Subject: Re: 'unusual' resolutions on X
To: Jochen Kunz <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Timo Schoeler <email@example.com>
Date: 11/09/2005 10:17:40
>>when running Mac OS X (really seldom :) the monitor control panel
>>allows me -- besides lots of other 'uncommon' resolutions -- to set
>>1400 x 1050.
>>i'd like to use this for X, but when i set it, the screen falls back
>>to 1280 x 1024.
> There is a tech-X11 mailing list where this question my be suited
> better. ;-)
> I am using 1408 x 1056 at work. IIRC I had to construct a modeline for
> this resolution.
okay, someone told be about the tool -- and the nice thing is, there's a
website running it as cgi :) 
> A problem can be that 1400 and 1050 are not divisible by 32. I had this
> problem at work and solved it by using a resolution of 1408 x 1056 =
> (3 x 11 x 32) x (4 x 11 x 32). (3 x 4 is the usual aspect ratio of CRTs
> and 11 an arbitrary scaling factor.)
interestingly, xf86config e.g. has 1400 x 1050 as an option. i'll figure
it out as soon as i'm in the office and have access to that machine.
besides that i'm still wondering why an LC display (1600 x 1200) is told
to be more productive than an CRT at 1600 x 1200, provided the latter
one is of good quality. LCDs may be nice, but i've spent weeks now
finding a 20" LCD that is really good. ViewSonic for example has a 'Zero
Pixel Defect Guarantee', that's a big step ahead, but their displays are
not superior. IBM has good displays, but you have to live with dead
pixels... :( sorry, but that's pretty OT (but i wanted to state my view
on the LCD vs CRT discussion that came up :).
 -- http://www.dkfz-heidelberg.de/spec/linux/modeline/
thanks all who replied,