1680x1050 resolution not working (Fedora Core 2, Dell Inspiron 8600, WSXGA+)

[Joel Jaeggli]

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> a bit of a digression, is there any sane rationale to the myriad of acronyms 
> for display resolution?

marketing. xga was the IBM eXtended Graphics Adapter which supported 
1024x768 albiet interlaced. for the longest time all resultions above 
that were typically described by h v and refresh rate. Then some marketing 
droid got a wild hare and now here we are... lcd's simplify things a lot 
since most of them are designed to work at 60hz as there native 
refresh rate. There used to be a serious qualitative difference 
between at crt at 1600x1200x60hz and one at 75 or 80 that doesn't exist 
when comparing lcd panels in general.

>  the last two times i went looking to buy a laptop 
> (from dell), i was thoroughly annoyed that they'll list, right up front, that 
> a unit has something like XGA, or SXGA, or XGA+, or UXGA or whatever.  and 
> all i want to know is, what is the freaking resolution in pixels?
>
> is there a standard for these acronyms?  and does everyone follow that 
> standard, or do we have vendors just making this stuff up out of thin air?  i 
> fully expect to see new laptops offering SDXGA (sooper dooper XGA) as the 
> next available resolution.
>
> is there a list?  who do i have to kill to read it?
>
> rday
>
>
>

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Joel Jaeggli  	       Unix Consulting 	       joelja at darkwing.uoregon.edu 
GPG Key Fingerprint:     5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2