Re: [ql-users] Aurora screen resolution

[James Hunkins]

LCD panels have a 'native' resolution where every pixel is physically 
represented by an element within the panel.  Lower resolutions are 
'scaled' down either by the graphics drivers or by hardware (panel or 
graphic driver chip).  Lower resolutions will never be as 'clear' and 
the native.  However, for things such as games where objects are 
moving, this is normally not such an issue.  And most operating systems 
today allow you to scale icons and text so that you can 'enlarge' 
things on higher resolution screens to help with the vision thing.

CRTs are better as they are very scalable up to their max resolution.  
But I personally will never go back to them as the better panels today 
are just so awesomely brilliant and sharp (now that you no longer have 
to allign a moving electron gun, along with scattering/bleeding issues, 
etc that are inherent to CRTs).

Cheers,
jim
On Nov 30, 2004, at 3:20 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ken Brickwood was using my modern 1280 x 1024 LCD monitor yesterday at
Byfleet.  Even that refused to display one of the existing modes
(goodness knows which one).
The situation would be made far worse with extra odd modes.
My colleague here has a lovely 19 inch LCD on her computer. We found 
that there were some PC resolutions it wouldn't work with at all, 
while some form of scaling seemed to be taking place at resolutions 
lower than 1024x768 making everything look blurred and out of focus 
and horrible. I don't know enough about them, but it seems that unlike 
CRTs some (at least some, if not most) LCD panels have a "preferred 
resolution" and have difficulty with anything else.
Dilwyn Jones

_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm