Per-User X Windows System Screen Resolution Configuration
Lennart Sorensen
lsorense-1wCw9BSqJbv44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys at public.gmane.org
Mon Mar 17 21:32:51 UTC 2008
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 01:39:55PM -0400, David C. Chipman wrote:
> Thanks for our suggestion. I would say, however, that
> as somebody with vision problems (and this is why I'm asking about this
> stuff), the fact that flat-panels *should* be used at their native
> resolution doesn't matter to me. If it's the "eye-bleed" resolution,
> I'll want it lower so I can read the text on the screen. Thank you for
> the suggestion, though. Later,
I would think you would be better off using a larger font at the full
resolution.
However you can also use an integer divisor of the native resolution and
still get it to be clear.
So a 1920x1200 could run 960x600 very nicely. You could probably get
away with 1280x800 as well, since that would map 3 real pixels to 2
virtual pixels, which shouldn't be too bad.
Of course an HDTV has much larger pixels. You could run 1920x1080 on a
60" and got way larger pixels than on a 24". :) They are not that
expensive either anymore and make wonderful TVs too.
--
Len Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group. Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists
More information about the Legacy
mailing list