Hi I have just bought an HP w2207, 22-inch, widescreen LCD monitor. I used it on an XP computer and it was beautiful. Now I am trying to use it with my Windows 98 system but I am having trouble. I installed all drivers etc. and the lowest resolution option possible is 1280x768 that is proportional and keeps the 16:9 aspect. The thing is, the text is very strange. At times it looks like the computer ran out of printer ink to display the text/colors correctly. I would love to use this resolution or something a little lower but there is nothing that works. Here's a couple examples of my text issue. ICON http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/9009/mycompha9.gif MENU http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/2846/startmenbd0.th.gif Any suggestions?

[Reply or follow-up to this message]

|[...]22-inch, widescreen LCD monitor.
|I used it on an XP computer and it was beautiful.
|[...]with[...]Windows 98[...]the text is very strange. 
| Auggie
|
This is obviously a function of the quality of the device driver.
You should assume that
1) the driver that is installed is corrupted
  or
2) the driver that is installed is inadequate.
Have you searched for a more recent device driver than the one you have?

We are also assuming that you know to Remove the old driver
before trying to install a replacement.

...and it could be that
2a) the manufacturer provides no adequate W98 driver.


|examples of my text issue.
|http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/9009/mycompha9.gif
|http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/2846/startmenbd0.th.gif
|
Heh.  This reminds me of TV commercials in the '60s trying to sell TV sets.
"Just look at the superior picture of our television model."
...except that you were viewing it on YOUR set.  8-))

BTW, using the QuickLink button makes links clickable.
I like it when folks remove the **target=_blank ** part.

[Reply or follow-up to this message]

...the lowest resolution option possible is 1280x768 that is proportional and keeps the 16:9 aspect.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Your monitor's native resolution is 1680×1050, which is a 16:10 aspect ratio. The "correct" lower resolution would be 1280×800. Even if you had the lower resolution in the correct aspect ratio, LCD monitors should always be run in their native resolution! EVERY LCD monitor I've seen from 2002 to date looks blurry when set in the resolution that's the first step-down from its 'native' resolution.

And this is where Windows 98 drivers falter. Most of the 'latest' video drivers for Windows 98 date from around 2005, before all of these widescreen LCD monitors came out. Almost all LCD monitors available at the time were 4:3 aspect ratio, having resolutions that were also common to older CRT monitors (1024×768, 1280×1024, 1600×1200), so even older video drivers were not a problem (assuming that the monitor 'plug-and-played' with the system!).

I would suggest that if you buy a new LCD monitor for a Windows 98 computer, you should look for a 4:3 monitor. I use a 4:3 19" LCD on my AMD 3000, because it has Windows 98 on it. My 4000 uses a 16:10 22" LCD, since Windows 98 is on a VMWare 'virtual machine' there, it runs in a 1024×768 window within the (XP) 1680×1050 screen.

------------------------------------------------------------

Athlon 3000+ 939 - 1GB RAM = 98SE (@768 MB RAM) & XP Pro SP2

Athlon 4000+X2 AM2 - 3GB RAM = 2000 SP4 & XP Pro SP2

IBM ThinkPad PIII 933 - 512 MB RAM = 98SE & XP Pro SP2

Windows 2000 Server in the basement

[Reply or follow-up to this message]

Best to run LCDs at native resolution probably 1680 x 1050, for yours. You would probably need a newer Vid Card to run that resolution, and it would depend on the Vid Card having Drivers for 98.

[Reply or follow-up to this message]

"EVERY LCD monitor I've seen from 2002 to date looks blurry when set in the resolution that's the first step-down from its 'native' resolution. "

My Samsung 931B 19" is the exception. That's why I bought it. I went around to the stores where they always have a screensaver running and move the mouse which cancels the screensaver and I changed the screen to my desired 1024x768. The text looks great on Samsung at any resolution.

And it was on sale for $230.

And it has a 700:1 contrast ratio.

[Reply or follow-up to this message]

Hello

It's actually (I believe) an issue with colour depth. I suspect you're running the display in 8bit colour (256 colours) and you probably can't go any higher because of the high resolution (for your video card) you've chosen.

If you were to change the background colour of your desktop to a colour which does not require on-screen dithering - a process which simulates new colours by mixing pixels of different available colours - you wouldn't see these darker dots. Those darker dots are there to make the overall shade of the background darker, except that it doesn't work particularly well because it is done so badly. (Risc OS on Acorn platforms did it a lot better in low colour modes).

The problem could be resolved with a video card equipped with more video memory as this will increase the range of colour depths available to you.

If you can't raise the colour depth beyond 256 colours then I suspect your current graphics card is a 1mb model. You'll need 2mb for 16bit colour and 4mb for 24bit colour.

Regards,

Chris


On Sunday, February 3, 2008 at 9:35 am, Auggie wrote:
>Hi
>
>I have just bought an HP w2207, 22-inch, widescreen LCD monitor. I used it on an
>XP computer and it was beautiful. Now I am trying to use it with my Windows 98 system
>but I am having trouble.
>
>I installed all drivers etc. and the lowest resolution option possible is 1280x768
>that is proportional and keeps the 16:9 aspect. The thing is, the text is very strange.
>At times it looks like the computer ran out of printer ink to display the text/colors
>correctly. I would love to use this resolution or something a little lower but there
>is nothing that works. Here's a couple examples of my text issue.
>
>ICON
>http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/9009/mycompha9.gif
>
>MENU
>http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/2846/startmenbd0.th.gif
>
>Any suggestions?

[Reply or follow-up to this message]

• Search this forum
• Start a new thread on a different subject

• Report abuse of the forum