Re: [Arm-netbook] Question about resolution on the micro-desktop

2017-01-13 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 6:56 PM, Benson Mitchell wrote: > On Jan 13, 2017 12:31 PM, "dumblob" wrote: > > Hi Luke, > >> >> in the >> case of fixed LCDs, the only

Re: [Arm-netbook] Question about resolution on the micro-desktop

2017-01-13 Thread Julie Marchant
On 01/13/2017 12:30 PM, dumblob wrote: > Also, if all the housings must support the rates of 1366x768, then I > would say it's too much. I think it's obvious that's not what the standard says. It says that the *card* must support 1366x768. That's very different from requiring the *display* to

Re: [Arm-netbook] Question about resolution on the micro-desktop

2017-01-13 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Julie Marchant wrote: > On 01/13/2017 12:30 PM, dumblob wrote: >> Also, if all the housings must support the rates of 1366x768, then I >> would say it's too much. > > I think it's obvious that's not what the standard says. It says that the >

Re: [Arm-netbook] Question about resolution on the micro-desktop

2017-01-13 Thread Lyberta
> i'm not going to make any such restrictions in software. if someone > plugs in a 1080p VGA monitor, and through the EDID interface it's > detected, and the OS and the SoC is capable of it, good for them. And what if there is no EDID? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [Arm-netbook] Question about resolution on the micro-desktop

2017-01-13 Thread Julie Marchant
On 01/13/2017 10:42 AM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > that's incorrect. you're perfectly entitled to try resolutions > beyond that which are required by the EOMA68 specification (however do > not be surprised if it doesn't actually work). > > in the case of the A20 Card, the RGB/TTL

Re: [Arm-netbook] Question about resolution on the micro-desktop

2017-01-13 Thread Julie Marchant
On 01/13/2017 11:26 AM, Christopher Havel wrote: > 1280x1024 is the very much standard resolution for a non-widescreen (4:3 > aspect ratio) 17" monitor. 1280x1024 is 5:4, not 4:3. Not terribly important for what you're saying, but I just wanted to point that out. ;) -- Julie Marchant

Re: [Arm-netbook] Question about resolution on the micro-desktop

2017-01-13 Thread Christopher Havel
There's also the matter of cheap VGA cables that have a physical pin 12 on the connectors that is not internally attached to anything at either end. I have a couple of those cables :( they do a very good job of disabling EDID. ___ arm-netbook mailing

Re: [Arm-netbook] Question about resolution on the micro-desktop

2017-01-13 Thread Adam Van Ymeren
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Lyberta wrote: >> i'm not going to make any such restrictions in software. if someone >> plugs in a 1080p VGA monitor, and through the EDID interface it's >> detected, and the OS and the SoC is capable of it, good for them. > > And what if

Re: [Arm-netbook] Another laptop project: PINEBOOK

2017-01-13 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 7:37 AM, mike.v...@gmail.com wrote: > > > 2017-01-12 14:09 GMT+01:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton : >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 1:02 PM, David Boddie

Re: [Arm-netbook] The dream of Ara

2017-01-13 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 8:35 AM, mike.v...@gmail.com wrote: > 2017-01-13 9:11 GMT+01:00 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton : >> >> --- >> crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware:

Re: [Arm-netbook] Question about resolution on the micro-desktop

2017-01-13 Thread Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
--- crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68 On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 3:07 PM, dumblob wrote: > Hi Julie, > > yes (even though in the upcoming specification version 1920x1080 should be > supported). NO. it's NEGOTIATED. if the HOUSING