E540 screen resolution is so bad

hi,
I have bought recenlty Thinkpad E540, but the problem is that I can see vertical lines of pixels, the screen is look like a fabric texture, I have replaced the laptop by another one and the problem is the same. I assume that HD screen should be more clear that what I see.
Does any body notice this problem?
and What is the solution?

I have the same problem. Screen door effect on my E540 HD screen. Currently looking for options to replace it with a screen (from a different manufacturer) that doesn't have this problem. I've only had the laptop for 2 days, but I'm completely convinced (from reading about other people's experiences with sceen door effect on Lenovo laptops -- primarily the X1) that Lenovo wouldn't do anything about it. It's just a poor quality screen to save on cost, I guess.
So I guess my question is if anybody knows if there are any screens available for this model that are of better quality and don't have this screen door effect? And if so, what model numbers and such should I be looking for when getting a new screen?

Similar Messages

Low and bad screen resolution with radeonhd [SOLVED]

Hi Archers,
I just setted up a brand new PC with an ATI HD4550 GPU and a 22'' 1680x1050 monitor.
I can run Xorg and even Gnome using the radeonhd drivers, but the max resolution I can get is 1280x1024 (which isn't even the correct ratio).
The lower suggested resolutions' ratios are bad as well.
I didn't write an xorg.conf file.
When I try to run X with a configuration file generated by X -configure, the monitor displays an error message like "Unsupported video signal".
What can I do?
Last edited by monsieur moche (2009-10-15 13:44:01)

monsieur moche wrote:Here is the xorg.conf of my last test: (...)
As you can see, I uncommented some lines and I added Option "PreferredMode" "1680x1050" to the monitor section.
After a lot of gasping, moaning and countless tries, this xorg.conf works here, with an analogue monitor. Look at the bottom for how I set the mode choices. Good luck!
Section "ServerLayout"
Identifier "X.org Configured"
Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0
InputDevice "Mouse0" "CorePointer"
InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
EndSection
Section "Files"
ModulePath "/usr/lib/xorg/modules"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/100dpi:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/75dpi:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/TTF"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/Type1"
EndSection
Section "Module"
Load "evdev"
Load "glx"
Load "extmod"
Load "record"
Load "dri2"
Load "dbe"
Load "dri"
Load "drm"
EndSection
Section "DRI"
Group "video"
Mode 0666
EndSection
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Keyboard0"
Driver "kbd"
Option "XkbOptions" "terminate:cntrl_alt_bksp"
EndSection
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Mouse0"
Driver "mouse"
Option "Protocol" "IMPS/2"
Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
# Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5 6 7" # Xorg's oppsett
Option "Buttons" "5"
Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5"
Option "ButtonMapping" "1 2 3 6 7"
EndSection
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "Monitor0"
VendorName "Monitor Vendor"
ModelName "Monitor Model"
HorizSync 30.0 - 100.0
VertRefresh 50.0 - 100.0
EndSection
Section "Device"
### Available Driver options are:-
### Values: <i>: integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False",
### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz"
### [arg]: arg optional
#Option "NoAccel" # [<bool>]
Option "AccelMethod" "exa" # [<str>]
#Option "offscreensize" # [<str>]
#Option "SWcursor" # [<bool>]
#Option "ignoreconnector" # [<str>]
#Option "forcereduced" # [<bool>]
#Option "forcedpi" # <i>
#Option "useconfiguredmonitor" # [<bool>]
#Option "HPD" # <str>
#Option "NoRandr" # [<bool>]
#Option "RROutputOrder" # [<str>]
Option "DRI" "on" # [<bool>]
#Option "TVMode" # [<str>]
#Option "ScaleType" # [<str>]
#Option "UseAtomBIOS" # [<bool>]
#Option "AtomBIOS" # [<str>]
#Option "UnverifiedFeatures" # [<bool>]
#Option "Audio" # [<bool>]
#Option "HDMI" # [<str>]
#Option "COHERENT" # [<str>]
Identifier "Card0"
Driver "radeonhd"
VendorName "ATI Technologies Inc"
BoardName "RV770 [Radeon HD 4850]"
BusID "PCI:2:0:0"
EndSection
Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen0"
Device "Card0"
Monitor "Monitor0"
DefaultDepth 24
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 1
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 4
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 8
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 15
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 16
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 24
Modes "1024x768" "800x600" "640x480"
EndSubSection
EndSection
Section "Extensions"
Option "Composite" "Enable"
EndSection

[SOLVED] Updating Xorg screwed up my screen-resolution.

After doing pacman -Syu earlier this evening, my screen-resolution was screwed up. One of the packages that was updated by pacman -Syu was X to 1.7.1-1 and all of its depencies.
I downgraded xorg (and its dependencies) to 1.6.3.901-1 and after that everything is working fine again.
I'm trying to figure out why the update failed, but to be honest I don't know where to look for clues. The only thing I can come up with is that maybe it would be better to update X without X running.
Before I try this solution I need some feedback on this. So if you could please give your comments/advise towards the following issues:
1. Is it better to update X without X running?
2. Where would I have to look for clues to find out why the update of X failed?
Thxs.
Last edited by NeoXP (2009-11-01 21:39:13)

NeoXP wrote:
After doing pacman -Syu earlier this evening, my screen-resolution was screwed up. One of the packages that was updated by pacman -Syu was X to 1.7.1-1 and all of its depencies.
I downgraded xorg (and its dependencies) to 1.6.3.901-1 and after that everything is working fine again.
I'm trying to figure out why the update failed, but to be honest I don't know where to look for clues. The only thing I can come up with is that maybe it would be better to update X without X running.
Before I try this solution I need some feedback on this. So if you could please give your comments/advise towards the following issues:
1. Is it better to update X without X running?
2. Where would I have to look for clues to find out why the update of X failed?
Thxs.
I have a similiar problem except that my X hang the whole computer. I have an Intel card and maybe thats the reason for the hang. To answer 1., I did my upgrade without X running, so that doesn't prevent bad things from happening. I downgraded to the previous version, as you did, and now everything is working again.
With respect to 2., I looked into Xorg log and found nothing relevant to this problem.

Yoga 2 Pro REAL Screen Resolution

SECOND THREAD on this HERE.
I've just discovered that the Yoga 2 Pro seems to be fudging its screen resolution claim. I wouldn't care, except ... it actually has become a small problem ... and one that I presume will get bigger over time
The Y2P has a "3200x1800" screen. It's beautiful. And in most regards its also overkill, since there's no such thing as 3200x1800 content, AND because it cause some issues with size of things on the screen. For this reason, and because pushing fewer pixels will tend to improve battery life, I run my Y2P at 1920x1080, or "normal full HD" resolution.
I recently tried to log into an on-line app I use, as was greeted with a strange error message:
Well, since I'm running 1920x1080 and using a current version of the Chrome browswer, none of that made sense. I tried Internet Explorer as well ... no luck.
I installed Speccy, a tool to check things out inside a computer, and when I got to the display settings, here's what I found:
That's right; I'm "set to 1920x1080", but something is seeing that the REAL resolution is 1280x720. Oh, and elsewhere in Speccy I found that the Y2P is reporting itself as a tablet rather than as a computer ... which probably isn't the issue here, but still unsettling.
So I changed the resolution to 3200x1800. Good news: I was able to get to the web app I need. BAD NEWS: The real resolution appears to be 1600x900:
I called Lnove tech support and got a representative who tells me that this is a Windows 8.1 problem; Windows 8.1 cannot support resolutions higher than 1920x1080, so even though the actual hardware resolution of the Y2P is 3200x1800, it needs to scale itself so Windows doesn't cry. This appears to be false (http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2012/03/21/scaling-to-different-screens.aspx), but I don't really know.
As such, my conclusion is that the representative told me something that was actually the opposite of correct, with correct SEEMING to be that the maximum REAL resolution of the Y2P hardware is in fact 1600x900, with Lenovo's claim of a 3200x1800 resolution being a software/upscaling/interpolation trick.
If that's so, it's really distressing, because it would appear to be a lie about hardware capabilities.
I didn't start out caring about that, although obviously as this point I feel like I've uncovered a smoking gun and would like an answer from Lenovo. But at the end of the day, since I don't need or want that 3200x1800 for the reasons I explained at the top of this post, I just want to know the truth—whatever it is— and to know how to get Windows to report the same resolution to "the world" that it's reporting to me, the user.
And I guess I wouldn't mind knowing why the scaling between real and interpolation is different depending on the settings one selects, too (do the math).
Anyone know anything conclusive? And even better, anyone from Lenovo have an ideas what the truth is here?

I don't know if any of these settings (resolution and/or item sizing) affects battery duration. But you could do a battery test: set it to one mode with full battery charge and then leave it on unused until the battery is 50%. Check how long that took. Repeat for the other mode and compare the time difference if any.
As to why there are these two layers of settings I think this is the answer: Windows metro apps and some Windows desktop application and the new elements in Windows 8 (the new start screen, the charms bar and all metro apps) have smart scaling of user interface elements (text, buttons and so on) designed to support very high resolution screens like ours. So buttons and text in such programs will adapt in size to fit the resolution. But older desktop applications, including the Windows 8.1 desktop taskbar and its icons it seems, does not do such smart scaling. So running them full resolution mean that everything is really tiny. To work around that everything can be scaled up to 200% (or 150% or 125%). I suspect that future versions of Windows or some Windows update may improve these things since the settings and the button descriptions in the settings aren't very user friendly.
But I'm not sure about this. I hope someone in the know jumps in this thread and gives more details.
It is a pity that Lenovo doesn't provide new Yoga 2 Pro users with a user friendly guide with information and tips on good ways to deal with resolutions and these scaling settings.

24" Alum iMac screen resolutions

Is there any way to change the screen resolution to 1600x1000 on the new 24" imacs? There are several other options on the display preferences but not this one. Anything other than the native is too fuzzy and the native 1920x1200 makes everything on the screen to way small to see from a safe distance..and I do wear glasses! It does put a lot of strain in my eyes.I know I can increase the size of the icons and text, but the Adobe pallets and other content is just too small. It shows up on my 23" cinema display with Mac Pro.

oskar10 wrote:
I know it is not crystal clear as native, but it does not look bad at all on my 23" cinema display. Why can't I set my imac to this resolution?
It's more than likely (I could be wrong) monitor based?
Let's use windows for an example. I have 2 monitors, both supporting different resolutions, the graphics card supports dozens of combinations but monitor 1 only supports certain ones, and monitor 2 only supports certain ones.
I plug in monitor 1 on my windows pc (using windows as an example) and I can set to all these widescreen resolutions. I plug in monitor 2 and the only resolutions I get are some widescreen and most of them non-widescreen.
The iMac display may only support certain types which is being detected by the OS and those are the only given options you have.
The cinema display is recognized as supporting other resolutions and thus THOSE are displayed as options.

Screen resolution problem for components in a canvas

Hi,
I am developing a Flex application, and I am using more than
one canvases in a single page(with in application tag).
And one canvas has elements like Chart, datagrid, legent
& a label.
Width & Height I gave to canvas and all its elements
(except legend & label) is in percentages
The problem I am facing is that,
when I change the screen resolution, and
when I press F11(full screen) in IE, the all objects except
legend & label are increasing/decreasing, and in some cases
lagend & label are overlapping in the chart & data grid.
Could anybody please advise what I need to follow to
eliminate these kind of problems.
Thanks in advance.
Pavan

Ooooooh, haha my bad, I didn't realize you were talking about
relative positioning on your app.
Here's what's happening. Your component/application is in
ABSOLUTE layout mode, so you can specify coordinates for where
controls and components should be placed. When the size of the
application changes, these coordinates are hard-coded, and they
will always display in the same place, which can case them to run
into components that have been resized to fit the new application
size. Now fixing those numbers is not easy. In fact, I don't know
of any way to make those numbers dynamic so they adjust when the
application size adjusts.
Instead, I suggest using constraints or Vbox/Hbox rather than
hardcoded coordinates. With constraints, you can specify how far
your Legend component is from the edges of the container it's in.
Or, you can use the VBox or HBox so your component is always in the
place it needs to be.
<mx:HBox width="80%" height="50%" top="10" left="10">
<mx:PieChart id="piechart1">
<mx:series>
<mx:PieSeries displayName="Series 1" field=""/>
</mx:series>
</mx:PieChart>
<mx:Legend dataProvider="{piechart1}"/>
</mx:HBox>
In this example, You can see I set top and left to 10. This
means that my HBox will be exactly 10 pixels from the top and left
side of my application (or container, or whatever it's confined
to). The Piechart and Legend fit neatly inside the HBox, and
because it's an HBox, they will be side by side horizontally.
If you need spacing between your chart and legend, you can
always use the Spacer control under Layout.
<mx:HBox width="80%" height="50%" top="10" left="10">
<mx:PieChart id="piechart1">
<mx:series>
<mx:PieSeries displayName="Series 1" field=""/>
</mx:series>
</mx:PieChart>
<mx:Spacer width="100%"/>
<mx:Legend dataProvider="{piechart1}"/>
</mx:HBox>
As you can see, the Spacer control is separating our chart
and the Legend by a width specified. Always use a percentage here,
as you'll run into problems I talked about in my previous post.
100% means the chart and the Legend will be as far away as they can
be while staying within the Hbox container. If you decreased it to
50%, they would only be half as far away.
Hope this helps.
EDIT:
One last example of a pie chart and a Legend within a canvas.
Each object has constraints to the canvas, which lets us put them
whereever we want within the canvas:
<mx:Canvas x="0" y="0" width="80%">
<mx:PieChart id="piechart1" left="10" top="10">
<mx:series>
<mx:PieSeries displayName="Series 1" field=""/>
</mx:series>
</mx:PieChart>
<mx:Legend dataProvider="{piechart1}" right="10"
bottom="10"/>
</mx:Canvas>
From this example, the chart will always line up to be 10
pixels from the top and left of our canvas. The Legend however,
will always line up to be 10 pixels from the right side and bottom
of our canvas. Adjusting the canvas size, the chart size, or the
legend size will give you the desired distance between these two
objects.

