Hello again Smart People:

I recently went Uptown from Win98se to Windows XP Home.

I don't remember what video display options I had before the upgrade but, I
do know now I have less --- and none produce pics as satisfactory as before.

My DISPLAY currently lists three options:
1) Medium (15 bit),
2) Medium (16 bit),
3) High (16 bit), which I use at 800 x 600 pixels (ugh).

Web page pictures are pixilated punky, that is, not clear as they were, but
blotchy. My super-dooper, IrframView shows JPGs in proper rendition, unless
the pic is snagged from a web page. [BTW, I am not talking about porn
sites. I leave that to other explorers] .

I think I had something like 24 bit, 256, 1000, a million (?) colors
available with Win98se, before XP. Nothing else has changed on my hardware
or software - except installing XP. The pre-XP install alert mentioned a
few things, but not that video would be affected.

I did the Trouble Shooting thingy and tried to update my driver - Windows
said the current one was fine, so, no change there. The manufacturer 'SIS'
does not have an update equivalent driver (sis6326) for my Tincan.

I went looking for that XP check-box feature that says something 'like
emulate Win98', but have not found it.

Also it was suggested I replace my video card with a new one. Would that do
it? -------or what?

This mess is neither life nor surfing threatening but the pics are kinda
ghastly. The MS experience should be better than this.

Any suggestions??

Thanx, Chuck---

Chuck, you need at least 256MB of Ram and a decent graphics card. For
your computer I would recommend something like GeForce2 but would need more
info about your system to make a good choice.
"Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hello again Smart People:
>
> I recently went Uptown from Win98se to Windows XP Home.
>
> I don't remember what video display options I had before the upgrade but,
> I
> do know now I have less --- and none produce pics as satisfactory as
> before.
>
> My DISPLAY currently lists three options:
> 1) Medium (15 bit),
> 2) Medium (16 bit),
> 3) High (16 bit), which I use at 800 x 600 pixels (ugh).
>
> Web page pictures are pixilated punky, that is, not clear as they were,
> but blotchy. My super-dooper, IrframView shows JPGs in proper rendition,
> unless the pic is snagged from a web page. [BTW, I am not talking about
> porn sites. I leave that to other explorers] .
>
> I think I had something like 24 bit, 256, 1000, a million (?) colors
> available with Win98se, before XP. Nothing else has changed on my hardware
> or software - except installing XP. The pre-XP install alert mentioned a
> few things, but not that video would be affected.
>
> I did the Trouble Shooting thingy and tried to update my driver - Windows
> said the current one was fine, so, no change there. The manufacturer 'SIS'
> does not have an update equivalent driver (sis6326) for my Tincan.
>
> I went looking for that XP check-box feature that says something 'like
> emulate Win98', but have not found it.
>
> Also it was suggested I replace my video card with a new one. Would that
> do it? -------or what?
>
> This mess is neither life nor surfing threatening but the pics are kinda
> ghastly. The MS experience should be better than this.
>
> Any suggestions??
>
> Thanx, Chuck---
>

Hi Rich:
Aye caramba, so fast a response! Thanks.

I have 256 Ram now and am thinking of boosting to 512. XP goobled up a lot
of what I had compared to Win98.
I erred in my description below. I do have a "High 24 bit" option
available. but it's not good also

I have Everest and Belarc software installed and can tell you anything you
want to know (that I don't know anything about).

What would you like to know? Ask away.
Chuck---


"Rich Barry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Pds0e.44832$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Chuck, you need at least 256MB of Ram and a decent graphics card. For
> your computer I would recommend something like GeForce2 but would need
> more info about your system to make a good choice.

