Screen Resolution - important

Discussion in 'Observed Trials Discussion' started by OTAdmin, Jun 7, 2004.

What resolution do you run?

Poll closed Jun 12, 2004.
  1. 800x600 or smaller

    20 vote(s)
    21.3%
  2. 1024x768

    36 vote(s)
    38.3%
  3. 1152x864

    8 vote(s)
    8.5%
  4. 1280x1024

    21 vote(s)
    22.3%
  5. 1400x1050

    2 vote(s)
    2.1%
  6. 1600x1200 or larger

    7 vote(s)
    7.4%
  1. OTAdmin

    OTAdmin Administrator Staff Member

    2,984
    105
    63
    I am of the opinion that 800x600 resolution is way outdated. I think its been about 9 years since I ran such low resolution. Then I go to some of the more inexperienced computer user's computers and I see them running 800x600.

    Now I've been wondering what resolution you guys are running. I am going to size the intermediate sized pictures in the photo album depending upon the results of this poll. If most of you are running 800x600 and I size the maximum intermediate dimension at 650px (like it was in the old album), then that is going to suck for you guys as you won't even be able to see the entire picture when looking through the albums. On the other hand, I run 1600x1200, so a 400px maximum dimension is like looking at a thumbnail for me. I want to know what resolution you guys run so I can optimize it for the highest number of users. I'm guessing 1024x768 would be the best option for the most users, but who really knows? We will soon enough :).

    Bill

    If you don't know how to check:

    1.) right click on your desktop

    2.) click properties

    3.) go to the settings tab

    4.) in the lower left hand corner there will be a sliding bar and under that it will say your current resolution. See below:
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Elan

    Elan steve french

    9,733
    109
    63
    wot is a reason for running higher resolution? i m more n happy running 800X600....
     

  3. OTAdmin

    OTAdmin Administrator Staff Member

    2,984
    105
    63
    :rant2:

    but seriously, you get to see more on the screen. I can run a browser on the left at around 1000pixel width, 1000pixel height, TV program top right at around 600pixels wide, 440px tall, and an AIM, MSN, or whatever conversation lower right below the TV, next to the browser window. And thats only if I'm using one monitor, if I'm using dual monitors I can run another browser or whatever on the other monitor... way nice :)
     
  4. chaloux

    chaloux Party all the time.

    399
    13
    0
    I hate anything under 1600x1200. It drives me nuts. Editing vids is such a hassle/pain/gay experience at low resolutions.
     
  5. Ed Gildea

    Ed Gildea New Member

    1,270
    2
    0
    122317e39 x 43-7t54 <-- its the best. ;)

    no i run 1152 x 864 because my computer is gay
     
  6. Ed Gildea

    Ed Gildea New Member

    1,270
    2
    0
    wait never mine its at 1280 x 1024 sorry :/
     
  7. OTAdmin

    OTAdmin Administrator Staff Member

    2,984
    105
    63
    I'm basically going to lump anything above 1024x768 together for this purpose, but figured i should make it more specific just in case.
     
  8. Elan

    Elan steve french

    9,733
    109
    63
    so i guess i should change mine?
     
  9. OTAdmin

    OTAdmin Administrator Staff Member

    2,984
    105
    63
    unless your equipment is ANCIENT or your eyes are bad, yes
     
  10. Elan

    Elan steve french

    9,733
    109
    63
    i have a dell dimension 4400..but my athlon xp got shipped today supposedl;y..i need a mouse, monitor, keyboard...and a speaker set now
     
  11. OTAdmin

    OTAdmin Administrator Staff Member

    2,984
    105
    63
    :cool:
     
  12. Bloodhound

    Bloodhound Steffen L.T.

    743
    0
    0
    1600x1200 is too extreme for a monitor less than 21" viewable. I run 1024x768 on two side-by side 19" monitors.
    One running in digital the other analog. As long as you set the mouse to be very sensitive (move very fast) and become very comfertable with using it, the dual monitor setup seems to be the better solution to more space. It bears certain advantages.
     
  13. OTAdmin

    OTAdmin Administrator Staff Member

    2,984
    105
    63
    my monitor: http://www.viewsonic.com/products/desktopdisplays/crtmonitors/proseries/p220f/

    I agree that 1600x1200 is too big for anything under 21", but its spot on at 21" And not to sound elitist, but Everytime I bring this up, someone says something about how much better LCDs are than CRTs... please don't anyone do this. LCDs are garbage compared to a pro series CRT from viewsonic.
     
  14. sebLG

    sebLG New Member

    577
    2
    0
    my monitor is one of those pretty looking funky iMac things thats like really big and super flat and swivels :p haha and i think i vote din the wrong thing ... oops :ugh: sorry . i voted the 1600x1200 but mine is actually 1440x900.
     
  15. AndyT

    AndyT New Member

    13,053
    91
    0
    i fucking hate those displays.


    colors are sooooo fucked, never prints right...fucking lcds....
     
  16. Elan

    Elan steve french

    9,733
    109
    63
    i am going to go to the thrift store and buy a $8 monitor
     
  17. AgrAde

    AgrAde From your head to your fists

    4,253
    64
    48
    anyone who runs 800x600 or under deserves to scroll to the right.
     
  18. Bloodhound

    Bloodhound Steffen L.T.

    743
    0
    0
    I agree, I would never own an LCD video product. LCD is poo, and of course great/practical/economical in simpler use.
    Monitors are my PC's lowest point actually. One is a semi-decent sony the other is quite lame. What monitor brand for a semi-low price would you guys recomend? Nothing that is stupidly long, around 19" viewable, must have quite skinny side pannels since two will sit right next to each other.
     
  19. piss off

    piss off Guest

    66
    1
    0
    but i hate windose ....bad bill gates....
    i have a powerbook in use...with 1280*854....APPLE RULEZ:yum:
     
    Last edited: Jun 8, 2004
  20. sebLG

    sebLG New Member

    577
    2
    0
    :bigthumb: :bigthumb: