:23:36 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:24:55 GMT, Palladium <nowhere@netnone.net>
wrote:

>It COULD be the card; but before you go out and get another one, you
>can try a few things ...
>
>First, are you running the monitor at "native" resolution? For yours
>it would be 1280 x 1024 (you say 1600x1200 but that seems a little
>high to me, but if that IS the native resolution per the operating
>manual, so be it. Still, give a slightly lower resolution a try and
>see what happens)
>
>Second, you can go into your windows control panel and increase the
>font size at native resolution
>
>Third, turn on "Clear type" option, which will help a lot with jagged
>letters.
>
>Viewsonic is a good manufacturer. Also, people usually find LCD
>screen to be immediately a step up in terms of clarity, etc. I
>certainly did.
>
>
>
>
>Good luck.

You're right, Palladium. When the clear type option is NOT turned on,
the text at 800x600 *is* pretty jagged, but when I turn on clear type,
the fonts smooth out quite a bit; it's a big difference.

Maybe Win 2K doesn't have that option.

Kevin Miller

"Either way, it is bad for Zathras."
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 4:24:36 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 21:17:40 -0700, Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Under the Effects tab, I do not see anything that looks liker Clear
>Type. There is a checkbox labelled "Smooth edges of screen fonts".

Did you try it to see what effect it had on the screen fonts?

Kevin Miller

"Either way, it is bad for Zathras."
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 9:03:44 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

Just a thought. This isn't a computer solution and I don't know how old your
wife is. I wear the "no-lines" bifocals and I was having a devil of a time
using my CRT monitor, in spite of having the adjustment which supposedly
made using a computer monitor easier. I tried all sorts of fonts, color
schemes, and resolutions and it still drove me crazy.

Finally, I went to my optometrist and bought a pair of "computer glasses"
which are just single-vision prescription glasses which give me a focus on
the CRT monitor. It was the best investment I've ever made. Now I don't have
to tilt my head this way and that to find that "sweet spot" which gives me
an in-focus screen, and I can see the whole screen in focus at once.

I find that I can use my regular bifocals with my laptop because that is
more like a regular reading task, unlike the CRT which sits high in front of
the face.


"Top Spin" <ToppSpin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:a1l0h0pim86i3lv6rt7v3jfa3etmogoat1@4ax.com...
> My wife has been using a 17" (more like 16") CRT for years. She has
> been complaining about eye strain recently so we went out and bought a
> Viewsonic VP201S -- the 20" LCD monitor.
>
> --
> For email, use Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 10:08:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 19:42:43 -0700, Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>>Third, turn on "Clear type" option, which will help a lot with jagged
>>letters.
>
>Is that a Win XP option? I can't find it on my Win 2K system.

Clear Type is found only on Windows XP. Windows 2000 has conventional
anti-aliasing. Clear Type does result in less jagged fonts, especially
at lower resolutions. However, to me it causes some blurring of the
display (and, yes, i have used the Clear Type tuning page, and yes,
the monitor was an LCD display with digital connection).
- -
Gary L.
Reply to the newsgroup only
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2004 10:23:55 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:03:44 -0500, "Box134" <box134@wooky.invalid>
wrote:

>Just a thought. This isn't a computer solution and I don't know how old your
>wife is. I wear the "no-lines" bifocals and I was having a devil of a time
>using my CRT monitor, in spite of having the adjustment which supposedly
>made using a computer monitor easier. I tried all sorts of fonts, color
>schemes, and resolutions and it still drove me crazy.
>
>Finally, I went to my optometrist and bought a pair of "computer glasses"
>which are just single-vision prescription glasses which give me a focus on
>the CRT monitor. It was the best investment I've ever made. Now I don't have
>to tilt my head this way and that to find that "sweet spot" which gives me
>an in-focus screen, and I can see the whole screen in focus at once.
>
>I find that I can use my regular bifocals with my laptop because that is
>more like a regular reading task, unlike the CRT which sits high in front of
>the face.

It's a good suggestion. She does have different glasses that she uses
for the computer work than for reading or anything else, but I'll ask
her about glasses made specifically for reading the monitor.

--
For email, use Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 6, 2004 2:49:59 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 18:23:55 -0700, Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:03:44 -0500, "Box134" <box134@wooky.invalid>
>wrote:
>
>>Just a thought. This isn't a computer solution and I don't know how old your
>>wife is. I wear the "no-lines" bifocals and I was having a devil of a time
>>using my CRT monitor, in spite of having the adjustment which supposedly
>>made using a computer monitor easier. I tried all sorts of fonts, color
>>schemes, and resolutions and it still drove me crazy.
>>
>>Finally, I went to my optometrist and bought a pair of "computer glasses"
>>which are just single-vision prescription glasses which give me a focus on
>>the CRT monitor. It was the best investment I've ever made. Now I don't have
>>to tilt my head this way and that to find that "sweet spot" which gives me
>>an in-focus screen, and I can see the whole screen in focus at once.
>>
>>I find that I can use my regular bifocals with my laptop because that is
>>more like a regular reading task, unlike the CRT which sits high in front of
>>the face.
>
>It's a good suggestion. She does have different glasses that she uses
>for the computer work than for reading or anything else, but I'll ask
>her about glasses made specifically for reading the monitor.

I did the same thing a couple of years ago, and it really helped out
a lot.

Kevin Miller

"Either way, it is bad for Zathras."
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 6, 2004 5:13:04 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

And I should suggest a few environmental changes that might help. I like to
have the room lights down and a desk lamp lighting the wall behind the CRT.
This way very little ambient light actually hits the screen.

I change my background colors, where I can control them, to something
non-white. In Windows I changed the background colour to a buff colour. The
idea is to reduce contrast. And last of all, turn the CRT brightness
w-a-a-a-y down.

By doing all these things I can spend hours in from of the monitor without
feeling like my eyes are crawling out of my head. This way I can waste more
time at the computer than ever before!

"Top Spin" <ToppSpin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:D bn5h09c0klp8cpp7vvdkojsa5fs62lor4@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 5 Aug 2004 17:03:44 -0500, "Box134" <box134@wooky.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> It's a good suggestion. She does have different glasses that she uses
> for the computer work than for reading or anything else, but I'll ask
> her about glasses made specifically for reading the monitor.
>
> --
> For email, use Usenet-20031220 at spamex.com
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 6, 2004 2:15:10 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

Kevin Miller <crow66@halo.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 04 Aug 2004 19:34:45 -0700, Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>>
>>We found the text to be very ragged at anything but the native
>>1600x1200. Graphics, such as wallpaper, etc., didn't seem to matter
>>much, if at all.
>
>I actually think that the VP201 interpolates fairly well for an LCD
>monitor.

As that like saying "it runs fairly fast, for a turtle"?

8)
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 6, 2004 6:05:59 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:44:21 -0700, Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>My wife has been using a 17" (more like 16") CRT for years. She has
>been complaining about eye strain recently so we went out and bought a
>Viewsonic VP201S -- the 20" LCD monitor.

Go to the drugstore and get your wife a pair of reading/computer
glasses.
August 11, 2004 8:58:26 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

In article <f2d3h0dl8495mr1fev3ba5ptf1a916uduk@4ax.com>,
Top Spin <ToppSpin@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 02:51:53 GMT, Palladium <nowhere@netnone.net>
> wrote:
>
> Under the Effects tab, I do not see anything that looks liker Clear
> Type. There is a checkbox labelled "Smooth edges of screen fonts".

Yes, that's the same idea. Anybody can have a checkbox labelled "Smooth
edges of screen fonts", but only MS can have one labelled "ClearType".

--
-eben ebQenW1@EtaRmpTabYayU.rIr.OcoPm home.tampabay.rr.com/hactar

This message was created using recycled electrons.
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
August 11, 2004 12:08:27 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:44:21 -0700, Top Spin wrote:

> My wife has been using a 17" (more like 16") CRT for years. She has
> been complaining about eye strain recently so we went out and bought a
> Viewsonic VP201S -- the 20" LCD monitor.
>
> She feels that the LCD is even harder on her eyes than was the CRT. I
> am wondering why this might be and what I can do about it.
>

You can try changing the DPI settings in windows. I don't know how this
is done, but it should affect the scale of how fonts are rendered. In
Linux it is pretty easy to tell the display system that you have a new,
bigger monitor.. and thus it compensates by rendering fonts bigger.

See about doing this, as it should make a huge difference when it comes to
eye strain.

Other than that -- don't switch the rez. Stay in 1600x1200. If you
downgrade you of course will have interpolation problems. Maybe you
should have bought a top-of-the-line CRT instead of an LCD. You would
have saved money, still had sharp text, and not have had all these
problems.. :p 

-Dud
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
October 9, 2004 6:17:15 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video (More info?)

Dudley Moore <dud@manunited.com> :
>On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 20:44:21 -0700, Top Spin wrote:
>
>> My wife has been using a 17" (more like 16") CRT for years. She has
>> been complaining about eye strain recently so we went out and bought a
>> Viewsonic VP201S -- the 20" LCD monitor.
>>
>> She feels that the LCD is even harder on her eyes than was the CRT. I
>> am wondering why this might be and what I can do about it.
>>
>
>You can try changing the DPI settings in windows. I don't know how this
>is done, but it should affect the scale of how fonts are rendered. In
>Linux it is pretty easy to tell the display system that you have a new,
>bigger monitor.. and thus it compensates by rendering fonts bigger.
>
>See about doing this, as it should make a huge difference when it comes to
>eye strain.
>
in windows xp:
control panel > display > settings > Advanced (button) > general (tab)

there you will see an option for dpi settings. 'normal' is 96 dpi, 'large'
is 120 dpi. you also can set a custom dpi, but I find that 120 works well
for me at 1600x1200
!