Did you install/update the default Plug-&-Play monitor definition file for

your specific monitor ? - Without that it's impossible for the Video card

to properly know which resolution/color depth it can achieve ?

 

"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message

news:OdWdnboyjZaEBD_bnZ2dnUVZ8sninZ2d@giganews.com...

> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:19:41 -0500, Charlie Tame wrote:

>

>> Stephan Rose wrote:

>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 17:39:49 -0500, Swingman wrote:

>>>

>>>>> I seriously gave it a try and approached it with an open mind.

>>>> Sure you did... if your job was to paint the Sistine Chapel, we'd be

>>>> looking

>>>> down, not up.

>>>>

>>>

>>> What more than install the OS, install the latest drivers, am I supposed

>>> to do? Please...be so kind as to enlighten me.

>>>

>>> Live with 1024x768 on a 1600x1200 LCD? no thank you.

>>>

>>> If *you* have the solution to that problem for instance, that apparently

>>> nobody else yet does, then please! Let's hear it! I'd be most

>>> interested.

>>>

>>

>>

>> Well I don't know if the latest drivers for that video card are any good

>> or not personally, but I can tell you you would have to uninstall those

>> placed by Vista to get any sense at all out of the card.

>

> The card itself actually works fine. The nVidia control panel is there,

> everything in it works. I can adjust all the settings fine, the 3D Preview

> works fine for adjusting the 3D settings.

>

> Just the resolution is what doesn't work.

>

> How would I even go about uninstalling whatever drive initially placed by

> Vista? The device manager just lists my nVidia driver now so I wouldn't

> even know what driver vista initially placed. I never bother to look for

> that since my normal procedure with windows is to install it and then

> install the latest nVidia driver.

>

> --

> Stephan

> 2003 Yamaha R6

>

> ????????????????

> ??????????????

"Stephan Rose" wrote in messag

> How would I even go about uninstalling whatever drive initially placed by

> Vista? The device manager just lists my nVidia driver now so I wouldn't

> even know what driver vista initially placed. I never bother to look for

> that since my normal procedure with windows is to install it and then

> install the latest nVidia driver.

 

This is a monitor/brand/display adapter issue.

 

How old is the monitor? nVidia is infamous for leaving older (and not all

that old) monitor's out of their "updated" drivers.

 

If you installed an "updated" driver, you can usually "roll back" the

display adapter driver in Device Manager.

 

--

http://www.e-woodshop.net

Last update: 6/1/07

KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 19:48:45 -0400, R. McCarty wrote:

> Did you install/update the default Plug-&-Play monitor definition file for

> your specific monitor ? - Without that it's impossible for the Video card

> to properly know which resolution/color depth it can achieve ?

 

I changed it to Digital FlatPanel 1600x1200 but it made no difference. I

even rebooted the machine afterwards thinking that maybe it wants a

reboot.

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:52:12 -0500, Swingman wrote:

> "Stephan Rose" wrote in messag

>

>> How would I even go about uninstalling whatever drive initially placed by

>> Vista? The device manager just lists my nVidia driver now so I wouldn't

>> even know what driver vista initially placed. I never bother to look for

>> that since my normal procedure with windows is to install it and then

>> install the latest nVidia driver.

>

> This is a monitor/brand/display adapter issue.

>

> How old is the monitor? nVidia is infamous for leaving older (and not all

> that old) monitor's out of their "updated" drivers.

 

Monitor is probably about 1.5 years old, is is a 20.1 inch 1600x1200

flatpanel.

 

It works flawlessly with the latest nVidia drivers under Linux.

It works flawlessly with the latest nVidia drivers under WinXP. And I

seriously mean latest, I just updated my nVidia drivers under XP a couple

of days ago.

 

So I don't see why nVidia would leave it out of Vista if they support it

properly everywhere else.

>

> If you installed an "updated" driver, you can usually "roll back" the

> display adapter driver in Device Manager.

 

That'd just bring me back to the default driver that Vista picked,

which didn't do any better.

 

I actually even tried to change my monitor driver from the generic PnP

driver to Digital Flatpanel 1600x1200 but it made no difference.

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

Stephan Rose wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:39:26 -0400, Richard Urban wrote:

>

>> Stephan has been around for months knocking Vista, without even having

>> tried it.

>>

>> Now he can do it with "authority"!

>>

>> Sad piece of work, this fellow, almost as bad as Alias.

>>

>

> Please, do me a favor...don't compare me with Alias. Yes I'm no big fan of

> Vista and there are things about it I don't like, but I don't do what

> Alias does. Not even remotely. My main reason to coming to this NG was

> educating myself on Vista and it has been quite educational. I might

> occasionally answer to OS specific discussions when such discussions

> actually contain constructive statements and not insulting contests

> between Alias and Frank...but I don't go around and post "Get Ubuntu" to

> every vista problem post now do I?

>

> Now, if you have any actual constructive thoughts and know of a solution

> to any of the problems. Then please, by all means, I'd be interested in

> hearing it. Google has not revealed much more other than that I'm not the

> only one with said issues.

>

> So I'm at the end of the road. More than install the OS and install the

> appropriate drivers I can't do. But hey, if you know something I don't,

> something else I could do, please do share. I will actually go give it a

> try.

>

You don't think for a minute these bozos have any answer to your problems,

do you? All they can do is blame you for not "doing your homework" or blame

the device manufacturer for not providing good enuf drivers. These Wintards

are truly useless. They aren't here to help anyone with Vista, because

they're incapable of doing so. They're here to be Windoze fanboys. The only

way they'd be able to get Vista working (if that's even possible) is to

have it preloaded by some manufacturer.

 

Shake Hands With,

Mr. Happy

 

--

"Cheer up, things could be worse." So I cheered up, installed Vista and

sure enough, things got worse.

Frank wrote:

> Stephan Rose wrote:

>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:39:26 -0400, Richard Urban wrote:

>>

>>

>>>Stephan has been around for months knocking Vista, without even having

>>>tried it.

>>>

>>>Now he can do it with "authority"!

>>>

>>>Sad piece of work, this fellow, almost as bad as Alias.

>>>

>>

>>

>> Please, do me a favor...don't compare me with Alias. Yes I'm no big fan

>> of Vista and there are things about it I don't like, but I don't do what

>> Alias does. Not even remotely. My main reason to coming to this NG was

>> educating myself on Vista and it has been quite educational. I might

>> occasionally answer to OS specific discussions when such discussions

>> actually contain constructive statements and not insulting contests

>> between Alias and Frank...but I don't go around and post "Get Ubuntu" to

>> every vista problem post now do I?

>>

>> Now, if you have any actual constructive thoughts and know of a solution

>> to any of the problems. Then please, by all means, I'd be interested in

>> hearing it. Google has not revealed much more other than that I'm not the

>> only one with said issues.

>>

>> So I'm at the end of the road. More than install the OS and install the

>> appropriate drivers I can't do. But hey, if you know something I don't,

>> something else I could do, please do share. I will actually go give it a

>> try.

>>

>

> So you've been commenting on Vista and all along you've never installed

> it? Now you tried to install it and you can't.

> Well...that knocks your technical expertise image down a whole bunch of

> notches.

 

Not quite down to your level Frankie boy. You're the one who can't get Linux

working on your computer but still choose to tell us how bad Linux is.

Everytime you attack someone for a certain type of behavior, we all know

that you subscribe to that type of behavior yourself, only a hundreds times

worse.

 

> Anyway, you've had an attitude about all things MS and Vista since the

> get go.

> My advice, stick with the "nix's.

 

That's my advice too! Run a real operating system, run Linux and leave Vista

for the Wintards that know no better.

> Frank

 

Shake Hands With,

Mr. Happy

 

--

"Cheer up, things could be worse." So I cheered up, installed Vista and

sure enough, things got worse.

> No, it's the best the hardware vendors who wrote the drivers can do.

> It's not Microsoft's job to write drivers.

 

To be fair, Microsoft has to provide enough resources and "incentives" for

vendors to do so in the same way that Linux community has to do.

 

If you were the CEO of the vendor, why would you want to spend tremendous

efforts on doing so for the "old" hardware? Will you benefit from it?

 

Will you do things that only have costs but not benefits as a rational

business decision-maker?

 

 

"Mike" <no@where.man> wrote in message

news:no-51ADA2.18240021072007@news.supernews.com...

> In article <OdWdnb8yjZaFHj_bnZ2dnUVZ8sninZ2d@giganews.com>,

> Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:

>

>> - Video does not work beyond 1024x768, latest drivers. Dealbreaker right

>> there. Google reveals that I'm not the only one with the issue and

>> apparently the only fix I've seen so far is to use the VGA output

>> instead.

>> Difficult to do with a video card that only has DVI outputs, not to

>> mention that I run a dual monitor setup and need both my outputs no

>> matter

>> what the type. Not even manually choosing the "1600x1200 Digital

>> Flatpanel"

>> driver fixes this. So yes, I tried.

>

> Driver issue.

>

>>

>> - My *MICROSOFT* Keyboard is not recognized correctly. It's a Japanese

>> keyboard, I select "Japanese" layout...and it does not give me a Japanese

>> layout no matter what I do. What else beyond selecting "Japanese" as my

>> keyboard type and layout am I supposed to friggin do?? Call bill gates?

>> Again, dealbreaker right there if I can't properly use my keyboard!

>

> Driver issue.

>

>>

>> - Looking into the device manager I see about 4-5 other devices not

>> supported, including my SATA controller. Hard drive does obviously work

>> since Vista is running but I wonder if it was running at its optimum

>> performance seeing that the device manager was complaining about not

>> having a driver for the controller.

>

> Driver issue.

>

>> I mean seriously, THIS is the best Microsoft can do??? THIS is supposed

>> to

>> be progress? Advancement?? It can't even work correctly out of the box

>> with my very up to date hardware!

>

> No, it's the best the hardware vendors who wrote the drivers can do.

> It's not Microsoft's job to write drivers.

>

> Mike

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 16:15:14 -0700, Frank wrote:

> Stephan Rose wrote:

>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:39:26 -0400, Richard Urban wrote:

>>

>>

>>>Stephan has been around for months knocking Vista, without even having tried

>>>it.

>>>

>>>Now he can do it with "authority"!

>>>

>>>Sad piece of work, this fellow, almost as bad as Alias.

>>>

>>

>>

>> Please, do me a favor...don't compare me with Alias. Yes I'm no big fan of

>> Vista and there are things about it I don't like, but I don't do what Alias

>> does. Not even remotely. My main reason to coming to this NG was educating

>> myself on Vista and it has been quite educational. I might occasionally

>> answer to OS specific discussions when such discussions actually contain

>> constructive statements and not insulting contests between Alias and

>> Frank...but I don't go around and post "Get Ubuntu" to every vista problem

>> post now do I?

>>

>> Now, if you have any actual constructive thoughts and know of a solution

>> to any of the problems. Then please, by all means, I'd be interested in

>> hearing it. Google has not revealed much more other than that I'm not the

>> only one with said issues.

>>

>> So I'm at the end of the road. More than install the OS and install the

>> appropriate drivers I can't do. But hey, if you know something I don't,

>> something else I could do, please do share. I will actually go give it a

>> try.

>>

>

> So you've been commenting on Vista and all along you've never installed

> it? Now you tried to install it and you can't.

> Well...that knocks your technical expertise image down a whole bunch of

> notches.

> Anyway, you've had an attitude about all things MS and Vista since the

> get go.

> My advice, stick with the "nix's".

 

Well wait a second there Frank!

 

You say that *nix is too difficult for the average user and that windows

is so much simpler. So if that's the case, you're contradicting yourself.

You are telling me to stick with the more difficult OS. =)

 

And actually, it installed just fine. It just runs like crap. =)

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message

news:OdWdnbQyjZYHAj_bnZ2dnUVZ8sninZ2d@giganews.com...

> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:52:12 -0500, Swingman wrote:

>

>> "Stephan Rose" wrote in messag

>>

>>> How would I even go about uninstalling whatever drive initially placed

>>> by

>>> Vista? The device manager just lists my nVidia driver now so I wouldn't

>>> even know what driver vista initially placed. I never bother to look for

>>> that since my normal procedure with windows is to install it and then

>>> install the latest nVidia driver.

>>

>> This is a monitor/brand/display adapter issue.

>>

>> How old is the monitor? nVidia is infamous for leaving older (and not all

>> that old) monitor's out of their "updated" drivers.

>

> Monitor is probably about 1.5 years old, is is a 20.1 inch 1600x1200

> flatpanel.

>

> It works flawlessly with the latest nVidia drivers under Linux.

> It works flawlessly with the latest nVidia drivers under WinXP. And I

> seriously mean latest, I just updated my nVidia drivers under XP a couple

> of days ago.

>

> So I don't see why nVidia would leave it out of Vista if they support it

> properly everywhere else.

