cory5412
Significant Minor Character
Posts: 126
|
Post by cory5412 on May 13, 2007 20:10:16 GMT -5
Yaay! When you introduce those wallpapers, I will have to use one of 'em.
|
|
|
Post by Pipe Organ Wolf on May 13, 2007 20:10:33 GMT -5
I'm running 1024X768. My vision isn't improving any, and I need to be able to easily read the monitor from about 4 feet away when I'm working with the music writing program. Ugh.
|
|
cory5412
Significant Minor Character
Posts: 126
|
Post by cory5412 on May 14, 2007 19:54:45 GMT -5
Ouch. Though, I remember when my dad had a desktop PC, way back in like 1998. He ran the 17" CRT at like, 800x600. For comparison, I ran it at 1280x1024. (I got my own desktop PC a year or two later and it had the same model of monitor.) One of my newer 17-inchers gets blurry at high resolutions though, so I run it at 1024x768. Reminds me, I need to go get one, I want to play dual desktops on the iMac.
|
|
|
Post by Pipe Organ Wolf on May 15, 2007 0:02:35 GMT -5
It's not an ideal setup, but there's no where else to put the computer or the Yamaha. I learned the hard way if I can't see what I'm inputting, I really end up with a mess. Maybe when I have some funds I can consider a larger monitor.
|
|
|
Post by Poofiemus on May 15, 2007 0:05:16 GMT -5
The nicest thing about 1024 by 768 is that it is the most freakin' common resolution out there, so there's none of this "Must find high-res cool wallpapers!" frenzy. It's pretty much just click and save, then voila! There it is.
My frankencompy ran at 1024 by 768, I think, on the 15" monitor, but on the 17" it was like 1200 or something. (It was a handmedown from my grandpa, who's a resolution nut, and so naturally he'd pick a monitor with the highest possible res for its size. You should see the monitor he has now. It's crazy!)
The last time I ran 800 by 600 for any length of time I think was back when we had Windows 3.1. XD
I'll have to be sure to make fullscreen wallpapers too, but I'm probably going to make widescreen editions first because that's what I use. =P
Oooooh! I should get an adaptor for my Gateway monitor and hook it up to the iMac just because I CAN! >: D
|
|
|
Post by Pipe Organ Wolf on May 15, 2007 0:10:28 GMT -5
Personally, I like a lot of negative black space on my wallpapers. It makes the icons stand out , and then I can enjoy the artwork better. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Poofiemus on May 15, 2007 0:53:30 GMT -5
Well, that would make my job easier! Backgrounds are so time consuming.
That reminds me, I should finish that "So Deep" wallpaper I started ages ago...
|
|
cory5412
Significant Minor Character
Posts: 126
|
Post by cory5412 on May 15, 2007 16:22:40 GMT -5
hehe, Windows 3.1. TWL actually had a 640x480 display, nice little machine, I should get it out and play with it for a bit. It's running OS/2 Warp3 at the moment, though. (Which is a lot like running an old install of Windows XP, it's excessively slow, but it's so much newer than the hardware, and it was designed for big workstations, not really tiny laptops. )
|
|
|
Post by Poofiemus on May 15, 2007 22:03:00 GMT -5
Defunct OS line!
Cory, you do such weird things to your compies, I know not why. XD
|
|
cory5412
Significant Minor Character
Posts: 126
|
Post by cory5412 on May 15, 2007 22:11:04 GMT -5
The machine's more than a decade old, not like I really had anything else that it would've been super productive doing. Technically,k it was doing well with Windows 3 as a writing machine, but I've got computer-ADD, it's a wonder I haven't tried to put OS/2 on this imac yet.
|
|
|
Post by Poofiemus on May 15, 2007 22:12:37 GMT -5
...Could you even DO that? Put OS/2 on the iMac, I mean? ...and why would you WANT to?
|
|
cory5412
Significant Minor Character
Posts: 126
|
Post by cory5412 on May 15, 2007 23:14:12 GMT -5
Hm, probably not - there is a major lack of drivers for OS/2 on hardware this new, and the only reason I could think of for wanting to is because I want OS/2 Warp 3 to run INSANELY FAST It would probably run no faster on my iMac than on a well-configured machine of about 500MHz though, as it can't really address more than 64 megabytes of memory, nor can it take advantage of big filesystems, and in general, applications can't load *faster* than instantly, which is what the performance would be like. That reminds me, I'd like to see how fast Windows 3 is under Vmware - I should do OS/2 Warp3 that way too, if it'll work properly. (PC operating systems can run inside a window on intel macs.) I do have an old 500MHz system I'm not doing anything with, I should play with OS/2 on that sometime.
|
|
|
Post by Poofiemus on May 15, 2007 23:21:51 GMT -5
XD Cory, your antics amuse me no end. And you're right; they can't load faster than instantly. That would entail them opening before you clicked on them!
|
|
cory5412
Significant Minor Character
Posts: 126
|
Post by cory5412 on May 16, 2007 2:24:41 GMT -5
Predictive computing, the latest thing from Apple? That's actually the reasoning behind me leaving my iMac on all the time, I don't ever wait for it.
|
|
|
Post by Poofiemus on May 16, 2007 16:06:42 GMT -5
Really? O.o See, I turn mine off at night because, for one thing, it helps conserve power and clear out the memory a bit, but it also keeps me from hopping up and browsing the internet in the middle of the night because the compy is on and waitind.
|
|