Skippy-xd and cairo-dock ignore screen resolution in openbox

Hey, this is the first time I'm posting since I usually solve my problem using this forum and google but I this time they failed me.
I recently switched from gnome to openbox and in the process of making myself comfortable I installed first skippy-xd and then cairo-dock.
I had to set the screen resolution (1920x1080), which was too low in the beginning, using xrandr and while trying to solve my problem I also created "/etc/X11/xorg.conf-d/10-monitor.conf". Unfortunately skippy-xd seems to ignore the new resolution when I enter the window picker and I end up having the window overview only covering a part of my screen. First I thought that was a skippy-xd specific problem but after installing cairo-dock I noticed, that the dock got displayed at the bottom of the same "window" that skippy occupied. So I guess there has to be some underlying problem that causes both of these programs to ignore my set screen resolution and instead go with the one openbox assigned to me in the beginning.
The same configuration works flawless on my laptop. And I search google up and down in order to find a solution.
Thanks in advance,
meloxu

I saw your post, and had found it incredulous that you have a 1920x1080 display. A bit of research and I found I was wrong.
So, it appears you are driving the panel at its native resolution. Unfortunately, trying to determine what you mean by "Fuzzy" is probably going to be like trying to nail Jello to a tree. But, let's give it a shot. Is it fuzzy before you start X? Are lines and shapes fuzzy? Or is it just text that is fuzzy?
If it is just fonts, it could be a problem with hinting. Hinting is where the edges of fonts are deliberately fuzzed and feathered to get the kerning correct when the physical pixels of the display don't quite line up. This works well, unless the thing doing the hinting does not understand the geometry of the display. In a color LCD, each pixel is actually made up of smaller sub pixels, generally three -- A red, a green, and a blue. Green is usually in the middle. Some displays have Two greens per pixel, arranged RGBG. Some displays even have yellow subpixels. Sometimes the subpixels are arranged left to right, sometimes they are arranged top to bottom. Long story short, if you have hinting enabled, but the geometry is configured incorrectly, bad things happen. Take a look at this wiki article

Civ3 not on full screen resolution

Hello here,
not too sure if this is the right place to ask, but I dont seem to find a solution o my problem.
When trying to play Civ3 1.21g on my MB Pro with 1440x900, the game does not use all of the available screen resolution - how can I change this to play on full screen?
Any help is greatly appreciated.
Thanks a lot,
Lorenz

That is strange. I'd first try resetting the PRAM (Hold option-command-P-R keys down during startup until you hear the chime at least three times). A PRAM reset often fixes little startup bugs.
Although irrelevant to the issue, also repair permissions (never a bad idea) with disk utility. Onyx is also great for this and other maintenance tasks.
cheers

Screen resolution for OEL 5 on VMware Server 1.0.3

Hi
I have installed Oracle Enterprise Linux 5 in a VMware Server 1.0.3 virtual machine.
The problem is that I can only run the virtual machine in 800x600 or 640x480.
Anyone who has tried this and made it work?
I have VMWare Tools installed and I have run the vmware-tools-config, or what its called.
When choosing 1024x768 as the screen resolution. Linux is unable to start the Xserver. Sorry, but I don't have the error message when writing this.
The Virtual Machine i setup as a Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4.0 server.
Regards
Nick
Message was edited by:
Nicke

