I just wanted to check before abandoning this switch, whether there's any reason the X300 would report the display doesn't support 1920x1200 or 1680x1050 while a Dell desktop, using the same cable and same KVM port, displayed even the 1920x1200 (not well, but displayed it). The monitor is a Dell 24" with 1920x1200 native resolution.
Not trying to troubleshoot the KVM switch (cheap, pushing its stated limits) but rather why different machines would report different capabilities. And perhaps if I could have overridden the X300's opinion. Thanks! -- Andrew mailto:[email protected] Sunday, April 24, 2011, 1:23:54 AM, I wrote: > It's a cheap 4-port KVM switch that cost ~$25 a couple of years ago. > Supposed to go up a decent resolution and I really only need > 1920x1200. The unit looks like this one > www.geeks.com/details.asp?invtid=MT-401UK&cat=NET though I didn't buy > it there (same model number). The one to which I linked claims > 1920x1440 max resolution so I realized I'm pushing the limit. > When I hook up the X300 to my Dell 24" monitor, it's seen as a > "Generic Non-PnP Monitor". I'm not sure if that's different than when > it's connected directly. I have it set to display only on the external > monitor. Win 7 though I had similar trouble with Vista and XP. > The monitor's native resolution is 1920x1200 but when I choose > 1920x1200 on the X300 I get a blank screen except "D-Sub: Can not > display this mode". The same for 1920x1080 and 1680x1050. I get a > display (sometimes distorted, with ghosting characters, sometimes with > a little cut off on the side) at 1600x1200, 1440x1900, 1400x1050, etc. > My assumption was that the switch is poor quality, or the supplied > cables, or both. > Right now I've got a Dell desktop (Win XP) hooked up to it too. Though > it has fewer resolution settings, the Dell displays at 1920x1200 > though a bit blurry (and ghosting) and sometimes shifted left (if I > switch between resolutions a few times, eventually I can get 1920x1200 > without the shifting). > To check for a bad port/bad cable, I switched the cables to the two > machines at the machines' end, with the same result. > While I may be expecting too much of a $25 KVM switch, is there > something about the X300 that would cause the monitor to report it > can't display its native 1920x1200, while a Dell using the same cable > and same switch, will get a display (irrespective of the quality)? > (e.g. is the X300 somehow recognizing that the display quality is > substandard and refusing to show it). > Right now I'd be happier with a 1920x display from the X300 through > this switch, even if the sharpness and general quality were as low as > from the Dell. > Thanks! _______________________________________________ Thinkpad mailing list [email protected] http://stderr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/thinkpad
