I have a desktop G4 circa 2000, which was running OS9 and had a ViewSonic
monitor (VDT, not flatscreen) at 1152 x 870 resolution. Today I tried
booting it off an OSX (Panther) disk, in preparation to migrating my office
to OS X. Works ok, but one weird thing I noticed is that the screen seems
lower-res somehow. Them screen control panel still says 1152 x 870, but
icons and text on the screen seems blocky and less stuff fits onto my screen
somehow. I haven't quantified it (since I can't have it going at the same
time in OS 9 and OS X (it's the same machine and screen), I will have to
come up with some way to just measure how much stuff fits across the
screen). But it definitely seems less crisp and lower-res than the OS 9
boot. Am I crazy or is there some kind of setting I'm missing? Anyone else
experienced this issue? Please cc: to mlevin77@comcast.net if you have any
wisdom to share. Thanks!

--

Mike Levin
mlevin77@comcast.net

On 12/12/03 7:39 PM, in article BBFFD814.4DD9%mlevin77@comcast.net, "Michael
Levin" <mlevin77@comcast.net> wrote:

> I have a desktop G4 circa 2000, which was running OS9 and had a ViewSonic
> monitor (VDT, not flatscreen) at 1152 x 870 resolution. Today I tried
> booting it off an OSX (Panther) disk, in preparation to migrating my office
> to OS X. Works ok, but one weird thing I noticed is that the screen seems
> lower-res somehow. Them screen control panel still says 1152 x 870, but
> icons and text on the screen seems blocky and less stuff fits onto my screen
> somehow. I haven't quantified it (since I can't have it going at the same
> time in OS 9 and OS X (it's the same machine and screen), I will have to
> come up with some way to just measure how much stuff fits across the
> screen). But it definitely seems less crisp and lower-res than the OS 9
> boot. Am I crazy or is there some kind of setting I'm missing? Anyone else
> experienced this issue? Please cc: to mlevin77@comcast.net if you have any
> wisdom to share. Thanks!

OS X uses very large icons by default. In the Finder (desktop), click on
"View" -> "Show View Options", and play with the icon size once you've got X
installed. The color depth may also be set to something less than millions.
--

Brian Ehni

The weird thing is, it isn't just the icons which are bigger. For example:
in Microsoft Word, when I open a document at 100% magnification, it takes up
about 8.5 inches in width on my monitor (measured by holding up a physical
ruler to the screen). Booting in OS X, and opening a 100% mag Word window,
it is now over 10 inches wide! The resolution is still the same, according
to the monitors control panel. Why is everything bigger in OSX? Any thoughts
will be welcome...

Mike


On 12/12/03 10:18 PM, in article BBFFE11C.5019E%behni@comcast.net, "Brian
Paul Ehni" <behni@comcast.net> wrote:

> On 12/12/03 7:39 PM, in article BBFFD814.4DD9%mlevin77@comcast.net, "Michael
> Levin" <mlevin77@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> I have a desktop G4 circa 2000, which was running OS9 and had a ViewSonic
>> monitor (VDT, not flatscreen) at 1152 x 870 resolution. Today I tried
>> booting it off an OSX (Panther) disk, in preparation to migrating my office
>> to OS X. Works ok, but one weird thing I noticed is that the screen seems
>> lower-res somehow. Them screen control panel still says 1152 x 870, but
>> icons and text on the screen seems blocky and less stuff fits onto my screen
>> somehow. I haven't quantified it (since I can't have it going at the same
>> time in OS 9 and OS X (it's the same machine and screen), I will have to
>> come up with some way to just measure how much stuff fits across the
>> screen). But it definitely seems less crisp and lower-res than the OS 9
>> boot. Am I crazy or is there some kind of setting I'm missing? Anyone else
>> experienced this issue? Please cc: to mlevin77@comcast.net if you have any
>> wisdom to share. Thanks!
>
> OS X uses very large icons by default. In the Finder (desktop), click on
> "View" -> "Show View Options", and play with the icon size once you've got X
> installed. The color depth may also be set to something less than millions.

--

Mike Levin
mlevin77@comcast.net

On 12/17/03 3:22 PM, in article BC06335B.61A6%mlevin77@comcast.net, "Michael
Levin" <mlevin77@comcast.net> wrote:

> The weird thing is, it isn't just the icons which are bigger. For example:
> in Microsoft Word, when I open a document at 100% magnification, it takes up
> about 8.5 inches in width on my monitor (measured by holding up a physical
> ruler to the screen). Booting in OS X, and opening a 100% mag Word window,
> it is now over 10 inches wide! The resolution is still the same, according
> to the monitors control panel. Why is everything bigger in OSX? Any thoughts
> will be welcome...
>
> Mike
>
>

Ah! That's a different kettle of fish (as I understand the question now).
It's likely that OS X cannot use the resolution you have set. Try setting to
1280x1024 in both OS' and compare.
--

Brian Ehni

Interesting. I can try it, but I don't think my monitor does 1280x1024! Am I
stuck? How can it be that OS9 supports more monitors than OSX? Bummer...


On 12/17/03 9:51 PM, in article BC06723B.50B6E%behni@comcast.net, "Brian
Paul Ehni" <behni@comcast.net> wrote:

> On 12/17/03 3:22 PM, in article BC06335B.61A6%mlevin77@comcast.net, "Michael
> Levin" <mlevin77@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> The weird thing is, it isn't just the icons which are bigger. For example:
>> in Microsoft Word, when I open a document at 100% magnification, it takes up
>> about 8.5 inches in width on my monitor (measured by holding up a physical
>> ruler to the screen). Booting in OS X, and opening a 100% mag Word window,
>> it is now over 10 inches wide! The resolution is still the same, according
>> to the monitors control panel. Why is everything bigger in OSX? Any thoughts
>> will be welcome...
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>
> Ah! That's a different kettle of fish (as I understand the question now).
> It's likely that OS X cannot use the resolution you have set. Try setting to
> 1280x1024 in both OS' and compare.

--

Mike Levin
mlevin77@comcast.net

On 12/17/03 9:00 PM, in article BC068276.62FA%mlevin77@comcast.net, "Michael
Levin" <mlevin77@comcast.net> wrote:

> Interesting. I can try it, but I don't think my monitor does 1280x1024! Am I
> stuck? How can it be that OS9 supports more monitors than OSX? Bummer...
>
>
Then try something smaller like 1024x768; the trick is to compare a "normal
resolution" like 640x480, 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024 or such (and the one
you're using in OS 9 isn't) between the two OS versions.

--

Brian Ehni

In comp.sys.mac.hardware.video Michael Levin <mlevin77@comcast.net> wrote:

Check if the 'Zoom' in Universal Access is shut off.

-Josh

--
SWEN -It's what's new from MicroSoft!