>

>>

>> If you installed an "updated" driver, you can usually "roll back" the

>> display adapter driver in Device Manager.

>

> That'd just bring me back to the default driver that Vista picked,

> which didn't do any better.

>

> I actually even tried to change my monitor driver from the generic PnP

> driver to Digital Flatpanel 1600x1200 but it made no difference.

>

 

My bet is that your system doesn't have the correct monitor driver

installed. Your machine needs to know which resolutions and refresh rates it

can support, otherwise it goes to 1024 x 768 to err on the safe side

 

Have you tried nVida's latest beta drivers for your card?

 

--

http://www.e-woodshop.net

Last update: 6/1/07

KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 19:46:30 -0400, Mr. Arnold wrote:

> <snipped>

>

> Did you do hardware compatibility check? Did you do your homework?

>

 

Well maybe you missed it but here is the scenario. My XP install had a

problem with the file system. Some corruption somewhere. Ruled out

hardware problems with multiple independent tests of the drive which all

came back just fine.

 

It happens, file systems can get borked. Wouldn't be the first time I've

dealt with such a problem.

 

Now the only thing I still did with the XP install was move all files off

it that are of any importance or that I wanted to keep as the File System

wasn't totally hosed yet but it would only be a matter of time.

 

So then, knowing I have to reinstall windows in some form or another this

weekend no matter what, I decided to give Vista a test run.

 

Instead of buying it, I borrowed an install CD and just let it run as a 30

day trial with no product key. Plenty time for me to evaluate it. So me

installing it, *that* is my compatibility check. That's why I am using a

trial version and didn't go out and spend money like I was almost about to

do. I really don't care what some update advisor says. I care how the OS

actually performs once installed.

 

And as far as homework goes, what homework? What would I change about my

hardware?

 

I'm running an up to date Intel CPU....I'd say if Vista is not compatible

with Intel CPUs it has a severe problem.

 

I'm running high performance DDR2 800MHz RAM...can't ask for more there

either.

 

My Video card is the *best* nVidia currently has to offer! I sure am not

about to *downgrade* my video card to make Vista happy.

 

My Keyboard is made by MICROSOFT! I think it isn't too much to expect a

Microsoft product to work with a Microsoft Operating system?

 

But disregarding that, this weekend *some* MS OS get's reinstalled on this

system as on Monday it has to be running correctly, with all hardware

supported, and stable for me to use it to do work on it as I do need

Windows to support my .Net based projects.

 

I gave Vista a fair chance and so far it has failed. If you, or anyone

else, actually has any constructive suggestions as to something I could to

do resolve said issues, I'll gladly give it a try. If it works, Vista

will stay and I'll buy the license. If not, then tomorrow afternoon it will

be removed from this computer and XP installed and that'll be the end of

it.

 

Honestly, I really don't care one way or the other if it's XP or Vista as

neither will ever be my primary OS.

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 19:22:46 -0500, Swingman wrote:

> "Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message

> news:OdWdnbQyjZYHAj_bnZ2dnUVZ8sninZ2d@giganews.com...

>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:52:12 -0500, Swingman wrote:

>>

>>> "Stephan Rose" wrote in messag

>>>

>>>> How would I even go about uninstalling whatever drive initially placed

>>>> by

>>>> Vista? The device manager just lists my nVidia driver now so I wouldn't

>>>> even know what driver vista initially placed. I never bother to look for

>>>> that since my normal procedure with windows is to install it and then

>>>> install the latest nVidia driver.

>>>

>>> This is a monitor/brand/display adapter issue.

>>>

>>> How old is the monitor? nVidia is infamous for leaving older (and not all

>>> that old) monitor's out of their "updated" drivers.

>>

>> Monitor is probably about 1.5 years old, is is a 20.1 inch 1600x1200

>> flatpanel.

>>

>> It works flawlessly with the latest nVidia drivers under Linux.

>> It works flawlessly with the latest nVidia drivers under WinXP. And I

>> seriously mean latest, I just updated my nVidia drivers under XP a couple

>> of days ago.

>>

>> So I don't see why nVidia would leave it out of Vista if they support it

>> properly everywhere else.

>>

>>>

>>> If you installed an "updated" driver, you can usually "roll back" the

>>> display adapter driver in Device Manager.

>>

>> That'd just bring me back to the default driver that Vista picked,

>> which didn't do any better.

>>

>> I actually even tried to change my monitor driver from the generic PnP

>> driver to Digital Flatpanel 1600x1200 but it made no difference.

>>

>

> My bet is that your system doesn't have the correct monitor driver

> installed. Your machine needs to know which resolutions and refresh rates it

> can support, otherwise it goes to 1024 x 768 to err on the safe side

 

That's all fine but if I tell it to use a 1600x1200 driver, it should

believe me and allow me to use that resolution...to me, that's the purpose

of such drivers.

>

> Have you tried nVida's latest beta drivers for your card?

>

 

Honestly, no. I generally don't like running beta drivers. They are beta

for a reason. Though I suppose in this case I don't have anything to loose

so I'll give it a shot.

 

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

Mr. Happy wrote:

>

>

> Not quite down to your level Frankie boy. You're the one who can't get Linux

> working on your computer but still choose to tell us how bad Linux is.

 

Uhhh...well doris that's just another oen of your lies! First attempt

with urbuttoo didn't work because it couldn't recognize the P750 Matrox

vc. Remember? The one your called a "crap" video card...hahaha...aren't

you a canadian...lol!

Remember the insults you hurled at me? I do! Well I did install urbuttoo

on another box with an ati card and guess what? It's the worse linux os

out there and I've tried at least half a dozen or more over the years.

Craw back into your linux loser hole now doris before you once again

make a stupid fool out of yourself.

Frank

Stephen

Your comparisons with a car, toaster and fridge are not valid.

Those 3 items are complete systems in themselves.

Windows is nothing without a computer.

For your car analogy, Windows is like the engine.

If you buy another engine, you should first check that it will work

appropriately with whatever car you have.

No matter how much a buyer spends on a component it is the buyers

responsibility to see that it works with what the buyer already has.

 

"I really don't care. I seriously don't. I expect that when someone

charges up to 399 for their product that it works."

That is the description of someone that should buy a car and not an

engine/buy a computer and not an operating system.

 

--

Jupiter Jones [MVP]

http://www3.telus.net/dandemar

http://www.dts-l.org

 

 

"Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message

news:OdWdnb4yjZa1Fz_bnZ2dnUVZ8sninZ2d@giganews.com...

> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:24:00 -0400, Mike wrote:

>

>> In article <OdWdnb8yjZaFHj_bnZ2dnUVZ8sninZ2d@giganews.com>,

>> Stephan Rose <nospam@spammer.com> wrote:

>>

>>> - Video does not work beyond 1024x768, latest drivers. Dealbreaker

>>> right

>>> there. Google reveals that I'm not the only one with the issue and

>>> apparently the only fix I've seen so far is to use the VGA output

>>> instead.

>>> Difficult to do with a video card that only has DVI outputs, not

>>> to

>>> mention that I run a dual monitor setup and need both my outputs

>>> no matter

>>> what the type. Not even manually choosing the "1600x1200 Digital

>>> Flatpanel"

>>> driver fixes this. So yes, I tried.

>>

>> Driver issue.

>>

>>>

>>> - My *MICROSOFT* Keyboard is not recognized correctly. It's a

>>> Japanese

>>> keyboard, I select "Japanese" layout...and it does not give me a

>>> Japanese

>>> layout no matter what I do. What else beyond selecting "Japanese"

>>> as my

>>> keyboard type and layout am I supposed to friggin do?? Call bill

>>> gates?

>>> Again, dealbreaker right there if I can't properly use my

>>> keyboard!

>>

>> Driver issue.

>

> And still a microsoft issue. It's a microsoft keyboard. Who, other

> than

> microsoft, should be writing drivers for their own keyboard which I

> bought

> in march/april time so *after* Vista was released?

>

>>

>>>

>>> - Looking into the device manager I see about 4-5 other devices

>>> not

>>> supported, including my SATA controller. Hard drive does obviously

>>> work

>>> since Vista is running but I wonder if it was running at its

>>> optimum

>>> performance seeing that the device manager was complaining about

>>> not

>>> having a driver for the controller.

>>

>> Driver issue.

>>

>>> I mean seriously, THIS is the best Microsoft can do??? THIS is

>>> supposed to

>>> be progress? Advancement?? It can't even work correctly out of the

>>> box

>>> with my very up to date hardware!

>>

>> No, it's the best the hardware vendors who wrote the drivers can

>> do.

