For me, it's 80x25. But if I decide I need graphics for some reason, then I use 1024x768.
1024*768, refresh rate no lower than 75Hz. If a game is too demanding, 800*600. With the increasing resolution of porn images, I may need to move up.
My laptop can't do better than 1024x768. :(
1024x768 here. Anything bigger is too small.
1280x1024
lol native resolution
1280x800 (best my laptop can do)
only at 60Hz, tho... xrandr says i could bump it up to 70Hz if i drop the resolution down to 1024x768, but 1024x768 looks like crap on a 1280x800 screen...
>Anything bigger is too small.
get a better operating system.
1280x1024 at 75 Hz. 8ms flat screen here
800x600 32-bit at 85Hz(maximum Hz).
I can go up to 1280x1024 32bit at 60Hz(bleah).
>get a better operating system.
Windows XP, 19" monitor.
1600 x 1200 is my max.
>Windows XP
like i said before, get a better operating system. windows xp's gui sucks for anything except gaming. actually, it's not all that great for that either...
Are there any flat monitors that don't look like complete ass on a non-native resolution?
1680 x 1050. Mmm, widescreen.
600X800
>>11
none that i know of...
if anyone knows of any, please tell us.
They used to exist. My old laptop's video card had good resampling and filtered, so the LCD looked decent on non-native resolutions.
I haven't seen something like this in a while though. It probably because people don't switch resolutions as much as they used to?
1280x1024 @ 85 hz
19" crt ftw
1600x1200, 75hz, on a 19" CRT.
>>16
why the fuck are you using 5:4 on a CRT?
1024 x 768
14 Inch screen on my 4 year old laptop
1280x1024, 19" LG LCD
>>11 what do you mean?
I have a lcd and my normal screen is 1280*1024*16 @ 75hz. It works perfectly fine in a range of games with resolutions at 1024*768 800*600 640*480 and 320*200. I don't change it for normal use because i'd really hate to have a desktop that was smaller than 1280*1024.
Me? Depends on the machine I'm on. A couple run fixed-frequency video cards, and can't run lower resolutions.
All the SGI boxes use the same monitor: Samsung SyncMaster 17GLsi. (17" CRT. As seen at http://dev.gentoo.org/~redhatter/mips/sgi/)
I usually try to run as higher resolution as possible. I get around readability issues using larger font sizes. I like being able to zoom out, see a large area, and zoom in on the detail. The one exception, is when the machine can't handle a higher resolution (e.g. the O2 can do 1280x1024, but fbdev is slow, and so it's better to keep the screen size small)
What is it with none but the most expensive LCDs supporting resolutions of >1280*1024 these days anyway? I'd have dumped my CRT ages ago if I could afford a 1600*1200-capable flatscreen.
LCD, 1152*864, 75Hz.
1280*1024 on my desktops and a very strange 1280*700 on my laptop you 'd think it'd be 720 or 800 damn silly res screen cost me a mint to buy a new screen when I cracked it.
1680 x 1050 delicious widescreen laptop native res
only problem is its damned hard to find games / wp for that res
1024x768.
Sometimes 1280x1024 aswell!
Anyone using 1280x1024 is a tool.
Says someone who can't afford a good monitor, no doubt.
>>28 Tell Silicon Graphics that. Unfortunately my SI and XL graphic cards only work at that resolution.
>>29
If it were a good monitor it would run at 4:3 like every other display standard.
1280 x 1024
LCDs are usually 5:4, thus, 1280x1024.
However, using both 1280x1024 and 1024x768 (which is 4:3) on any kind of monitor is dumb, and will give you a deformed view.
1680x1050 on my 21 inch LCD screen <3
1920x1200
>>34
no, LCDs are usually 8:5 (1280x800, 1440x900, 1680x1050, 1920x1200 etc.)
>>38
there is one ratio that is more common than any other, and that is probably 8:5.
I don't remember the last time i saw an ad for a non-widescreen LCD monitor, and non-widescreen laptops are virtually nonexistent (at least in the area where i live)...
17in LCD @ 1280x1024
19in WXGA+ LCDTV @ 1440x900 (have to set it custom in Nview or xconf)
14in LCD laptop @ 1280x800
1440x900 + 1280x1024
i tried making my 1280 to 16x12, but instead of resizing, it keeps its dpi and extends my monitor off screen.. if i wanna go to the top, move my mouse up, and the whole screen scrolls down, like a web page almost. sucks.
1920x1200 (24 inch tft)
it is nice to have many windows open at the same time ^^
> That's what multiple workspaces are for.
Especially when they are spread out across multiple Monitors. 2*1280x1024 is awesome. I want a third one, but that would probably be the limit of what I can use simultaneously.
Multiple desktops and high resolution is even nicer. :-)
(There are just some apps that won't fit in 1024x768)
>>45
there are apps that do fit in 1024x768?
1280x1024 on a 17-inch crt (highest possible with this monitor AFAIK, unfortunately it can only do 60 Hz refresh at any resolution) here right now...
i want my laptop back ~~~~~>_<~~~~~
I'm running at 1280x1024. I don't how big my monitor is.
1600x1200 on a 20-incher
>>46 Yes, I know there are... I'm using one right now... but it doesn't change the fact that some apps don't.
(e.g. x48 doesn't quite fit, it's just 30px too high)
>>50
If i had the money and the space, i'd soooo get that.
I don't think I could handle a screen that big.... but having it would still be awesome.
1600x1200...
Two LCD's at 16x12 and 1280x1024.
1680x1050
>>54 Damn... you do like grainy resolutions.
16x12 would barely fit one character. Maybe two skinny ones. I couldn't imagnine trying to navigate a UI on a screen that can only display no more than 2 letters at a time.
Three monitors:
Left: 1280x1024
Middle: 1680x1050
Right: 1024x768
does anyone know of any laptops with a 15.4" or smaller screen that can do 1920x1200 or higher resolution?
2560 x 1024 (2 monitors) :)
2048 x 768 (2 monitors)
2048x1024 (one monitor one tv) sometimes u just gotta see it on the big screen
1024x768 @ 85hz on a 17" Mitsubishi superbright Diamondtron 750SB. Best monitor ever. I have set the brightness/contrast using displaymate and the colour using Digital Video Essentials RGB filter, the picture quality is amazing, especially when using the superbright mode to watch films. Took my eyes a while to adjust to the sharp picture, but now looking at shadow mask CRT's the picture just looks fuzzy.
>>11
CRTs can adjust the number of pixels shown because it uses a gun to shoot electrons at the screen, that's why they have a refresh rate. LCDs used fixed pixels, and there is no refresh rate, however if you tell it to go to a non native resolution, it's still displaying 1280x1024, or what have you, just scaled up or down to what resolution you chose.
So long story short, no. Not, at least, until LCD technology is improved. I don't exactly see why pixels on an LCD just can't combine intelligently (assuming you choose the same aspect ratio) to be larger versions of themselves, but I only know the reason why it doesn't work based off of what an intro to comp. hardware class told me, I don't actually know how we could fix it xD
1440x900
1280x1024 (this seems to be very usual with 4:3 LCD monitors).