Screen Resolution

[Dapper Dan]

Just recently graduated from Win 98SE with an old 13" CRT monitor to Win XP
Home Edition with a 17" LCD Screen.

My screen is set, as delivered, at the recommended resolution of 1280x1024.
At this resolution, I could hardly read so I adjusted DPI to large (120 DPI)
and also adjusted text in IE to LARGER. I have also made a number of
individual adjustments in the APPEARANCE section of the Display Adapter, to
the point where I am relatively happy with the appearance.

Notwithstanding these adjustments, a significant number of web pages appear
on the screen with about an inch of empty space on each side. I have
experimented with resolution for a couple of days; is lowering the screen
resolution the only solution to attaining full screen appearance, or is
there another less obvious way (other than making the font so large that
everything looks silly)? A related question is whether there are any
negatives to running at a lower resolution than recommended.

I just wondered what some of the experts do with respect to this.

Thanks

 

[dev]

/Dapper Dan/ said:

Just recently graduated from Win 98SE with an old 13" CRT monitor to Win XP
Home Edition with a 17" LCD Screen.

My screen is set, as delivered, at the recommended resolution of 1280x1024.
At this resolution, I could hardly read so I adjusted DPI to large (120 DPI)
and also adjusted text in IE to LARGER. I have also made a number of
individual adjustments in the APPEARANCE section of the Display Adapter, to
the point where I am relatively happy with the appearance.

Notwithstanding these adjustments, a significant number of web pages appear
on the screen with about an inch of empty space on each side. I have
experimented with resolution for a couple of days; is lowering the screen
resolution the only solution to attaining full screen appearance, or is
there another less obvious way (other than making the font so large that
everything looks silly)? A related question is whether there are any
negatives to running at a lower resolution than recommended.

I just wondered what some of the experts do with respect to this.

LCD monitors should be run at their native resolution, in accordance with
manufacturer specs.
It won't help your space issue, but if you have not done so already turn on
ClearType...
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cleartype/cleartypeq.htm

This should make your viewing experience more pleasurable.

 

[Chuck]

I can understand that the default settings (Normal) at 1280x1024 (or
whatever) might produce smaller text on the windows desktop icons than you
are comfortable with.

I'm not exactly sure what else you have done. My choices are normal, large,
and extra large.
72-96 DPI is more or less the standard value for a display setting. 120 DPI
should produce a visibly smaller text.
Is your LCD one of the extra wide versions? If so you will end up with a
wider border, unless you change the aspect ratio, which may look a bit odd.

A 13"CRT monitor was normally set for no more than 800x600 due to the small
size of text. Virtual scrolling screens were used by some to allow more info
to be shown.

 

[Dapper Dan]

Thanks dev
ClearType helped a bit and then I downloaded the ClearType Tuner from
Microsoft with the result that I was getting some red ghosting on black
vertical letters. So uninstalled the tuner and have been playing with the
various settings.

Dan

 

[Dapper Dan]

Chuck

Are the settings you describe those in the Display Adapter. I only have 3
choices; Normal size (96 DPI), Large size(120 DPI) and Custom. I thought the
higher the number the larger the text. I'll go back and experiment.

To the best of my knowledge, I have a regular 17" screen, not an extra wide
version.

Sounding like people just accept the recommended resolution and live with
using less than a full screen. Makes me kind of glad I didn't spend more and
go for a 19" screen.

In any event, thanks for the feedback, it's appreciated.

Dan

 

[Alias]

Chuck

Are the settings you describe those in the Display Adapter. I only have 3
choices; Normal size (96 DPI), Large size(120 DPI) and Custom. I thought the
higher the number the larger the text. I'll go back and experiment.

To the best of my knowledge, I have a regular 17" screen, not an extra wide
version.

Sounding like people just accept the recommended resolution and live with
using less than a full screen. Makes me kind of glad I didn't spend more and
go for a 19" screen.

In any event, thanks for the feedback, it's appreciated.

Dan

I have a 17" LCD and my desktop fills the entire screen at the same
resolution as yours. Did you try using the buttons on the monitor to
fill out the desktop to the whole screen? Look on the CD that came with
the monitor. It may have a program called FPAdjust that will help.

 

[Dapper Dan]

Thanks Alias. A little late for you, isn't it?

The buttons on the monitor don't appear to adjust to full screen display.
However I just found a monitor CD that was hidden in the Warranty booklet.
So will have to go through that ... looks like the instruction manual is
electronic.

Dan

 

[Dapper Dan]

I read the manual and I don't see the ability anywhere to make adjustments
re screen size. Just in case I am not describing the problem correctly,
there are websites that fill my screen completely at the recommended
resolution. My home page, www.Yahoo.ca for example, is OK on the initial
page but on any subsequent page (news story), there is about 2" of free
space on each side of the screen. Other examples;
www.washingtonpost.com (about 2" of unused screen space)
www.nytimes.com (about 2' of unused screen space)
www.thestar.com (about 3" of unused screen space)
www.canada.com (about 4" of unused screen space)

Dan

 

[Alias]

I read the manual and I don't see the ability anywhere to make adjustments
re screen size. Just in case I am not describing the problem correctly,
there are websites that fill my screen completely at the recommended
resolution. My home page, www.Yahoo.ca for example, is OK on the initial
page but on any subsequent page (news story), there is about 2" of free
space on each side of the screen. Other examples;
www.washingtonpost.com (about 2" of unused screen space)
www.nytimes.com (about 2' of unused screen space)
www.thestar.com (about 3" of unused screen space)
www.canada.com (about 4" of unused screen space)

Dan

Oh, so it's Internet Explorer, not your desktop? What happens if you use
Firefox? When you say "free space", do you mean on all four sides of the
IE window?

I'm a night owl

 

[Dapper Dan]

Alias
When I say free space I mean unused screen space. With the examples I
provided most of the unused screen space is on the right side of the screen
with the exception of www.thestar.com which equates to about 1.5" on each
side of the screen, for a total of 3" of unused screen space.

I can't imagine that this is specific to me. Can you navigate to one of the
sites and let me know if it's a common issue? Canada.com appears to be the
worse. Thanks for your patience.

Dan

 

[Alias]

Alias
When I say free space I mean unused screen space. With the examples I
provided most of the unused screen space is on the right side of the screen
with the exception of www.thestar.com which equates to about 1.5" on each
side of the screen, for a total of 3" of unused screen space.

I can't imagine that this is specific to me. Can you navigate to one of the
sites and let me know if it's a common issue? Canada.com appears to be the
worse. Thanks for your patience.

Dan

I think I see what you mean. At Canada.com there is an "unused" space to
the right that is light blue? If that's what you mean, it's normal. I
just went to www.thestar.com and there are two white spaces on the left
and right, also normal. You are used to a small monitor is all. The
webmasters of those pages did that on purpose. What happens at yahoo.com
or www.pcworld.com? No "unused spaces"?

 

[Dapper Dan]

Thanks Alias, that's what I was enquiring about, the unused space on a
monitor screen while surfing the web. Yes, Yahoo and PCWORLD both take up
the full screen.

I had been using Canada. com with my old 13" monitor and it used the full
screen. However with this 17" monitor, it only uses maximum 2/3 of the
screen. Doesn't seem normal to me, nor does it make much sense. Why would
anyone waste their money upgrading if they end up viewing their preferred
sites with "substandard" features, for lack of a better word? I recently
switched my homepage to Yahoo because of this but to be honest, I'm not that
happy with the content, from a Canadian perspective.

In any event, thanks for clarifying this issue, it is greatly appreciated.

Dan

 

[Alias]

Thanks Alias, that's what I was enquiring about, the unused space on a
monitor screen while surfing the web. Yes, Yahoo and PCWORLD both take up
the full screen.

I had been using Canada. com with my old 13" monitor and it used the full
screen. However with this 17" monitor, it only uses maximum 2/3 of the
screen. Doesn't seem normal to me, nor does it make much sense. Why would
anyone waste their money upgrading if they end up viewing their preferred
sites with "substandard" features, for lack of a better word? I recently
switched my homepage to Yahoo because of this but to be honest, I'm not that
happy with the content, from a Canadian perspective.

In any event, thanks for clarifying this issue, it is greatly appreciated.

Dan

At least now you know it isn't your monitor but the webmasters at those
sites. I don't do that with the web sites I make and I also think it
looks dodgy, if that's any consolation.

Now, I never use IE or Firefox in Maximum view so I don't get to see the
unused space. You might want to try that. Un maximize and stretch the
window so that canada.com has no unused space and see what you think.

 

[Dapper Dan]

Whilst I can understand working with multiple windows would minimize the
impact, I'm not sure it makes any sense to minimize a window so that the web
page has no unused space. Now we are left with a window that has an inch or
two of blue screen on each side of the window.

Thanks again Alias. As you said in your previous message, at least I know
why.

Dan

 

[Darrell S]

Just recently graduated from Win 98SE with an old 13" CRT monitor to
Win XP Home Edition with a 17" LCD Screen.

My screen is set, as delivered, at the recommended resolution of
1280x1024. At this resolution, I could hardly read so I adjusted DPI
to large (120 DPI) and also adjusted text in IE to LARGER. I have
also made a number of individual adjustments in the APPEARANCE section of
the Display Adapter, to the point where I am relatively
happy with the appearance.
Notwithstanding these adjustments, a significant number of web pages
appear on the screen with about an inch of empty space on each side.
I have experimented with resolution for a couple of days; is lowering
the screen resolution the only solution to attaining full screen
appearance, or is there another less obvious way (other than making
the font so large that everything looks silly)? A related question
is whether there are any negatives to running at a lower resolution
than recommended.
I just wondered what some of the experts do with respect to this.

Thanks

If the recommended resolution doesn't suit you try decreasing until you find
one that looks good to you. I tried your 1280x1024 resolution on my
monitor. Excellent detail but I can't read most of the stuff (old timer).
I went back to 1152 X 864 which works fine for me. Some programs may
require a specific resolution. I have an aircraft ground school program
that only works full screen on a different resolution than the "recommended"
resolution for my flat screen monitor (LCD).

So I made a shortcut to the file that runs the program and added the needed
resolution to the name of that shortcut. That way I don't have to remember
which resolution works best for it.

 

[Dapper Dan]

Thanks Darrell

There was a suggestion that I should maintain the native resolution, thus
will stick with it. I've almost got it to where I'm happy with the
adjustments I have made. Just a few more and I'll be all set. As an aside,
it has been interesting to make a change in a setting and see the result
somewhere else (for example, Message Box); it's really trial and error in
the truest sense.

Dan