Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

800 x 600 looks bad

Last response: in Laptops & Notebooks
Share
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 12, 2004 7:25:31 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

I have an IBM Thinkpad T-21, with a 14-inch screen, running Win2000.

I sometimes prefer 800 x 600 reolution, which looked fine on my old 12-inch
Gateway laptop. But, with this new (actually, used) laptop, 800 x 600 looks
distorted -- the fonts have odd fat-and-thin areas, and line graphics look
jaggy.

All looks fine at 1024 x 768 but, as I said, I would prefer 800 x 600, if I
could get it to look right on this screen.

Is there a work-around for this?

Thanks for any insights....

More about : 800 600 bad

Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 12, 2004 2:45:15 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Ted Kerin <tfkerin@nospam.net> wrote:
> All looks fine at 1024 x 768 but, as I said, I would prefer 800 x 600, if I
> could get it to look right on this screen.

You can't. Each logical pixel at 800x600 has to occupy 1.3 pixels on your
screen (in each dimension). It either occupies 1 or 2 or 4.

Use the right resolution. If you want bigger fonts, use bigger fonts.

Peter
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 12, 2004 2:52:25 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Ted Kerin wrote:
> I have an IBM Thinkpad T-21, with a 14-inch screen, running Win2000.
>
> I sometimes prefer 800 x 600 reolution, which looked fine on my old 12-inch
> Gateway laptop. But, with this new (actually, used) laptop, 800 x 600 looks
> distorted -- the fonts have odd fat-and-thin areas, and line graphics look
> jaggy.
>
> All looks fine at 1024 x 768 but, as I said, I would prefer 800 x 600, if I
> could get it to look right on this screen.
>
> Is there a work-around for this?

1024 x 768 is the native reolution. If you want 800x600 and you want it
to look crisp, the disable screen-expansion (either in the BIOS setup,
or in the hardware-setup application if you have such a thing), and just
change your screen mode to 800x600. It will now look crisp, but with a
sizeable black border ...
Related resources
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 12, 2004 6:38:32 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Thanks for the feedback, guys. I had found some old Google discussions, but
hoped there was some more recent development, or an IBM-specific tip.

The irony is, a given image looks (and is) physically and visually larger,
and looks fine, on my old 12-inch, 600x800 Gateway screen (ATI chipset) --
compared to anything I can get on my upgraded, 1024 x 680 IBM. [I like to
read comic strips online, so this can make the difference between legible
and illegible.]

On my IBM (Savage chipset), the 600x800 res just doesn't work, while
1024x768 makes images a good 25 per cent smaller, by actual measurement,
than I got on my old, smaller-screen, lower-res laptop.

I'll learn to live with it, but this was an interesting learning experience,
that will make me more careful about this issue in any future laptop
shopping.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 12, 2004 6:40:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

P.S.: I also tried going into the BIOS and disabling the HV stretch, so that
800x600 would be limited to the middle of the screen, with a black border.
But the images were still way smaller than on my 12-inch, 800x600-res
Gateway.
August 12, 2004 8:09:00 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Wouldn't everything be just as small as it was at 1024x768 when the whole
screen was used? That would defeat the purpose for most people.

Clint

"Martin Slaney" <slazNIET_SPAM@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:411B3DD9.40007@dsl.pipex.com...
> Ted Kerin wrote:
> > I have an IBM Thinkpad T-21, with a 14-inch screen, running Win2000.
> >
> > I sometimes prefer 800 x 600 reolution, which looked fine on my old
12-inch
> > Gateway laptop. But, with this new (actually, used) laptop, 800 x 600
looks
> > distorted -- the fonts have odd fat-and-thin areas, and line graphics
look
> > jaggy.
> >
> > All looks fine at 1024 x 768 but, as I said, I would prefer 800 x 600,
if I
> > could get it to look right on this screen.
> >
> > Is there a work-around for this?
>
> 1024 x 768 is the native reolution. If you want 800x600 and you want it
> to look crisp, the disable screen-expansion (either in the BIOS setup,
> or in the hardware-setup application if you have such a thing), and just
> change your screen mode to 800x600. It will now look crisp, but with a
> sizeable black border ...
>
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 12, 2004 8:46:59 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"a Smith" <voodle@vooOIdle.SPAMNOfreeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> Blame IBM's use of the S3 Savage IX video chipset, it can't scale the LCD
> very well so it looks like it does at lower resolutions. An X20 (around
the
> same age) doesn't suffer from this problem because it has an ATI video
> chipset, it just looks slightly blurry as it should.

