On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Felix Miata <mrmazda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2012/03/31 15:27 (GMT-0700) Adam Williamson composed: > > >> On Sat, 2012-03-31 at 12:20 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: > > >>> Ever tried to get VESA to produce 2048x1152, 1366x768, 1680x1050, >>> 1600x900 or >>> 1920x1080? > > >>> Have you tried to buy a 4:3 display lately? Do all your CRTs work >>> as well now as they did when new if at all? Are you familiar with what >>> 1024x768 and 1280x1024 look like on a 1920x1080 display? > > >> They look better than an error message telling you your X server won't >> run. > > > Only when the message isn't a lie. Just because it didn't start doesn't > necessarily mean it can't be made to start. 'Tis better just a message than > a literally distorted untruth. > > >> (you're wrong anyway; vesa is perfectly capable of 16x9 resolutions. It > > > Not all I listed are TV (16:9) modes, nor did I list every possible native > mode of current and recent displays, much less future displays. Did you try > 1280x800, 1680x1050 or 1920x1200? > > >> does 1600x900 fine on my Vaio Z, and it did 1600x768 on my Vaio P after >> some poking of ajax). > > > 2.08:1? Velly intellestink. > > Some cards provide extra modes, but most widescreen modes are not in any > VESA standards I've seen, and thus nothing close to all cards can be counted > on to support a wide display's native mode. > > >> ...it's still better than no X. > > > I don't think everyone would agree. Some might take as an inducement to > figure out why and end up with satisfactory support instead of VESA molasses > or funhouse. Try Option "NoAccel" "1" in xorg.conf ... -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
