• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Native resolution makes a big difference.

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
4,445
Location
Student Hell Headingley
I recently bought a cheap 22" wide screen monitor with a native res' of 1680 x 1050 and hooked it up to my aging pooter with a Radeon X800XT platinum edition card only to find that some lines of text looked a bit blurred; being an old giffer, I thought that my eyes had finally started to go but now I have managed to set the resolution properly, it is as clear as a bell.

Never thought that it would make so much difference.

Just thought I'd mention it in case anyone else was as old and daft as me. :D
 
yeah LCD screens don't do so well scaling up low resolution. Some monitors are better than others in that respect but native resolution is just so crystal clear and purdy. :D
 
I thought you were going to say you are using Vista and viewing that lovley blurry clear fonts Segoe UI. Make any one think they need glasses they do.
 
Makes me laugh - we've recently got 22" 1600x1200 monitors at work, and I swear I'm the only one running at native resolution.

Everyone else seems to run @ 1280x1024 and then say "I thought LCD's were meant to be clearer and better for your eyes. Mine's all blurry".:rolleyes:

The more amusing part is that we got these monitors so we could use some software without having to keep left/right scrolling all the time....and now we get "I got a new monitor and you said it would be better and we'd be able to see everything, but we still have to scroll"....there's just no telling some people
 
Makes me laugh - we've recently got 22" 1600x1200 monitors at work, and I swear I'm the only one running at native resolution.

Everyone else seems to run @ 1280x1024 and then say "I thought LCD's were meant to be clearer and better for your eyes. Mine's all blurry".:rolleyes:

The more amusing part is that we got these monitors so we could use some software without having to keep left/right scrolling all the time....and now we get "I got a new monitor and you said it would be better and we'd be able to see everything, but we still have to scroll"....there's just no telling some people

then if you change the res to native, they say "i can't see it's too small"
my reply "get new eyes"
 
Makes me laugh - we've recently got 22" 1600x1200 monitors at work, and I swear I'm the only one running at native resolution.

Everyone else seems to run @ 1280x1024 and then say "I thought LCD's were meant to be clearer and better for your eyes. Mine's all blurry".:rolleyes:

The more amusing part is that we got these monitors so we could use some software without having to keep left/right scrolling all the time....and now we get "I got a new monitor and you said it would be better and we'd be able to see everything, but we still have to scroll"....there's just no telling some people

Proper square(ish) monitors. What make and model are they please? Are they any good? Not too keen on these widescreen jobbies. It's ok for a 32" telly but a 22" widescreen monitor just does'nt look right to me.
 
then if you change the res to native, they say "i can't see it's too small"
my reply "get new eyes"

Joking aside, it's actually a very real problem for me (I'm visually impaired).

For example I can't stand 1280x1024 on a 17", and while 1680x1050 on a 22" is fine, I wouldn't fancy running it on a 20". Likewise I'm a bit wary of 24" screens as I suspect I couldn't hack 1920x1200 on such a small screen.

I have messed around with DPI settings on a 17" to try and resolve the small text issue, but then that just ended up causing problems with some websites.

At work I run an old 21" CRT at 1400x1050 which seems about right for me (1600x1200 is too high). I've already had a few IT bods walk past and say "you wanna log a call for that and get yourself a flatscreen", to which I normally reply "I don't wanna be downgrading to a 19incher!".
 
Joking aside, it's actually a very real problem for me (I'm visually impaired).

For example I can't stand 1280x1024 on a 17", and while 1680x1050 on a 22" is fine, I wouldn't fancy running it on a 20". Likewise I'm a bit wary of 24" screens as I suspect I couldn't hack 1920x1200 on such a small screen.

I have messed around with DPI settings on a 17" to try and resolve the small text issue, but then that just ended up causing problems with some websites.

At work I run an old 21" CRT at 1400x1050 which seems about right for me (1600x1200 is too high). I've already had a few IT bods walk past and say "you wanna log a call for that and get yourself a flatscreen", to which I normally reply "I don't wanna be downgrading to a 19incher!".

Firstly I would like to stress I feel for you - and I know there are loads of different eye complaints which can affect your visoin in different ways and I was similarly dubious when getting my 24" screen awhile ago (having a very strange eye complaint where my pupils shake fractionally from side to side constantly)

Even now 24" are quite expensive (I got a Dell 24" widescreen a couple of years ago) and I really wouldnt be without it, easily the best monitor I have sat in front of. Without sitting any closer (if anything with a bigger picture the tendency is to sit slightly further away anyway I find) my eyes just got used to it very quickly indeed and I now wouldnt be without it


Obviously its still a big outlay - but its worth trying to get a demo in pc world or a big department store

I wish you luck either way :)
 
have had the same problem with a friend and the parents

mate was running a 22" monitor at 1280x...., which I changed for him.

but my mum still insists running a 17" at 1024x.... as she can't see the icons otherwise
 
Back
Top Bottom