> "Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hello again Smart People:
>>
>> I recently went Uptown from Win98se to Windows XP Home.
>>
>> I don't remember what video display options I had before the upgrade but,
>> I
>> do know now I have less --- and none produce pics as satisfactory as
>> before.
>>
>> My DISPLAY currently lists three options:
>> 1) Medium (15 bit),
>> 2) Medium (16 bit),
>> 3) High (16 bit), which I use at 800 x 600 pixels (ugh).
>>
>> Web page pictures are pixilated punky, that is, not clear as they were,
>> but blotchy. My super-dooper, IrframView shows JPGs in proper rendition,
>> unless the pic is snagged from a web page. [BTW, I am not talking about
>> porn sites. I leave that to other explorers] .
>>
>> I think I had something like 24 bit, 256, 1000, a million (?) colors
>> available with Win98se, before XP. Nothing else has changed on my
>> hardware or software - except installing XP. The pre-XP install alert
>> mentioned a few things, but not that video would be affected.
>>
>> I did the Trouble Shooting thingy and tried to update my driver -
>> Windows
>> said the current one was fine, so, no change there. The manufacturer
>> 'SIS' does not have an update equivalent driver (sis6326) for my Tincan.
>>
>> I went looking for that XP check-box feature that says something 'like
>> emulate Win98', but have not found it.
>>
>> Also it was suggested I replace my video card with a new one. Would that
>> do it? -------or what?
>>
>> This mess is neither life nor surfing threatening but the pics are kinda
>> ghastly. The MS experience should be better than this.
>>
>> Any suggestions??
>>
>> Thanx, Chuck---
>>
>
>

Chuck, processor speed, type of ram, motherboard.


"Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi Rich:
> Aye caramba, so fast a response! Thanks.
>
> I have 256 Ram now and am thinking of boosting to 512. XP goobled up a lot
> of what I had compared to Win98.
> I erred in my description below. I do have a "High 24 bit" option
> available. but it's not good also
>
> I have Everest and Belarc software installed and can tell you anything you
> want to know (that I don't know anything about).
>
> What would you like to know? Ask away.
> Chuck---
>
>
> "Rich Barry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:Pds0e.44832$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Chuck, you need at least 256MB of Ram and a decent graphics card. For
>> your computer I would recommend something like GeForce2 but would need
>> more info about your system to make a good choice.
>
>> "Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Hello again Smart People:
>>>
>>> I recently went Uptown from Win98se to Windows XP Home.
>>>
>>> I don't remember what video display options I had before the upgrade
>>> but, I
>>> do know now I have less --- and none produce pics as satisfactory as
>>> before.
>>>
>>> My DISPLAY currently lists three options:
>>> 1) Medium (15 bit),
>>> 2) Medium (16 bit),
>>> 3) High (16 bit), which I use at 800 x 600 pixels (ugh).
>>>
>>> Web page pictures are pixilated punky, that is, not clear as they were,
>>> but blotchy. My super-dooper, IrframView shows JPGs in proper rendition,
>>> unless the pic is snagged from a web page. [BTW, I am not talking about
>>> porn sites. I leave that to other explorers] .
>>>
>>> I think I had something like 24 bit, 256, 1000, a million (?) colors
>>> available with Win98se, before XP. Nothing else has changed on my
>>> hardware or software - except installing XP. The pre-XP install alert
>>> mentioned a few things, but not that video would be affected.
>>>
>>> I did the Trouble Shooting thingy and tried to update my driver -
>>> Windows
>>> said the current one was fine, so, no change there. The manufacturer
>>> 'SIS' does not have an update equivalent driver (sis6326) for my Tincan.
>>>
>>> I went looking for that XP check-box feature that says something 'like
>>> emulate Win98', but have not found it.
>>>
>>> Also it was suggested I replace my video card with a new one. Would that
>>> do it? -------or what?
>>>
>>> This mess is neither life nor surfing threatening but the pics are kinda
>>> ghastly. The MS experience should be better than this.
>>>
>>> Any suggestions??
>>>
>>> Thanx, Chuck---
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Hi,

I would guess your system is more than 4 years old and your mobo only
support upto AGP 4X or less. I would suggest you to buy a nvidia Geforce 4 MX
400 with 64 MB ram. This card is very cheap now but its performance is much
better than your onboard vedio chips. Most modern main-stream vedio cards
are AGP 8X/PCI Express with 128MB ram. You may take more time to find the
mentioned card in the market . I would also suggest you to add more ram to
the OS. 512 MB is good enough for normal use for XP.

Peter


"Rich Barry" wrote:

> Chuck, processor speed, type of ram, motherboard.
>
>
> "Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Hi Rich:
> > Aye caramba, so fast a response! Thanks.
> >
> > I have 256 Ram now and am thinking of boosting to 512. XP goobled up a lot
> > of what I had compared to Win98.
> > I erred in my description below. I do have a "High 24 bit" option
> > available. but it's not good also
> >
> > I have Everest and Belarc software installed and can tell you anything you
> > want to know (that I don't know anything about).
> >
> > What would you like to know? Ask away.
> > Chuck---
> >
> >
> > "Rich Barry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:Pds0e.44832$(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> Chuck, you need at least 256MB of Ram and a decent graphics card. For
> >> your computer I would recommend something like GeForce2 but would need
> >> more info about your system to make a good choice.
> >
> >> "Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
> >> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> >>> Hello again Smart People:
> >>>
> >>> I recently went Uptown from Win98se to Windows XP Home.
> >>>
> >>> I don't remember what video display options I had before the upgrade
> >>> but, I
> >>> do know now I have less --- and none produce pics as satisfactory as
> >>> before.
> >>>
> >>> My DISPLAY currently lists three options:
> >>> 1) Medium (15 bit),
> >>> 2) Medium (16 bit),
> >>> 3) High (16 bit), which I use at 800 x 600 pixels (ugh).
> >>>
> >>> Web page pictures are pixilated punky, that is, not clear as they were,
> >>> but blotchy. My super-dooper, IrframView shows JPGs in proper rendition,
> >>> unless the pic is snagged from a web page. [BTW, I am not talking about
> >>> porn sites. I leave that to other explorers] .
> >>>
> >>> I think I had something like 24 bit, 256, 1000, a million (?) colors
> >>> available with Win98se, before XP. Nothing else has changed on my
> >>> hardware or software - except installing XP. The pre-XP install alert
> >>> mentioned a few things, but not that video would be affected.
> >>>
> >>> I did the Trouble Shooting thingy and tried to update my driver -
> >>> Windows
> >>> said the current one was fine, so, no change there. The manufacturer
> >>> 'SIS' does not have an update equivalent driver (sis6326) for my Tincan.
> >>>
> >>> I went looking for that XP check-box feature that says something 'like
> >>> emulate Win98', but have not found it.
> >>>
> >>> Also it was suggested I replace my video card with a new one. Would that
> >>> do it? -------or what?
> >>>
> >>> This mess is neither life nor surfing threatening but the pics are kinda
> >>> ghastly. The MS experience should be better than this.
> >>>
> >>> Any suggestions??
> >>>
> >>> Thanx, Chuck---
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>

You say picture look good in Irfanview but the "web" ones are blotchy.
Are you running "web accellerator" of some sort? That speeds things up
but whacking the graphics. So if you have that, shut it off.

Chuck--- wrote:

