1366x768 clipped in OS 9?

[Mike Richardson]

I just bought a new VGA Flat panel with a native resolution of 1366x768 for use with my "pimped out" 1.7 GHz Gigabit G4 for Mac OS 9 use.

The right 6 pixel columns are not being displayed. They are all black.

Does OS 9 not properly support 1366x768, possibly because the width 1366 is not divisible by 8? (1360 is divisible by 8, which would explain 6 missing pixels).

The graphics card is an ATI Radeon 8500, the drivers are whatever came with Mac OS 9.2.2. I might try tracking down the last ATI OS 9 driver install.

 

[porter]

That would make sense to me.

"Pimped out" and "OS 9" don't really go together anymore.

 

[Mike Richardson]

That would make sense to me.
"Pimped out" and "OS 9" don't really go together anymore.

The G4 is pimped out. I suppose the Mac OS 9 install is just ordinary.

I applied a ROM update, however it's still not the latest ROM. I have to move the card into my G5 (or boot this G4 into OS X) in order to apply the newest ROM.

I also applied a 2005 driver update but it didn't help. My last hope is the ROM update. Otherwise I'll have to find some other use for this display.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

Is is a dedicated Computer Monitor or some kind of "Flat Panel TV" with VGA input?

In the latter case, overscan is likely to be the culprit, and not anything to do with your appropriately "pimped out" Classic OS Box.

I happen to be living in an OS 9.x world myself and I'm quite happy to be there, thank you very much!

jt :b&w:

 

[Mike Richardson]

Is is a dedicated Computer Monitor or some kind of "Flat Panel TV" with VGA input?
In the latter case, overscan is likely to be the culprit, and not anything to do with your appropriately "pimped out" Classic OS Box.

I happen to be living in an OS 9.x world myself and I'm quite happy to be there, thank you very much!

jt :b&w:

It is a proper Computer Monitor, with only a VGA input (selected specifically so I could use it with older computers with only VGA or Mac video).

 

[Osgeld]

yea we have a vga lcd with that resolution at work, heck even getting windows XP to work with it is a bear and i never really found proper monitor drivers for it is is clipped and stretched abit

And when I went shopping for my wife monitor a few months later I knew to avoid "funny" resolutions

 

[Mike Richardson]

I tried this monitor on my MDD 1.25 GHz for Tiger and the best resolution available was 1024x768!

This monitor is going back to the store. I guess I'll just tell them it's defective (for my purposes). I might be too late to return it though, it sat in the box for like two weeks before I got around to setting it up.

I'd rather have a 16:10 or a good old 4:3 anyway. 16:9 seems really almost too wide for a computer monitor.

 

[porter]

I guess I'll just tell them it's defective (for my purposes)

I thought the term was "fit for purpose", if you explicitly said you were going to use it with a Mac and the salesman said you'd have no problem then you are in the clear.

 

[dan_g]

Did you use something like SwitchRes to get into that resolution?

 

[Mike Richardson]

Did you use something like SwitchRes to get into that resolution?

No. OS 9 actually presented 1366x768 as a choice. Unfortunately it cuts off the last 6 columns of pixels on the right side, so it's a pretty worthless choice.

 

[Outlander]

1366x768 is a non-standard resolution.

 

[Mike Richardson]

1366x768 is a non-standard resolution.

Obviously.