>> It's not Microsoft's job to write drivers.

>

> Honestly, I really don't care. I seriously don't. I expect that when

> someone charges up to 399 for their product that it works. I don't

> care how

> it works. I don't care why it works. I don't care whose

> responsibility

> what is. I only care that, had I spent money on it, that it would

> WORK!

>

> Why it doesn't....does not concern me at all. I treat this like any

> other

> product I buy.

>

> If I buy a toaster I expect it to toast.

> If I buy a car I expect it to drive.

> If I buy a fridge I expect it to cool things!

>

> On that same note, if I buy an operating system designed for a PC I

> expect

> it work with my PC's hardware. Especially if said hardware was

> purchased

> less than a year ago. If it doesn't, I don't care why it doesn't. I

> only

> care about the problems I have as a result and the fact that it

> doesn't.

>

> --

> Stephan

> 2003 Yamaha R6

>

> å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

> å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

Mr. Arnold wrote:

>

> "Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message

> news:Oi6Zou%23yHHA.536@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

>> Mr. Arnold wrote:

>>> You are kind of pathetic. I'll bet you don't wash you're behind

>>> before you change you underwear too.

>>>

>>> I'll bet you just ran off lickety split and install the software

>>> without doing a compatibilty check to see if the computer was even

>>> compatible or even strong enough to run Vista.

>>

>>

>> Idiot

>

> And your mama was one for having you. :)

 

 

Pleased to see you can laugh at yourself, at least you will look like a

member of the audience

Stephan Rose wrote:

 

>

> You say that *nix is too difficult for the average user and that windows

> is so much simpler.

 

You're confusing me making that statement with someone else, but then,

don't let the facts get in your way.

 

So if that's the case, you're contradicting yourself.

 

Well, that's not the case is it?

> You are telling me to stick with the more difficult OS. =)

 

Go with what you need, want and know. Cause I don't give a rats ass.

>

> And actually, it installed just fine. It just runs like crap. =)

 

Not on any of my 9 boxes it doesn't.

Frank

>

Adam Albright wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:06:46 -0500, Charlie Tame <charlie@tames.net>

> wrote:

>

>> Quite so, to most users the "Driver Issue" argument is irrelevant, it is

>> simply a "Fanboy" excuse.

>

> Looks especially lame when the driver is for a MICROSOFT keyboard.

>

> My experience, the Vista compatibility advisor nagged about two

> applications I had on my XP box. Both Microsoft.

>

> ROTFLMAO!

>

 

 

Not a word of sensible advice, just "It is driver issues..."

Stephan Rose wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:19:41 -0500, Charlie Tame wrote:

>

>> Stephan Rose wrote:

>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 17:39:49 -0500, Swingman wrote:

>>>

>>>>> I seriously gave it a try and approached it with an open mind.

>>>> Sure you did... if your job was to paint the Sistine Chapel, we'd be looking

>>>> down, not up.

>>>>

>>> What more than install the OS, install the latest drivers, am I supposed

>>> to do? Please...be so kind as to enlighten me.

>>>

>>> Live with 1024x768 on a 1600x1200 LCD? no thank you.

>>>

>>> If *you* have the solution to that problem for instance, that apparently

>>> nobody else yet does, then please! Let's hear it! I'd be most interested.

>>>

>>

>> Well I don't know if the latest drivers for that video card are any good

>> or not personally, but I can tell you you would have to uninstall those

>> placed by Vista to get any sense at all out of the card.

>

> The card itself actually works fine. The nVidia control panel is there,

> everything in it works. I can adjust all the settings fine, the 3D Preview

> works fine for adjusting the 3D settings.

>

> Just the resolution is what doesn't work.

>

> How would I even go about uninstalling whatever drive initially placed by

> Vista? The device manager just lists my nVidia driver now so I wouldn't

> even know what driver vista initially placed. I never bother to look for

> that since my normal procedure with windows is to install it and then

> install the latest nVidia driver.

>

 

Ah, well I may be mistaken there, perhaps my MB disk installed a driver,

but nevertheless NVidia say you must remove any previous driver.

Re: Adam Hopalong mama's little piss and rides again.

 

It's not read. You little piss ant, you need to hop back under your rock and

hop around in the coffin dirt you sweep under the rock with your little

broom, and you kicked around with your size two shoes, you little piss ant.