Hi
This is how the system works right now.
I also tried to add manually the 1024x768 resolution with the Mode option. but this didn't work.
Thx in advance.
/n
Section "Device"
     Identifier     "Videocard0"
     Driver          "vmware"
EndSection
Section "Screen"
     Identifier     "Screen0"
     Device          "Videocard0"
     DefaultDepth     24
     SubSection "Display"
          Viewport 0 0
          Depth     24
     EndSubSection
EndSection
(II) VMWARE: driver for VMware SVGA: vmware0405, vmware0710
(II) Primary Device is: PCI 00:0f:0
(--) Assigning device section with no busID to primary device
(--) Chipset vmware0405 found
(II) resource ranges after xf86ClaimFixedResources() call:
[0] 0 0 0x000b8000 - 0x000bffff (0x8000) MX[B]
[1] 0 0 0x000b0000 - 0x000b7fff (0x8000) MX[B
(II) Setting vga for screen 0.
(--) VMWARE(0): VMware SVGA regs at (0x1060, 0x1061)
(II) Loading sub module "vgahw"
(II) LoadModule: "vgahw"
(II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/libvgahw.so
(II) Module vgahw: vendor="X.Org Foundation"
compiled for 7.1.1, module version = 0.1.0
ABI class: X.Org Video Driver, version 1.0
(--) VMWARE(0): caps: 0x000083E2
(--) VMWARE(0): depth: 24
(--) VMWARE(0): bpp: 32
(--) VMWARE(0): vram: 16777216
(--) VMWARE(0): pbase: 0xf0000000
(--) VMWARE(0): mwidt: 2360
(--) VMWARE(0): mheig: 1770
(--) VMWARE(0): depth: 24
(--) VMWARE(0): bpp: 32
(--) VMWARE(0): w.red: 8
(--) VMWARE(0): w.grn: 8
(--) VMWARE(0): w.blu: 8
(--) VMWARE(0): vis: 4
(**) VMWARE(0): Depth 24, (--) framebuffer bpp 32
(==) VMWARE(0): RGB weight 888
(==) VMWARE(0): Default visual is TrueColor
(==) VMWARE(0): Using HW cursor
(==) VMWARE(0): Using gamma correction (1.0, 1.0, 1.0)
(II) VMWARE(0): <default monitor>: Using default hsync range of 31.50-37.90 kHz
(II) VMWARE(0): <default monitor>: Using default vrefresh range of 50.00-70.00 Hz
(WW) VMWARE(0): Unable to estimate virtual size
(II) VMWARE(0): Clock range: 0.00 to 400000.00 MHz
(II) VMWARE(0): Not using default mode "640x350" (vrefresh out of range)
(II) VMWARE(0): Not using default mode "320x175" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)
. For any screen resolution
(II) VMWARE(0): Not using default mode "2560x1600" (width requires unsupported line pitch)
(II) VMWARE(0): Not using default mode "1280x800" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)
(II) VMWARE(0): Not using default mode "2560x1600" (width requires unsupported line pitch)
(II) VMWARE(0): Not using default mode "1280x800" (bad mode clock/interlace/doublescan)
(--) VMWARE(0): Virtual size is 800x600 (pitch 800)
(**) VMWARE(0): *Default mode "800x600": 40.0 MHz, 37.9 kHz, 60.3 Hz
(II) VMWARE(0): Modeline "800x600" 40.00 800 840 968 1056 600 601 605 628 hsync vsync
(**) VMWARE(0): *Default mode "800x600": 36.0 MHz, 35.2 kHz, 56.2 Hz
(II) VMWARE(0): Modeline "800x600" 36.00 800 824 896 1024 600 601 603 625 hsync vsync
(**) VMWARE(0): *Default mode "640x480": 25.2 MHz, 31.5 kHz, 60.0 Hz
(II) VMWARE(0): Modeline "640x480" 25.20 640 656 752 800 480 490 492 525 -hsync -vsync
(==) VMWARE(0): DPI set to (75, 75)
[17] -1 0 0x00001050 - 0x0000105f (0x10) IX[B]
[18] -1 0 0x00001060 - 0x0000106f (0x10) IX(B)
(II) VMWARE(0): vgaHWGetIOBase: hwp->IOBase is 0x03d0, hwp->PIOOffset is 0x0000
(WW) VMWARE(0): Failed to set up write-combining range (0xf0000000,0x1000000)
(II) VMWARE(0): Using XFree86 Acceleration Architecture (XAA)
Screen to screen bit blits
(==) VMWARE(0): Backing store disabled
(==) VMWARE(0): Silken mouse enabled
(II) VMWARE(0): Initialized VMWARE_CTRL extension version 0.1