> Hi Rich:
> Aye caramba, so fast a response! Thanks.
>
> I have 256 Ram now and am thinking of boosting to 512. XP goobled up a lot
> of what I had compared to Win98.
> I erred in my description below. I do have a "High 24 bit" option
> available. but it's not good also
>
> I have Everest and Belarc software installed and can tell you anything you
> want to know (that I don't know anything about).
>
> What would you like to know? Ask away.
> Chuck---
>
>
> "Rich Barry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:Pds0e.44832$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>> Chuck, you need at least 256MB of Ram and a decent graphics card. For
>>your computer I would recommend something like GeForce2 but would need
>>more info about your system to make a good choice.
>
>
>>"Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>>>Hello again Smart People:
>>>
>>>I recently went Uptown from Win98se to Windows XP Home.
>>>
>>>I don't remember what video display options I had before the upgrade but,
>>>I
>>>do know now I have less --- and none produce pics as satisfactory as
>>>before.
>>>
>>>My DISPLAY currently lists three options:
>>>1) Medium (15 bit),
>>>2) Medium (16 bit),
>>>3) High (16 bit), which I use at 800 x 600 pixels (ugh).
>>>
>>>Web page pictures are pixilated punky, that is, not clear as they were,
>>>but blotchy. My super-dooper, IrframView shows JPGs in proper rendition,
>>>unless the pic is snagged from a web page. [BTW, I am not talking about
>>>porn sites. I leave that to other explorers] .
>>>
>>>I think I had something like 24 bit, 256, 1000, a million (?) colors
>>>available with Win98se, before XP. Nothing else has changed on my
>>>hardware or software - except installing XP. The pre-XP install alert
>>>mentioned a few things, but not that video would be affected.
>>>
>>>I did the Trouble Shooting thingy and tried to update my driver -
>>>Windows
>>>said the current one was fine, so, no change there. The manufacturer
>>>'SIS' does not have an update equivalent driver (sis6326) for my Tincan.
>>>
>>>I went looking for that XP check-box feature that says something 'like
>>>emulate Win98', but have not found it.
>>>
>>>Also it was suggested I replace my video card with a new one. Would that
>>>do it? -------or what?
>>>
>>>This mess is neither life nor surfing threatening but the pics are kinda
>>>ghastly. The MS experience should be better than this.
>>>
>>>Any suggestions??
>>>
>>>Thanx, Chuck---
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Hello again, Smart People:

Rich, Peter, and Bob I, the Calvary to the rescue! All things are now as
they were before - a "No Problemo" (until the next time).

Yes, yes, yes, so simple. Yes, it was my dial-up Accelerator causing the
problem with the pictures. I turned it OFF and like magic, the pics become
nicely viewable, as before. I'm not sure the damn Accelerator accelerates
anything, anyway.

I'm usually mystified and you nice folks de-mystify me. .Invariably, when
I'm in a pickle, I have come here and reaped the benefits of the kindness of
Cyberspace strangers.

Thanks for your time, thanks for your expertise, thanks again to the three
of you )

Sincerely, Chuck---



"Bob I" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> You say picture look good in Irfanview but the "web" ones are blotchy. Are
> you running "web accellerator" of some sort? That speeds things up but
> whacking the graphics. So if you have that, shut it off.
>
> Chuck--- wrote:
>
>> Hi Rich:
>> Aye caramba, so fast a response! Thanks.
>>
>> I have 256 Ram now and am thinking of boosting to 512. XP goobled up a
>> lot of what I had compared to Win98.
>> I erred in my description below. I do have a "High 24 bit" option
>> available. but it's not good also
>>
>> I have Everest and Belarc software installed and can tell you anything
>> you want to know (that I don't know anything about).
>>
>> What would you like to know? Ask away.
>> Chuck---
>>
>>
>> "Rich Barry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:Pds0e.44832$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>>> Chuck, you need at least 256MB of Ram and a decent graphics card. For
>>> your computer I would recommend something like GeForce2 but would need
>>> more info about your system to make a good choice.
>>
>>
>>>"Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
>>>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>
>>>>Hello again Smart People:
>>>>
>>>>I recently went Uptown from Win98se to Windows XP Home.
>>>>
>>>>I don't remember what video display options I had before the upgrade
>>>>but, I
>>>>do know now I have less --- and none produce pics as satisfactory as
>>>>before.
>>>>
>>>>My DISPLAY currently lists three options:
>>>>1) Medium (15 bit),
>>>>2) Medium (16 bit),
>>>>3) High (16 bit), which I use at 800 x 600 pixels (ugh).
>>>>
>>>>Web page pictures are pixilated punky, that is, not clear as they were,
>>>>but blotchy. My super-dooper, IrframView shows JPGs in proper rendition,
>>>>unless the pic is snagged from a web page. [BTW, I am not talking about
>>>>porn sites. I leave that to other explorers] .
>>>>
>>>>I think I had something like 24 bit, 256, 1000, a million (?) colors
>>>>available with Win98se, before XP. Nothing else has changed on my
>>>>hardware or software - except installing XP. The pre-XP install alert
>>>>mentioned a few things, but not that video would be affected.
>>>>
>>>>I did the Trouble Shooting thingy and tried to update my driver -
>>>>Windows
>>>>said the current one was fine, so, no change there. The manufacturer
>>>>'SIS' does not have an update equivalent driver (sis6326) for my Tincan.
>>>>
>>>>I went looking for that XP check-box feature that says something 'like
>>>>emulate Win98', but have not found it.
>>>>
>>>>Also it was suggested I replace my video card with a new one. Would that
>>>>do it? -------or what?
>>>>
>>>>This mess is neither life nor surfing threatening but the pics are kinda
>>>>ghastly. The MS experience should be better than this.
>>>>
>>>>Any suggestions??
>>>>
>>>>Thanx, Chuck---
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