Yes, I have generally very good experiences with ATI.

Any ideas on software that can fix this problem though?

Benjamin
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 13, 2004 4:58:14 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Ted Kerin wrote:
> The irony is, a given image looks (and is) physically and visually
> larger, and looks fine, on my old 12-inch, 600x800 Gateway
> screen (ATI chipset) -- compared to anything I can get on my
> upgraded, 1024 x 680 IBM. [I like to read comic strips online,
> so this can make the difference between legible and illegible.]

Get Mozilla Firefox. Then when a comic strip is too small, you can type
Ctrl+Shift+N to enlarge it.

http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/

-Mike
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 13, 2004 3:58:15 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Great tip, Michael.

I do have Firefox, but was unaaware of that trick. I'll give it a try as
soon as I get home!



"Michael Geary" <Mike@Geary.com> wrote in message
news:10hot4n25c2g4b6@corp.supernews.com...
> Ted Kerin wrote:
> > The irony is, a given image looks (and is) physically and visually
> > larger, and looks fine, on my old 12-inch, 600x800 Gateway
> > screen (ATI chipset) -- compared to anything I can get on my
> > upgraded, 1024 x 680 IBM. [I like to read comic strips online,
> > so this can make the difference between legible and illegible.]
>
> Get Mozilla Firefox. Then when a comic strip is too small, you can type
> Ctrl+Shift+N to enlarge it.
>
> http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/
>
> -Mike
>
>
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 14, 2004 8:42:41 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Michael Geary" <Mike@Geary.com> wrote in message
news:10hot4n25c2g4b6@corp.supernews.com...
>
> Get Mozilla Firefox. Then when a comic strip is too small, you can type
> Ctrl+Shift+N to enlarge it.
>

Mike, I have the latest Firefox, and this doesn't work for me. I can't find
any documentation on a way that Firefox can enlarge images, or a whole web
page (not just the size of text). Do you think this feature might be only on
older versions of Firefox? Or is there a chance you made a typo in
describing the command? (Or, can you think what I might be doing wrong with
it?)

Thanks again.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 14, 2004 9:08:38 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Ted Kerin" <tfkerin@nospam.net> wrote:
>I sometimes prefer 800 x 600 reolution, which looked fine on my old 12-inch
>Gateway laptop. But, with this new (actually, used) laptop, 800 x 600 looks
>distorted -- the fonts have odd fat-and-thin areas, and line graphics look
>jaggy.

Yeah, I'm kicking myself over getting the highres screen on my nwe
laptop for this very same reason. If it's set to 1400x1050 it looks
very sharp, but really small, and other resolutions look bigger but
either fuzzy or aliased.

Netscape 7.1 has an option to select font sizes, which helps some
things (but not comic strips, which are images), but frequently gets
screen layouts looking ugly. It also has the option of setting the
screen resolution (measure a line on the screen and it'll set the DPI,
neat little hack), but it doesn't have any effect on display size.

IE shows stuff larger but fuzzier.

Dunno what the answer is, but it's sure annoying...
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 14, 2004 10:23:33 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

look for the omega drivers site, might just help you out
http://www.omegadrivers.net/
http://www.driverheaven.net/downloads/index4.htm

"Benjamin Myklebust" <benjaminmyklebust@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cffvt4$opg$1@sunnews.cern.ch...
> "a Smith" <voodle@vooOIdle.SPAMNOfreeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
>> Blame IBM's use of the S3 Savage IX video chipset, it can't scale the LCD
>> very well so it looks like it does at lower resolutions. An X20 (around
> the
>> same age) doesn't suffer from this problem because it has an ATI video
>> chipset, it just looks slightly blurry as it should.
>
> Yes, I have generally very good experiences with ATI.
>
> Any ideas on software that can fix this problem though?
>
> Benjamin
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.737 / Virus Database: 491 - Release Date: 8/11/2004
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 15, 2004 1:24:44 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

William wrote: "Ted Kerin" <tfkerin@nospam.net> wrote: I sometimes
[snip]
> Dunno what the answer is, but it's sure annoying...

In Opera, the + and - keys on the numeric keypad zoom in and out.

Cheers,
Dennis
--
null up 20 days, 7:29, 2 users, load average: 0.29, 0.29, 0.17
thruster up 5:42, 0 users, load average: 0.01, 0.01, 0.00
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 15, 2004 11:31:16 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

> Michael Geary wrote:
> > Get Mozilla Firefox. Then when a comic strip is too small,
> > you can type Ctrl+Shift+N to enlarge it.

Ted Kerin wrote:
> Mike, I have the latest Firefox, and this doesn't work for me.
> I can't find any documentation on a way that Firefox can
> enlarge images, or a whole web page (not just the size of text).
> Do you think this feature might be only on older versions of
> Firefox? Or is there a chance you made a typo in describing
> the command? (Or, can you think what I might be doing
> wrong with it?)

Sorry about the mix-up, Ted. I didn't realize that Ctrl+Shift+N is not part
of the default Firefox install. It comes with the Web Developer extension,
which you can get here:

http://www.chrispederick.com/work/firefox/webdeveloper/

or here:

http://update.mozilla.org/extensions/

Web Developer is mostly for developers, but it has some tools that are
useful for everyone, such as the Ctrl+Shift+N to zoom in, Ctrl+Shift+M to
zoom out, and Ctrl+Shift+D to disable all styles. It adds a toolbar and some
menu items to Firefox but you can hide those from the View menu and the Web
Developer options dialog.

It sounds like you already know about Ctrl+Plus and Ctrl+Minus to increase
and decrease text size--those are built into Firefox but affect only text,
not pictures.

-Mike
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 15, 2004 11:35:17 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

William P.N. Smith wrote:
> Yeah, I'm kicking myself over getting the highres screen
> on my nwe laptop for this very same reason. If it's set to
> 1400x1050 it looks very sharp, but really small, and other
> resolutions look bigger but either fuzzy or aliased.
>
> Netscape 7.1 has an option to select font sizes, which
> helps some things (but not comic strips, which are
> images), but frequently gets screen layouts looking ugly.
> It also has the option of setting the screen resolution
> (measure a line on the screen and it'll set the DPI, neat
> little hack), but it doesn't have any effect on display size.
>
> IE shows stuff larger but fuzzier.
>
> Dunno what the answer is, but it's sure annoying...

Have you changed the Windows resolution to 120 DPI from the default 96 DPI?
This will help a lot. The setting is hidden under the Display control panel,
Settings tab, Advanced button.

Also, be sure to turn on ClearType, in the Display control panel, Appearance
tab, Effects button.

Try those and see if they help. If you can run native resolution it will be
a whole lot better than running a smaller resolution.

-Mike
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 15, 2004 8:06:22 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"Michael Geary" <Mike@Geary.com> wrote:
>William P.N. Smith wrote:
>> 1400x1050 it looks very sharp, but really small, and other
>> resolutions look bigger but either fuzzy or aliased.

>> Netscape 7.1 has an option to select font sizes, which
>> helps some things (but not comic strips, which are
>> images), but frequently gets screen layouts looking ugly.
>> It also has the option of setting the screen resolution
>> (measure a line on the screen and it'll set the DPI, neat
>> little hack), but it doesn't have any effect on display size.

>> IE shows stuff larger but fuzzier.

>Have you changed the Windows resolution to 120 DPI from the default 96 DPI?
>This will help a lot. The setting is hidden under the Display control panel,
>Settings tab, Advanced button.

That was very helpful, thanks! Now Windows, Eudora, and Agent are all
"bigger" at the native resolution. IE is still large and fuzzy, and
Netscape didn't change.

>Also, be sure to turn on ClearType, in the Display control panel, Appearance
>tab, Effects button.

>Try those and see if they help. If you can run native resolution it will be
>a whole lot better than running a smaller resolution.

Any ideas how to make Netscape work 'right', without switching to
another browser?

Thanks!
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 16, 2004 6:32:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

800 x 600 is dead. The only thing you can do is to use LARGE FONTS

"Ted Kerin" <tfkerin@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:2o0k85F5du0iU1@uni-berlin.de...
>I have an IBM Thinkpad T-21, with a 14-inch screen, running Win2000.
>
> I sometimes prefer 800 x 600 reolution, which looked fine on my old
> 12-inch
> Gateway laptop. But, with this new (actually, used) laptop, 800 x 600
> looks
> distorted -- the fonts have odd fat-and-thin areas, and line graphics look
> jaggy.
>
> All looks fine at 1024 x 768 but, as I said, I would prefer 800 x 600, if
> I
> could get it to look right on this screen.
>
> Is there a work-around for this?
>
> Thanks for any insights....
>
>
>
>
>
August 17, 2004 12:14:17 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 16:06:22 -0400, William P.N. Smith wrote:

>"Michael Geary" <Mike@Geary.com> wrote:
>>William P.N. Smith wrote:
>>> 1400x1050 it looks very sharp, but really small, and other
>>> resolutions look bigger but either fuzzy or aliased.
>
>>> Netscape 7.1 has an option to select font sizes, which
>>> helps some things (but not comic strips, which are
>>> images), but frequently gets screen layouts looking ugly.
>>> It also has the option of setting the screen resolution
>>> (measure a line on the screen and it'll set the DPI, neat
>>> little hack), but it doesn't have any effect on display size.
>
>>> IE shows stuff larger but fuzzier.
>
>>Have you changed the Windows resolution to 120 DPI from the default 96 DPI?
>>This will help a lot. The setting is hidden under the Display control panel,
>>Settings tab, Advanced button.
>
>That was very helpful, thanks! Now Windows, Eudora, and Agent are all
>"bigger" at the native resolution. IE is still large and fuzzy, and
>Netscape didn't change.
>

I used to use large fonts 120 or 133 dpi on my UXGA (1600 x 1200)
display. I prefer to use normal dpi (96?) and set fonts larger in
individual programs. Agent, for example has that in it's options.
Everything looks better that way. I use Firfolx and it's built in
zoom for browsing. I'm really happy with that. However my next
laptop won't be UXGA. I'll probably go with 1024 x 768.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 17, 2004 1:08:11 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Scott <dkf747@yawho.com> wrote:
>I prefer to use normal dpi (96?) and set fonts larger in
>individual programs.

Unfortunately, this breaks a lot of assumtions about page formatting
that many web designers appear to have made, and makes many WWWebsites
unreadable. [plus it doesn't help with comics and other graphics.]

Maybe I'll try Firefox...
August 17, 2004 3:14:40 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 21:08:11 -0400, William P.N. Smith wrote:

>Scott <dkf747@yawho.com> wrote:
>>I prefer to use normal dpi (96?) and set fonts larger in
>>individual programs.
>
>Unfortunately, this breaks a lot of assumtions about page formatting
>that many web designers appear to have made, and makes many WWWebsites
>unreadable. [plus it doesn't help with comics and other graphics.]
>
>Maybe I'll try Firefox...

No, if you set large fonts in windows then that will break the
assumptions in page formatting. Setting the fonts in individual apps
usually does not mess up page formatting.

Firefox / Mozilla zoom feature occasionally messes up some pages. I
just zoom it down a bit if that particular page is important to me.
It doesn't help with comics or images, but most images are large
enough for me. Netscape works the same as Mozilla / Firefox so I
don't think it will solve the problem.
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 17, 2004 9:48:52 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

Scott <dkf747@yawho.com> wrote:
>William P.N. Smith wrote:
>>Scott <dkf747@yawho.com> wrote:
>>>I prefer to use normal dpi (96?) and set fonts larger in
>>>individual programs.

>>Unfortunately, this breaks a lot of assumtions about page formatting
>>that many web designers appear to have made, and makes many WWWebsites
>>unreadable. [plus it doesn't help with comics and other graphics.]

>No, if you set large fonts in windows then that will break the
>assumptions in page formatting. Setting the fonts in individual apps
>usually does not mess up page formatting.

You mean like http://compusmiths.com/CNN_24.JPG when I set the minimum
font size in Netscape 7.1 to 24?
August 18, 2004 1:47:12 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:48:52 -0400, William P.N. Smith wrote:

>Scott <dkf747@yawho.com> wrote:
>>William P.N. Smith wrote:
>>>Scott <dkf747@yawho.com> wrote:
>>>>I prefer to use normal dpi (96?) and set fonts larger in
>>>>individual programs.
>
>>>Unfortunately, this breaks a lot of assumtions about page formatting
>>>that many web designers appear to have made, and makes many WWWebsites
>>>unreadable. [plus it doesn't help with comics and other graphics.]
>
>>No, if you set large fonts in windows then that will break the
>>assumptions in page formatting. Setting the fonts in individual apps
>>usually does not mess up page formatting.
>
>You mean like http://compusmiths.com/CNN_24.JPG when I set the minimum
>font size in Netscape 7.1 to 24?

The same thing happens in Firefox. However, no that is not what I
mean. What I was talking about were apps like Agent newsreader or MS
Word. I've got them set to show things at a larger font. No page
formatting is changed that way.

The other thing I was referring to was START -> control panel - >
display->settings->advanced and setting the dpi setting larger.
Someone else had mentioned that but that will also affect page
formatting. \

I know of no way, at present, to avoid this other than to set the
screen to a lower, non-native resolution. (Not as clear)
Anonymous
a b D Laptop
August 19, 2004 5:53:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.laptops (More info?)

"MikeW (Dallas)" <mikew@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:Qz3Uc.7442$zM2.832@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com...

>
> 800 x 600 is dead. The only thing you can do is to use LARGE FONTS
>



On my web site, our software tracking system reports that two-thirds of our
visitors use 800 x 600. Yes, I understand that it's primitive, and I'd never
use it on my desktop, but it's still more alive than you may realize.

Also, in my case (which I admit may be idiosyncratic), I'm interested in
larger, decent-looking displays of .GIF images on my laptop -- I realize
that font size can always be increased, but that doesn't help me.


Meanwhile, thanks to everyone for the interesting and informative
discussion, and for the tips.

Michael, I enjoyed installing and experimenting with the developers
extension to Firefox -- thanks for pointing me to it. Unfortunately, it has
a glitch on my comics page, in that the zoom breaks the links to a whole
group of comics (from King Features, which, in a possibly related point, has
some strong anti-deep-linking measures). Also, the zoom has a fairly long
pause.

Dennis (veinless), Opera seems to be my best choice -- thanks. Its zoom
feature still looks jaggy for images, but less so for some zoom levels than
for others -- so, with some practice, I have found the right zoom levels to
make a .gif look bigger, with the lines more blurry than jaggy -- a good
compromise. And the zoom, in or out, is almost instant. In the past I used
Opera occasionally, but never knew of this feature. Now it's my browser of
choice for these kinds of web pages. Nice!

Thanks again, to all....
!