 

You are nothing but a low-life rolling in coffin dirt piss ant. I don't get

into conversations with low-life rolling in the coffin dirt piss ants like

you, live with it. :)

 

that's a soft logical , and you don't deserve a hard ,

because I always got to keep an eye on Adam Piss Ant Hopalong a NG

*clown*, hopping up and down threads. <g>

 

<bye>

Stephan Rose wrote:

> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 19:48:45 -0400, R. McCarty wrote:

>

>> Did you install/update the default Plug-&-Play monitor definition file

>> for your specific monitor ? - Without that it's impossible for the Video

>> card to properly know which resolution/color depth it can achieve ?

>

> I changed it to Digital FlatPanel 1600x1200 but it made no difference. I

> even rebooted the machine afterwards thinking that maybe it wants a

> reboot.

>

A reboot is the standard way to try and get a Windoze box functioning when

it has problems. Since that didn't work, move on to the next

Microsoft "solution" - a reinstall.

 

Shake Hands With,

Mr. Happy

 

--

"Cheer up, things could be worse." So I cheered up, installed Vista and

sure enough, things got worse.

Whatever you're whining about there is no need to read it, as it's boring.

 

that's a soft logical .

 

<bye>

Swingman wrote:

> "Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message

> news:OdWdnbQyjZYHAj_bnZ2dnUVZ8sninZ2d@giganews.com...

>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:52:12 -0500, Swingman wrote:

>>

>>> "Stephan Rose" wrote in messag

>>>

>>>> How would I even go about uninstalling whatever drive initially placed

>>>> by

>>>> Vista? The device manager just lists my nVidia driver now so I wouldn't

>>>> even know what driver vista initially placed. I never bother to look

>>>> for that since my normal procedure with windows is to install it and

>>>> then install the latest nVidia driver.

>>>

>>> This is a monitor/brand/display adapter issue.

>>>

>>> How old is the monitor? nVidia is infamous for leaving older (and not

>>> all that old) monitor's out of their "updated" drivers.

>>

>> Monitor is probably about 1.5 years old, is is a 20.1 inch 1600x1200

>> flatpanel.

>>

>> It works flawlessly with the latest nVidia drivers under Linux.

>> It works flawlessly with the latest nVidia drivers under WinXP. And I

>> seriously mean latest, I just updated my nVidia drivers under XP a couple

>> of days ago.

>>

>> So I don't see why nVidia would leave it out of Vista if they support it

>> properly everywhere else.

>>

>>>

>>> If you installed an "updated" driver, you can usually "roll back" the

>>> display adapter driver in Device Manager.

>>

>> That'd just bring me back to the default driver that Vista picked,

>> which didn't do any better.

>>

>> I actually even tried to change my monitor driver from the generic PnP

>> driver to Digital Flatpanel 1600x1200 but it made no difference.

>>

>

> My bet is that your system doesn't have the correct monitor driver

> installed.

 

Sorry but monitors don't have drivers. You've used a computer before, no?

 

Shake Hands With,

Mr. Happy

 

 

--

"Cheer up, things could be worse." So I cheered up, installed Vista and

sure enough, things got worse.

Re: Opps I was after Adam Hopalong..

 

You have my apology.

 

Anyway, when you whine like you have whined, I don't have time for you

anyway.

xfile wrote:

>> No, it's the best the hardware vendors who wrote the drivers can do.

>> It's not Microsoft's job to write drivers.

>

> To be fair, Microsoft has to provide enough resources and "incentives" for

> vendors to do so in the same way that Linux community has to do.

>

> If you were the CEO of the vendor, why would you want to spend tremendous

> efforts on doing so for the "old" hardware? Will you benefit from it?

>

> Will you do things that only have costs but not benefits as a rational

> business decision-maker?

>

 

Quite fair. There is "Some" incentive to cover older hardware since if

people go buy new they won't necessarily buy a brand that let them down

once already. However it is one thing to release an OS to manufacturers

for pre install (So the people enjoying some of the profit do the beta

testing and quite another to sell something in a box for ordinary

shoppers to buy that most likely won't work properly on their hardware.

This is unavoidable to some extent, but the fact that it was hyped to

death and will be disappointing to many makes this seem worse.

 

I think many will go for the ultimate version simply to get "The Best"

so the disappointment / annoyance factor will be even higher. What you

don't then need is someone endlessly repeating "It's your own fault for

not ensuring compatibility" :)

 

To some extent we are "Spoiled" by XP because it does things very well

and quite honestly I'd feel cheated if I bought the most expensive MS OS

ever only to find it caused me so much trouble. The attitude with many

here seems to be one of "Mine's okay so you must either have crap

equipment or be stupid or both. This is sad because it damages not only

Microsoft but the whole field of "Amateur" computing.

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 19:52:10 -0500, Charlie Tame wrote:

> Stephan Rose wrote:

>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:19:41 -0500, Charlie Tame wrote:

>>

>>> Stephan Rose wrote:

>>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 17:39:49 -0500, Swingman wrote:

>>>>

>>>>>> I seriously gave it a try and approached it with an open mind.

>>>>> Sure you did... if your job was to paint the Sistine Chapel, we'd be looking

>>>>> down, not up.

>>>>>

>>>> What more than install the OS, install the latest drivers, am I supposed

>>>> to do? Please...be so kind as to enlighten me.

>>>>

>>>> Live with 1024x768 on a 1600x1200 LCD? no thank you.

>>>>

>>>> If *you* have the solution to that problem for instance, that apparently

>>>> nobody else yet does, then please! Let's hear it! I'd be most interested.

>>>>

>>>

>>> Well I don't know if the latest drivers for that video card are any good

>>> or not personally, but I can tell you you would have to uninstall those

>>> placed by Vista to get any sense at all out of the card.

>>

>> The card itself actually works fine. The nVidia control panel is there,

>> everything in it works. I can adjust all the settings fine, the 3D Preview

>> works fine for adjusting the 3D settings.

>>

>> Just the resolution is what doesn't work.

>>

>> How would I even go about uninstalling whatever drive initially placed by

>> Vista? The device manager just lists my nVidia driver now so I wouldn't

>> even know what driver vista initially placed. I never bother to look for

>> that since my normal procedure with windows is to install it and then

>> install the latest nVidia driver.

>>

>

> Ah, well I may be mistaken there, perhaps my MB disk installed a driver,

> but nevertheless NVidia say you must remove any previous driver.

 

Previous nVidia driver probably. =) I doubt they refer to windows' Vesa

driver ) Wouldn't want to remove that one really...

 

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:06:48 -0700, Mr. Happy wrote:

> Swingman wrote:

>

>> "Stephan Rose" <nospam@spammer.com> wrote in message

>> news:OdWdnbQyjZYHAj_bnZ2dnUVZ8sninZ2d@giganews.com...

>>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 18:52:12 -0500, Swingman wrote:

>>>

>>>> "Stephan Rose" wrote in messag

>>>>

>>>>> How would I even go about uninstalling whatever drive initially placed

>>>>> by

>>>>> Vista? The device manager just lists my nVidia driver now so I wouldn't

>>>>> even know what driver vista initially placed. I never bother to look

>>>>> for that since my normal procedure with windows is to install it and

>>>>> then install the latest nVidia driver.

>>>>

>>>> This is a monitor/brand/display adapter issue.

>>>>

>>>> How old is the monitor? nVidia is infamous for leaving older (and not

>>>> all that old) monitor's out of their "updated" drivers.

>>>

>>> Monitor is probably about 1.5 years old, is is a 20.1 inch 1600x1200

>>> flatpanel.

>>>

>>> It works flawlessly with the latest nVidia drivers under Linux.

>>> It works flawlessly with the latest nVidia drivers under WinXP. And I

>>> seriously mean latest, I just updated my nVidia drivers under XP a couple

>>> of days ago.

>>>

>>> So I don't see why nVidia would leave it out of Vista if they support it

>>> properly everywhere else.

>>>

>>>>

>>>> If you installed an "updated" driver, you can usually "roll back" the

>>>> display adapter driver in Device Manager.

>>>

>>> That'd just bring me back to the default driver that Vista picked,

>>> which didn't do any better.

>>>

>>> I actually even tried to change my monitor driver from the generic PnP

>>> driver to Digital Flatpanel 1600x1200 but it made no difference.

>>>

>>

>> My bet is that your system doesn't have the correct monitor driver

>> installed.

>

> Sorry but monitors don't have drivers. You've used a computer before,

> no?

 

Actually under windows, they do. It likely is just information regarding

the capability of the monitor, but it still gets installed as a driver.

 

--

Stephan

2003 Yamaha R6

 

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯

å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