You're welcome, you are correct in that the "web accelerator" doesn't
accelerate anything. Think of it a content reduction. :-) It uses the
theory that "You can hand out glasses of water a lot faster if they're
only half full."

Chuck--- wrote:

> Hello again, Smart People:
>
> Rich, Peter, and Bob I, the Calvary to the rescue! All things are now as
> they were before - a "No Problemo" (until the next time).
>
> Yes, yes, yes, so simple. Yes, it was my dial-up Accelerator causing the
> problem with the pictures. I turned it OFF and like magic, the pics become
> nicely viewable, as before. I'm not sure the damn Accelerator accelerates
> anything, anyway.
>
> I'm usually mystified and you nice folks de-mystify me. .Invariably, when
> I'm in a pickle, I have come here and reaped the benefits of the kindness of
> Cyberspace strangers.
>
> Thanks for your time, thanks for your expertise, thanks again to the three
> of you )
>
> Sincerely, Chuck---
>
>
>
> "Bob I" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>
>>You say picture look good in Irfanview but the "web" ones are blotchy. Are
>>you running "web accellerator" of some sort? That speeds things up but
>>whacking the graphics. So if you have that, shut it off.
>>
>>Chuck--- wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hi Rich:
>>>Aye caramba, so fast a response! Thanks.
>>>
>>>I have 256 Ram now and am thinking of boosting to 512. XP goobled up a
>>>lot of what I had compared to Win98.
>>>I erred in my description below. I do have a "High 24 bit" option
>>>available. but it's not good also
>>>
>>>I have Everest and Belarc software installed and can tell you anything
>>>you want to know (that I don't know anything about).
>>>
>>>What would you like to know? Ask away.
>>>Chuck---
>>>
>>>
>>>"Rich Barry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>news:Pds0e.44832$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>
>>>
>>>> Chuck, you need at least 256MB of Ram and a decent graphics card. For
>>>>your computer I would recommend something like GeForce2 but would need
>>>>more info about your system to make a good choice.
>>>
>>>
>>>>"Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hello again Smart People:
>>>>>
>>>>>I recently went Uptown from Win98se to Windows XP Home.
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't remember what video display options I had before the upgrade
>>>>>but, I
>>>>>do know now I have less --- and none produce pics as satisfactory as
>>>>>before.
>>>>>
>>>>>My DISPLAY currently lists three options:
>>>>>1) Medium (15 bit),
>>>>>2) Medium (16 bit),
>>>>>3) High (16 bit), which I use at 800 x 600 pixels (ugh).
>>>>>
>>>>>Web page pictures are pixilated punky, that is, not clear as they were,
>>>>>but blotchy. My super-dooper, IrframView shows JPGs in proper rendition,
>>>>>unless the pic is snagged from a web page. [BTW, I am not talking about
>>>>>porn sites. I leave that to other explorers] .
>>>>>
>>>>>I think I had something like 24 bit, 256, 1000, a million (?) colors
>>>>>available with Win98se, before XP. Nothing else has changed on my
>>>>>hardware or software - except installing XP. The pre-XP install alert
>>>>>mentioned a few things, but not that video would be affected.
>>>>>
>>>>>I did the Trouble Shooting thingy and tried to update my driver -
>>>>>Windows
>>>>>said the current one was fine, so, no change there. The manufacturer
>>>>>'SIS' does not have an update equivalent driver (sis6326) for my Tincan.
>>>>>
>>>>>I went looking for that XP check-box feature that says something 'like
>>>>>emulate Win98', but have not found it.
>>>>>
>>>>>Also it was suggested I replace my video card with a new one. Would that
>>>>>do it? -------or what?
>>>>>
>>>>>This mess is neither life nor surfing threatening but the pics are kinda
>>>>>ghastly. The MS experience should be better than this.
>>>>>
>>>>>Any suggestions??
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanx, Chuck---
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
>

Chuck, glad to hear that you found a solution. Web accelerator is
something I've forgotten about since using cable broadband. Bob did a good
job zoning in on it.

"Bob I" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:uDz$(E-Mail Removed)...
> You're welcome, you are correct in that the "web accelerator" doesn't
> accelerate anything. Think of it a content reduction. :-) It uses the
> theory that "You can hand out glasses of water a lot faster if they're
> only half full."
>
> Chuck--- wrote:
>
>> Hello again, Smart People:
>>
>> Rich, Peter, and Bob I, the Calvary to the rescue! All things are now as
>> they were before - a "No Problemo" (until the next time).
>>
>> Yes, yes, yes, so simple. Yes, it was my dial-up Accelerator causing the
>> problem with the pictures. I turned it OFF and like magic, the pics
>> become nicely viewable, as before. I'm not sure the damn Accelerator
>> accelerates anything, anyway.
>>
>> I'm usually mystified and you nice folks de-mystify me. .Invariably,
>> when I'm in a pickle, I have come here and reaped the benefits of the
>> kindness of Cyberspace strangers.
>>
>> Thanks for your time, thanks for your expertise, thanks again to the
>> three of you )
>>
>> Sincerely, Chuck---
>>
>>
>>
>> "Bob I" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>
>>>You say picture look good in Irfanview but the "web" ones are blotchy.
>>>Are you running "web accellerator" of some sort? That speeds things up
>>>but whacking the graphics. So if you have that, shut it off.
>>>
>>>Chuck--- wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi Rich:
>>>>Aye caramba, so fast a response! Thanks.
>>>>
>>>>I have 256 Ram now and am thinking of boosting to 512. XP goobled up a
>>>>lot of what I had compared to Win98.
>>>>I erred in my description below. I do have a "High 24 bit" option
>>>>available. but it's not good also
>>>>
>>>>I have Everest and Belarc software installed and can tell you anything
>>>>you want to know (that I don't know anything about).
>>>>
>>>>What would you like to know? Ask away.
>>>>Chuck---
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"Rich Barry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>>>news:Pds0e.44832$(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Chuck, you need at least 256MB of Ram and a decent graphics card. For
>>>>> your computer I would recommend something like GeForce2 but would need
>>>>> more info about your system to make a good choice.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hello again Smart People:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I recently went Uptown from Win98se to Windows XP Home.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't remember what video display options I had before the upgrade
>>>>>>but, I
>>>>>>do know now I have less --- and none produce pics as satisfactory as
>>>>>>before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>My DISPLAY currently lists three options:
>>>>>>1) Medium (15 bit),
>>>>>>2) Medium (16 bit),
>>>>>>3) High (16 bit), which I use at 800 x 600 pixels (ugh).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Web page pictures are pixilated punky, that is, not clear as they
>>>>>>were, but blotchy. My super-dooper, IrframView shows JPGs in proper
>>>>>>rendition, unless the pic is snagged from a web page. [BTW, I am not
>>>>>>talking about porn sites. I leave that to other explorers] .
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I think I had something like 24 bit, 256, 1000, a million (?) colors
>>>>>>available with Win98se, before XP. Nothing else has changed on my
>>>>>>hardware or software - except installing XP. The pre-XP install alert
>>>>>>mentioned a few things, but not that video would be affected.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I did the Trouble Shooting thingy and tried to update my driver -
>>>>>>Windows
>>>>>>said the current one was fine, so, no change there. The manufacturer
>>>>>>'SIS' does not have an update equivalent driver (sis6326) for my
>>>>>>Tincan.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I went looking for that XP check-box feature that says something 'like
>>>>>>emulate Win98', but have not found it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Also it was suggested I replace my video card with a new one. Would
>>>>>>that do it? -------or what?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>This mess is neither life nor surfing threatening but the pics are
>>>>>>kinda ghastly. The MS experience should be better than this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Any suggestions??
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanx, Chuck---
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>

I believe that he was referring to the amount of RAM on the Video card, not
amount installed on the motherboard.
Mike

"Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi Rich:
> Aye caramba, so fast a response! Thanks.
>
> I have 256 Ram now and am thinking of boosting to 512. XP goobled up a lot
> of what I had compared to Win98.
> I erred in my description below. I do have a "High 24 bit" option
> available. but it's not good also
>
> I have Everest and Belarc software installed and can tell you anything you
> want to know (that I don't know anything about).
>
> What would you like to know? Ask away.
> Chuck---
>
>
> "Rich Barry" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:Pds0e.44832$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Chuck, you need at least 256MB of Ram and a decent graphics card. For
>> your computer I would recommend something like GeForce2 but would need
>> more info about your system to make a good choice.
>
>> "Chuck---" <Chuck---@no.spam.com> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Hello again Smart People:
>>>
>>> I recently went Uptown from Win98se to Windows XP Home.
>>>
>>> I don't remember what video display options I had before the upgrade
>>> but, I
>>> do know now I have less --- and none produce pics as satisfactory as
>>> before.
>>>
>>> My DISPLAY currently lists three options:
>>> 1) Medium (15 bit),
>>> 2) Medium (16 bit),
>>> 3) High (16 bit), which I use at 800 x 600 pixels (ugh).
>>>
>>> Web page pictures are pixilated punky, that is, not clear as they were,
>>> but blotchy. My super-dooper, IrframView shows JPGs in proper rendition,
>>> unless the pic is snagged from a web page. [BTW, I am not talking about
>>> porn sites. I leave that to other explorers] .
>>>
>>> I think I had something like 24 bit, 256, 1000, a million (?) colors
>>> available with Win98se, before XP. Nothing else has changed on my
>>> hardware or software - except installing XP. The pre-XP install alert
>>> mentioned a few things, but not that video would be affected.
>>>
>>> I did the Trouble Shooting thingy and tried to update my driver -
>>> Windows
>>> said the current one was fine, so, no change there. The manufacturer
>>> 'SIS' does not have an update equivalent driver (sis6326) for my Tincan.
>>>
>>> I went looking for that XP check-box feature that says something 'like
>>> emulate Win98', but have not found it.
>>>
>>> Also it was suggested I replace my video card with a new one. Would that
>>> do it? -------or what?
>>>
>>> This mess is neither life nor surfing threatening but the pics are kinda
>>> ghastly. The MS experience should be better than this.
>>>
>>> Any suggestions??
>>>
>>> Thanx, Chuck---
>>>
>>
>>
>
>