On 9/12/19 10:00 AM, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
On 2019-09-12 10:32 a.m., Ken Springer wrote:
On 9/12/19 9:13 AM, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
On 2019-09-12 8:59 a.m., Ken Springer wrote:
On 9/11/19 9:34 PM, Ken Springer wrote:
On 9/11/19 9:03 PM, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
On 2019-09-11 9:56 p.m., Ken Springer wrote:
On 9/11/19 8:49 PM, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
On 2019-09-11 9:02 p.m., Ken Springer wrote:
On 9/11/19 7:37 PM, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
On 2019-09-11 8:23 p.m., Ken Springer wrote:
On 9/11/19 3:10 PM, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
On 2019-09-11 3:58 p.m., Ken Springer wrote:
On 9/11/19 2:01 PM, Rene Lamontagne wrote:
On 2019-09-11 2:46 p.m., Ken Springer wrote:
On 9/11/19 10:34 AM, Rabid Robot wrote:
On 2019-09-11 11:23 a.m., Rene Lamontagne wrote:
On 2019-09-11 10:09 a.m., Ken Springer wrote:
On 9/11/19 8:49 AM, Rene Lamontagne wrote:

snip

Sold both of my older builds on Kijiji, since selling house and moving
into an apartment space is at a premium, unused stuff has gotta go.
Anyway it all works and seeing it doesn't do any harm I guess I'll
just
leave it a mystery. Thanks for trying to sort it out.

You're welcome, Rene.Â* I enjoyed the mental exercise.

Having slept on this issue over night, would you want to try something
just for fun?

Try 1440X900, and see what you can do with that.




OK, that looks not bad but leaves about 3/4 inch black on each side.
Got a post from Mark Loyd a little while ago suggesting 1600x900 which
really worksÂ* great, fills the screen fully and is 16:9, Wonder why I
didn't see it myself, I guess we just see what we want to see at
times. :-)

Hmmm...Â* 1600X900 was not in your original list of possible resolutions.

As I just replied to Jonathan Little, your original list of resolutions
as 3 resolutions that are 16:10, which just does not make sense to me if
the monitor is truly 16:9.

Have you tried all the different tweaks shown in Ease of Access with
both resolutions?



To add to the mix I just went and checked my sons System, this really
gets crazy.
He has the same Asus MX279 monitor, But I built his system with an Intel
i7 8700 CPU/GPU with Intel UHD630 graphics hooked up HDMI to HDMI cable
same as mine , Mine has an AMD CPU/GPU with Vega 11 Graphics.
His has additional settings of
1400x1050
1360x768
1366x768
but his shows none of the lower ones below 1280x720 which is his lowest,
So it would seem that the settings are very CPU/GPU dependent.
There, that should help to stir the pot. :-)

ROTFLMAO!!!

The various combos of hardware has always been in my mind as being a
factor in what you can do when it comes to trying to compensate for
visual issues.

My thought right now is, there will never be a single size fits all
solution to visual issues. It boils down to knowing how to access the
various settings plus what the hardware can do.

That means all solutions are individual. Plus, one hardware system may
work better than another for any individual.

If you were to try to custom build a system for someone, I'm thinking
you need to select the hardware combination that gives you the widest
range of options.

I'd love to help fellow seniors and anyone else set their system up to
work the best for them, but selecting the hardware is way beyond my
abilities. After configuring the visual aspects of the system, now you
have to move on to configuring the UI and such for ease of use.
Customizing the start menu, do you put shortcuts on the taskbar, or the
desktop, and do you simply create keyboard shortcuts.

It's no wonder people get frustrated with their computers, and simply
walk away.

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