From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-10

On 2025/9/23 18:12:28, Paul wrote:

On Tue, 9/23/2025 10:31 AM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

I got Speccy, after Boris mentioned it in his bad SS thread.

I am a bit puzzled by what it says for my machine under Graphics (the
machine is a Lenovo ideapad laptop):

Monitor
Name Generic PnP Monitor on AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
Current Resolution 1536x864 pixels
Work Resolution 1536x783 pixels
State Enabled, Primary
Monitor Width 1920
Monitor Height 1080
Monitor BPP 32 bits per pixel
Monitor Frequency 60 Hz
Device \\.\DISPLAY1\Monitor0

What is "Current Resolution"? (It's not the window Speccy is running in
- that's only about a third of the screen width.) Any why is "Work
Resolution" a lower height - is it the taskbar? (FWIW I have a
double-height taskbar. Not all softwares "play nice" with that.)

In your Display settings, see if you are using a scale factor like 125%.

Some people find the fonts or icons too small, and a scale adjustment can help.

You are right - (a) I am indeed using 125%, (b) dividing 1920 and 1080
by 1.25 does indeed give 1536 and 864.
Settings actually says (Recommended) after the 125% setting.

The 125% value is a common choice on the smaller monitors
(I might have used that back in WinXP days),
while people with 4K monitors may select 200% because stuff is
so small. You should see how small the boot-text is on Linux
on the 4K monitor. Needs a microscope.

I'm surprised to see the result shown (in Speccy) in pixels though; I
thought this was only for text. (Settings captions it "Change the size
of text, apps and other items".) Though I just tried briefly changing to
100%, and it looks as if everything changed.>

A 4K monitor is definitely an acquired taste. My table is now eight inches wider than it used to be :-) I put the extension on the table, while
the table was still in usage, driving screws into the thing while on my back on a bench next to the table. And that allowed the new monitor to move to
the left a bit and come out of hiding. The previous 1440x900 monitor,
stopped detecting the video card signal, so it was time for a substitute.

And if someone asks "why don't you get a 49" monitor ?". Well,
think about how wide the table would have to be then. I'd need
extra sheets of plywood. I would need binoculars to see the far
end of the screen.

(-: [I'm using a laptop - albeit with an external keyboard and mouse
here, but I don't necessarily take those when I travel with it; a 49"
monitor would definitely affect its portability!]>

Paul

So what is "Work Resolution"?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-10

On Wed, 9/24/2025 1:52 AM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

So what is "Work Resolution"?

The only stock they had at the store, was a 27" 3840x2160,
which is really too small for that resolution. Some
enthusiast sites recommend 32" as a better minimum size
for a 4K monitor. To get a 32" one, I would have needed
to buy a demonstrator model.

With the resolution set to 200%, the working resolution
is in a sense 1920x1080. But when you take screenshots,
the screenshots still measure 3840x2160, so some image
resize is necessary when working with the screen shot images.

And any software that wants to be annoying, can use the
full resolution, like one of the Linux boot screens switches
to a tiny font at full resolution (boot text), and you need your microscope
to read the screen. That's what is the acquired taste in
a monitor like this, is there is always some part of monitor
operation that is less than nice.

And if you wanted "sharp" on a monitor, they had an OLED
monitor priced at $2000, with a game running on it. And that is
sharper and brighter than this monitor. But monitors like that
can suffer burn-in, and I would not be interested in a
$2000 monitor as a "throwaway item".

The other aspect of a new monitor, is when you have an old monitor
next to it (I have two screens for two-computer-at-once use), the
old monitor looks really bad from an intensity point of view.

Paul

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-10

On 2025/9/24 20:7:2, Paul wrote:

On Wed, 9/24/2025 1:52 AM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

So what is "Work Resolution"?

The only stock they had at the store, was a 27" 3840x2160,
which is really too small for that resolution. Some
enthusiast sites recommend 32" as a better minimum size
for a 4K monitor. To get a 32" one, I would have needed
to buy a demonstrator model.

With the resolution set to 200%, the working resolution
is in a sense 1920x1080. But when you take screenshots,
the screenshots still measure 3840x2160, so some image
resize is necessary when working with the screen shot images.

[]

So - Speccy told me:

Monitor
Name Generic PnP Monitor on AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
Current Resolution 1536x864 pixels
Work Resolution 1536x783 pixels
State Enabled, Primary
Monitor Width 1920
Monitor Height 1080
Monitor BPP 32 bits per pixel
Monitor Frequency 60 Hz
Device \\.\DISPLAY1\Monitor0

I know the monitor - laptop screen - is 1920|u1080.
You have explained to me that my using "125%" gives me 1536|u864 (the
"real" resolution divided by 1.25, or 125%) as the "Current Resolution".
so what is "Work Resolution"? It's clearly _not_ something to do with
the monitor being such that things appear tiny, as the _width_ figure is
the same - 1536 - as the "Current Resolution".
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

People worry that computers will get too smart and take over the world,
but the real problem is that they're too stupid and they've already
taken over the world
(Pedro Domingos, quoted by Wolf K in alt.windows7.general 2018-12-10)
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-10

On Wed, 9/24/2025 3:24 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

On 2025/9/24 20:7:2, Paul wrote:

On Wed, 9/24/2025 1:52 AM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

So what is "Work Resolution"?

