On 9/11/19 4:51 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Ken Springer
writes:
On 9/10/19 2:49 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Ken Springer
writes:
[]
When I look at a vertical straight line, this is what I see:

|
\
|
|
/
|

More or less. LOL
Oh dear! I don't think _any_ monitor (or playing with resolutions)
will
fix that )-:. I can't see how glasses will, either, unless your eyeballs
don't move, to preserve alignment.

Yep. Nothing except a new eyeball will fix that.

_Could_ a _contact_ lens - or surgically attached one? In other words,
is the distortion in your lens, retina, or image processing brainware?

A contact lens would have to be oriented correctly when you put them in.
Possibly new lenses, as you get with cataract surgery, but then what
do you do if you eyeball changes? Thee surgery is quick, but it isn't
cheap.

I experimented with the options of increasing the text size by 125% or
150%. Bit this does not change the size of the text in menus in the
windows. And, if the situation is right, dialog boxes may have the
buttons you need to click on off the screen to the bottom, and you
can't get to them!
The text size manipulations aren't great - and many softwares don't
honour them properly, so if you _do_ increase text size, they don't
enlarge the box it goes in, so you end up with either overlapping
letters, or text spilling out of the box )-:.

They're so crappy, why do they bother to keep them?

Good question. (By the way, when I was looking yesterday, this system
only offered 100% and 125%. No 150%.) Probably lethargy.

I noticed no 150% just recently, somewhere. I wonder if that was a
laptop with a smaller screen.

[]
The really sad thing is, for everything in a window, it could be
adjusted and changed in XP and earlier. But then they got rid of it.

If pressed, they'd probably say they removed those settings because some
people change them then don't remember how (or _that_) they did, and
think something's wrong. Rather like you could change various aspects of
the display (colours, widths, fonts ...) in Windows 95 - and still could
in '98, but had to press an "Advanced" button to get at them (-:.

That's a possibility I hadn't thought of. End result is penalizing the
majority for just a few ignorant ones.

snip

This Pro-Art rotates 900
Or 8:5 (-:

Does it really display as 900 on your system? I ask, because I used
the degree sign when I typed the message.

Yes. At least, I didn't amend the quoted text; I think it had been
amended by the time I got it, rather than my system, which can display
the ° sign OK. (That's the degree sign, in case it has been amended by
the time _you_ see it.)

It must have been amended, as your degree sign came through.

snip
(I use "[]" to mean the same thing.)
[]

I noticed. LOL

snip

You can blame the movie people for the widescreen today, IMO.

Yes and no. As I said, widescreen isn't that great even for most movie
scenes, but (on the whole) we're stuck with it for movies - but its
introduction in the PC world was due to the belief that movie-viewing
was going to be a large part of what PCs were going to be used for,
which I dispute (even now, and certainly at the time of its
introduction). But any such discussion is pointless as we are where we
are. (And it's preferable to VVS!)

Long ago, I was reading movie trivia, and discovered there were various
aspect ratios to the new widescreen movies. IIRC, one was 16:9.

[]
Teamviewer is installed on all my desktops, for the same use as you.
Then when they call, I don't have to go to a particular computer.

Have you had the false diagnosis of commercial use? (When I got it, I
looked into the pricing: it's such a good utility that I would have
considered it. But it's so high it really is only for the professional
user - especially as it's monthly rather than a one-off.)

Teamviewer screwed up, a bug in an update that erroneously mislabeled
the use. I think this was exacerbated if you chose the combo
private/commercial option when you installed it. All I had to do was
send an email to a specific email address, and my stuff was reset.

[]
Most of those still don't seem to have got to grips with the
advantages
of flat screen; they have a space into which the monitor is placed,
still needing a stand and space all around, as if it was still a CRT
monitor with bulk. None of them seem to have it attached to the back
wall, let alone used lateral thinking and attached it as hinged _over_
some of the compartments thus allowing a bigger screen.

The newest, and biggest, cabinet is now 18 years old. The other, at
least 10 years older.

Ah, so designed in the CRT era; fair enough. I assumed that the ones
(computer desks) on the page you gave me a link to were mostly new ones,
and I was surprised they all still showed the monitor as standing in one
of the boxes, rather than fixed thus wasting less space.

The older one, definitely. Smaller widescreens may have been coming in
with the newer one, but I simply don't remember.


--
Ken
MacOS 10.14.5
Firefox 67.0.4
Thunderbird 60.7
"My brain is like lightning, a quick flash
and it's gone!"