How to set screen resolution on Apple TV Gen2

This is my first bad out of the box experience with an Apple product. I got my brand new Apple TV Gen 2 and hooked it up to our Sony Receiver/TV.
Plugged everything in. Turned it on and I got the screen but am not able to change resolution. With the current resolution I can not see all the menus and the display does not fit on the 40" display.
Tried unplugging.
Tried doing a reset.
Tried holding the Menu & Down arrow
Tried looking through the menus, such as Settings, Video & Audio but can't find anything on setting screen resolution
Tried searching this forum for instructions for changing resolution
Much appreciation in advance for any tips or magic tricks on setting screen resolution.

i also have this problem. i had a long discussion with apple support and the result was that apple tv 2 is not build for connecting it to a receiver but only to a up-to-date flat TV. i don´t know how i managed it to use the 720p resolution but as i had it i set the auto power to off and let it switched on all the time.
after the update to 4.2.1 it had no chance to get it to 720p. it is locked to 1024x768 which is not the resolution i want to watch HD movies.
but my setup is not a normal one. i have a onkyo AV receiver which is sending the HDMI signal over a HDMI splitter to an LCD screen and a HD beamer. the LCD screen is an old one which has no HDMI input, i use a HDMI to analog-component converter for this. the HDMI output of the onkyo is connected to a wireless HDMI system from marmitek.
so its not so the ideal setting for apple tv. i hope that everything works fine if i have a new flat TV with a normal HDMI input.

Recommended screen resolution for SAP CRM 2006s/5.2

Hi All
Any idea that what is the recommended screen resolution by SAP for SAP CRM 2006s / .2 Web UI ?
Thanks & Regards
Vishal Mani

Hello Vishal,
This is John Burton, the guy who created the note that Stephen referred to (SAP note 764974). I don't think you will get a general recommendation from SAP regarding screen resolution and/or browser size requirement for a number of reasons. (The following are just my thoughts and don't necessarily represent the official views of SAP or anyone else).
1) Screen resolution is a somewhat personal choice varying by user and preference.
2) Technology changes very frequently and large wide-screen high-resolution monitors are becomming increasingly available.
3) The CRM WebClient supports a variety of different business roles and types of users; it is conceivable for example that an Interaction Center agent might be able to get by with a fairly small, low-resolution monitor while an analyst or supervisor might need two separate wide-screen high-resolution monitors in order to have various reports and other applications open at once.
4) And of course, no company wants to play the "bad guy" and make end users angry by giving a recommendation for very low-end, small low-resolution VGA monitors, or risk upsetting CFOs by giving a recommendation for very expensive wide-screen high-resolution LCD monitors
I'm sorry that I couldn't give you a more "official" answer.
Warm regards,
John

Does a New iMac Always Open With The Correct Screen Resolution?

This may sound a daft question but the other day I visited a friend and when he switched his 2 year old 24" iMac on, I was horrified to see black bands down each side of the screen.
It was obvious he had an incorrect resolution. . . . . I think it turned out to be 800x600!
Anyway I reset it to the correct 1920x1200 and he was amazed at the improvement!
I asked him how it had got like that and he said it had always been that way.
My immediate suspicion was that he had bought the machine second-hand from some idiot who had been fiddling with it but he assured me he had bought it new and that's how it had been from the start.
From what I remember, all my computers have started off with the correct screen resolution and haven't needed any resetting.
Any idea why this happened?

Thanks Barbara and den.thed.
Your suggestions will be helpful for anyone with a similar problem looking at this thread, however, they don't apply in this case. (Hope that doesn't sound bad! LOL)
This friend bought the iMac a couple of years ago simply to edit with Final Cut Pro. He doesn't use it for anything else and it isn't even connected to the internet. (He uses a PC for all mundane chores like that).
He claims that upon initial startup it displayed the 4:3 desktop image and assumed it was normal for his machine . . . . . . . . though he must have seen others in the shops displaying correctly.
Incidentally it may not have been 800x600, but it was certainly an incorrect 4:3 aspect ratio.
As he is a very intelligent and skilled film maker and editor I am surprised that he never queried it, after years of using PCs.

