On Mon 30 Jan 2017 at 22:31:28 (+0000), Jonathan de Boyne Pollard wrote: > Felix Miata: > > >At what point exactly within either of those videos does 80 by 25 > >appear? All I saw anywhere appeared to be in the vicinity of 240 > >by 67. > > I think that I have put my finger on the source of your perplexity. > Remember where M. Oss said the following? > > Mattia Oss: > > >This can be seen in the 3rd video. > > There's a third video, and it appears in the third video. It's > definitely 80*25 VGA text mode in that third video.
Yes, there were three videos originally, viz. 16199062 goo-1-line-7-boot-4.8.0-1-amd64.mkv 15994161 goo-2-line-1-boot-4.9.0-1-amd64.mkv 10878351 goo-3-line-1-boot-text-4.9.0-1-amd64.mkv (though I guess the precise lengths my depend on the software used to download them?) But that only translated to two youtube videos, viz. 4587493 you-1-line-7-linux-image-4.8.0-1-amd64.bootvideo-NLWB7FyV7jU.mp4 5927576 you-2-line-4-linux-image-4.8.0-2-amd64.bootvideo-Nc1lgpdgaxQ.mp4 I don't see a low-res period in either of the latter. I suspect the OP didn't bother with the third video, notwithstanding the discussion about it. Should I take it that the "HUGE" characters are just a result of a period at 640x480 resolution? > And just as M. > Oss said, the text in the third video scrolls fairly briskly and the > characters are ... > > Mattia Oss: > > >HUGE characters. > > > ... as one would expect with 80 columns by 25 rows on a widescreen > display of that size. > > Now M. Oss and all of you get to play with the different ways that > the VESA driver can do scrolling. (-: But if the OP intended people to attend only to the rate at which lines appear on the screen, then posting videos at 1920x1080 was a waste of time for many, because the rate at which the video runs is a function of the power of the recipient's computer. None of mine are able to run these videos at all smoothly. Cheers, David.
