On Wed, 2002-01-09 at 03:59, Paul F. Pearson wrote: > On 9 Jan 2002, Michel [ISO-8859-1] Dänzer wrote: > > > On Wed, 2002-01-09 at 03:44, Paul F. Pearson wrote: > > > On 9 Jan 2002, Michel [ISO-8859-1] Dänzer wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 2002-01-09 at 03:25, Paul F. Pearson wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Paul F. Pearson wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Update: When I change to a bit depth of 16, I can do 1024x768 (at 24 > > > > > bits, > > > > > I actually had a virtual desktop of 800x600). > > > > > > > > > > Actually, the log output says "Virtual size is 1024x768". How can I > > > > > get > > > > > that to an *actual* size? I get a true 1024x768 in the Mac OS. > > > > > > > > With 'millions of colors'? ;) > > > > > > Actaully, 'thousands of colors'. > > > > Which would be depth 15. > > Also depth 16. 2^16 = 65,535; or, am I missing some fundamental thing > about bit depth.
No, just that when MacOS says 'thousands of colors' it means 'depth 15'. Guess the MacOS target user couldn't live with greys not being grey. :) > I think I've figured out why I'm now getting a "virtual size" - it happens > after "checking the monitor" or something like that. I didn't really give > anything specific for my monitor. I'll try to figure out good setting for > my monitor, and see if that clears things up. Don't worry about the 'virtual size', it's just the term for the desktop size. There is always a virtual and physical size of the screen, you just usually want them to be the same. :) -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast
