"Paul" <nospam@needed.com> wrote in message news:g3l05t$poj$1@aioe.org...
> Grinder wrote:
>> Keith W wrote:
>>> "Grinder" <grinder@no.spam.maam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:z9X6k.217613$yE1.154032@attbi_s21...
>>>> Grinder wrote:
>>>>> Keith W wrote:
>>>>>> Along with my normal PC I have a second elderly one that is used for
>>>>>> back ups and general messing about. They share keyboard, mouse and
>>>>>> widescreen monitor via a KVM switch. The second machine is a
>>>>>> Pentium 3 (500mhz) with an Intel 810 mobo and an ATI Rage Pro Turbo
>>>>>> PCI graphics card. I have Windows XP Pro installed and the latest
>>>>>> drivers for the card from the ATI website. However, it cannot
>>>>>> produce the 1440x900 resolution that the mintor requires and I am
>>>>>> having to make do with 1280x1024 which reduces picture quality
>>>>>> somewhat but I had accepted that, because of the age of the machine,
>>>>>> it was all I could get and I cannot justify buying a new card. Now
>>>>>> however, I have just made it dual boot by installing xubuntu and
>>>>>> amazingly that has identified the monitor size and is producing
>>>>>> 1440x900 through the same mobo and graphics card.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My question is, now that I know Linux can do it, how can I accomplish
>>>>>> it in Windows? I have tried Powerstrip but that gives the same
>>>>>> results as before, i.e. 1280x1024.
>>>>> You added a custom resolution? I would have thought that would work.
>>>>> It has for me, several times, but it's only diagnostic as I'm too
>>>>> cheap to shell out $30 for the benefit. There is an earlier version
>>>>> kept on the site because some of the older video cards are no longer
>>>>> supported. You might try that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Check out Tip #4 on this list:
>>>>> http://www.onlinesoftwareguide.com/0606xptips.html
>>>>>
>>>>> That looks a bit promising to me so I think I'll try to make that
>>>>> final tweak on my neighbor's setup. I'll let you know how it turns
>>>>> out.
>>>> Ok, I tried the tip and it didn't work. The registry just got changed
>>>> back on restart.
>>>>
>>>> I installed Powerstrip, and had mixed results. Creating and installing
>>>> a custom monitor inf did get the stated maximum (optimal) resolution to
>>>> show up in my options. I was, however, able to add that resolution
>>>> within Powerstrip, and it worked after a restart.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I tried Powerstrip, which has worked for me on other PCs but in this
>>> instant the vertical and horizontal settings are locked and just beep
>>> when I try to change them. I will download the earlier one that you
>>> mention and try that.
>>
>> Ok, for what it's worth, I have a Windows 98 SE system around here that
>> has an 8MB ATI 3D Rage Pro AGP in it, and I've hooked it up to a 1440x900
>> LCD monitor.
>>
>> 1) Windows 98 does not offer the native resolution for selection.
>>
>> 2) Powerstrip 2.78 complains that what I want to do is
>> "not supported" when I try to set the resolution
>>
>> 3) Powerstrip 3.78 allows me to add a custom resolution
>> without complaint, but bitches on restart. The new
>> resolution has not been added.
>>
>> 4) Xubuntu 7.10 can display 1440x900 with no problems.
>
> I don't think this is important, but what color depth is being used ?
>
> X Windows is flexible, and I spent more of my life staring at an
> 8 bit color depth, than any other. Maybe your Xubuntu test case
> is not in 32 bit color depth, but one of the lesser options ?
>
> Some of the old video cards, offered their top resolutions in
> a reduced color depth.
>

I don't know what colour depth the Linux is giving although it looks fine.
However, I have tried reducing the colour depth in Win XP and it makes not a
ha'peth of difference.
--
Keith W
Sunbury on Thames
(If you can't laugh at life, it ain't worth living)