XP update wrecks my screen resolution on Qosmio G10-133

I am running a two years old G10-133. Great and reliable machine. The reason I bought it was because it has great screen resolution/sharpness for MS Word texts and Outlook emails.
For various reasons I do not download the MS Windows updates that are frequently offered in a pop-up at start up (suspicion that they can bring more problems than they solve). Anyway I have recently (despite running Norton Security all the time) picked up some sort of nasty malware in Google that hijacks around 50% of the google links after a search and sends then off to another search engine with links.
The windows and Norton firewalls did not pick these up or clean them out so I tried the Spybot freeware to get rid of them to no affect.
Finally rang up Toshiba Europe Support and the chap there recommended that :
1) Don't use Norton. Waste of time and money and slows machine. Get the new Windows Defender freeware instead.
2) Do all the XP updates
So I started with all the windows updates (loads), including Internet Explorer 7.
Guess what, after restart computer went a bit slow cranky, but worse the screen resolution (sharpness/clarity of text) had deteriorated in both Word, Outlook and Explorer.
So I called Toshiba Support again (I am on a three years warranty contract) and they could not solve the problem or suggest anything and seemed surprised that it had happened. We checked the usual screen resolution things in Control panels to no avail.
So I gave up, set the System Restore back before all the updates.
Computer is now stable and the screen resolution back to where it was.
Questions:
1) Can I get the XP updates and EXP 7 and still get my old (best) screen resolution.
2) What about giving up Norton for Windows Defender good/safe idea?
3) Any ideas on how to stop the hijacking of Google links?
All help much appreciated
Message was edited by: holtom

Hi
1.) This is very strange and I have never heard about bad display quality after installation of Microsoft updates!
I think you should try to contact the Microsoft support and maybe they know something about such strange behaviour.
But did you try to update graphic driver and/or BIOS?
2.) This is true. I have installed the Norton System Works several months ago and my unit booted very slow with preinstalled Norton Antivirus.
I have removed it and use and freeware AntiVirus application called "Antivir".
I don't want to use the MS Windows Defender. But I don't say this application is bad.
3) I don't know what you want to do but I don't think that this has something to do with your Toshiba notebook ;)

How to programmatically resize vi for different screen resolutions ?

Hi,
I have been struggling with this,How can i built a vi that should run for different screen resolutions (on different pc's).
There are several threads on forum , But i dont find the exact solution for it.
I have already tried with VI properties in the VI but i dont think its working.
Can someone please help me ?
Thanks and regards,
Shivkant Paswan

Yup it is a pain to use panes, but that is the easiest method I've found which meets my requirements. Learn to use panes and splitters effectively, and then learn their limitations and workaround when you find those limitations. In general LabVIEW should handle multi-resolutions, and resizing better but these are the tools we have today.
Unofficial Forum Rules and Guidelines - Hooovahh - LabVIEW Overlord
If 10 out of 10 experts in any field say something is bad, you should probably take their opinion seriously.

Photoshop RAW processing with different screen resolutions

Hi, I know this might not be fully a photoshop question, but I have done so many searches online & am unable to find anything.
I usually do RAW photo editing on photoshop on my old Fujitsu laptop & have recently I have upgraded to a MacBook Pro. I have noticed that when I do the same kind of processing on my Macbook, the photos tend to not be as dark & have contrast as I would normally like it to be.
Meaning to say, photos that look really dark in on my Macbook look rather greyed & washed out on my Fujitsu, however the photos I have processed on my Fujitsu all look nicely exposed on my Macbook.
So is this due to different screen resolutions? Because the photos I have edited on my mac look really different when compared to on my fujitsu, like the colours etc. Please do advise me on what exactly is the problem & what I can do to solve it. Thanks!

It all depends on the colour range, brightness, and contrast of the screen, and the screen technology. The only way to make somewhat sure that the colours are "correct" and consistent is to purchase a hardware screen calibration device, like a spyder. But even then the laptop screens tend to be quite bad for this type of work.
Read up on this topic here:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/241957/how_to_calibrate_your_monitor.html

E540 screen resolution is so bad

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for