The only stock they had at the store, was a 27" 3840x2160,
which is really too small for that resolution. Some
enthusiast sites recommend 32" as a better minimum size
for a 4K monitor. To get a 32" one, I would have needed
to buy a demonstrator model.

With the resolution set to 200%, the working resolution
is in a sense 1920x1080. But when you take screenshots,
the screenshots still measure 3840x2160, so some image
resize is necessary when working with the screen shot images.

[]

So - Speccy told me:

Monitor
Name Generic PnP Monitor on AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
Current Resolution 1536x864 pixels
Work Resolution 1536x783 pixels
State Enabled, Primary
Monitor Width 1920
Monitor Height 1080
Monitor BPP 32 bits per pixel
Monitor Frequency 60 Hz
Device \\.\DISPLAY1\Monitor0

I know the monitor - laptop screen - is 1920|u1080.
You have explained to me that my using "125%" gives me 1536|u864 (the
"real" resolution divided by 1.25, or 125%) as the "Current Resolution".
so what is "Work Resolution"? It's clearly _not_ something to do with
the monitor being such that things appear tiny, as the _width_ figure is
the same - 1536 - as the "Current Resolution".

Work resolution is everything except the TaskBar.

In an ideal world, you could move the TaskBar to the
side of the screen, and see a change in the "tax" on
the other dimension when you do that.

But if you are happy with your Task Bar as currently
viewable, I would leave well enough alone :-)

Paul

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-10

Paul wrote on 9/24/2025 3:59 PM:

On Wed, 9/24/2025 3:24 PM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

On 2025/9/24 20:7:2, Paul wrote:

On Wed, 9/24/2025 1:52 AM, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

So what is "Work Resolution"?

The only stock they had at the store, was a 27" 3840x2160,
which is really too small for that resolution. Some
enthusiast sites recommend 32" as a better minimum size
for a 4K monitor. To get a 32" one, I would have needed
to buy a demonstrator model.

With the resolution set to 200%, the working resolution
is in a sense 1920x1080. But when you take screenshots,
the screenshots still measure 3840x2160, so some image
resize is necessary when working with the screen shot images.

[]

So - Speccy told me:

Monitor
Name Generic PnP Monitor on AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
Current Resolution 1536x864 pixels
Work Resolution 1536x783 pixels
State Enabled, Primary
Monitor Width 1920
Monitor Height 1080
Monitor BPP 32 bits per pixel
Monitor Frequency 60 Hz
Device \\.\DISPLAY1\Monitor0

I know the monitor - laptop screen - is 1920|u1080.
You have explained to me that my using "125%" gives me 1536|u864 (the
"real" resolution divided by 1.25, or 125%) as the "Current Resolution".
so what is "Work Resolution"? It's clearly _not_ something to do with
the monitor being such that things appear tiny, as the _width_ figure is
the same - 1536 - as the "Current Resolution".

Work resolution is everything except the TaskBar.

In an ideal world, you could move the TaskBar to the
side of the screen, and see a change in the "tax" on
the other dimension when you do that.

But if you are happy with your Task Bar as currently
viewable, I would leave well enough alone :-)

Paul

Uninstalling speccy and ccleaner might be something to consider too.

There are much better programs than these old turds.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-10

On 2025/9/25 0:40:9, Hank Rogers wrote:

Paul wrote on 9/24/2025 3:59 PM:

[]

Work resolution is everything except the TaskBar.

In an ideal world, you could move the TaskBar to the
side of the screen, and see a change in the "tax" on
the other dimension when you do that.

Ah, I thought it might be the taskbar.>>

But if you are happy with your Task Bar as currently
viewable, I would leave well enough alone :-)

_I_ am happy with my double-height taskbar along the bottom of the
screen. Several programs aren't that happy with its double height.>>

Paul

Uninstalling speccy and ccleaner might be something to consider too.

There are much better programs than these old turds.

(I don't think I've installed ccleaner on this machine.) Depends on your definition of "better".
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"The wish of the lazy to allow unsupervised access [to the internet] to
their children should not reduce all adults browsing to the level of suitability for a five-year-old."
Yaman Akdeniz, quoted in Inter//face (The Times, 1999-2-10): p12
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-10

J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/24/2025 7:20 PM:

On 2025/9/25 0:40:9, Hank Rogers wrote:

Paul wrote on 9/24/2025 3:59 PM:

[]

Work resolution is everything except the TaskBar.

In an ideal world, you could move the TaskBar to the
side of the screen, and see a change in the "tax" on
the other dimension when you do that.

Ah, I thought it might be the taskbar.>>

But if you are happy with your Task Bar as currently
viewable, I would leave well enough alone :-)

_I_ am happy with my double-height taskbar along the bottom of the
screen. Several programs aren't that happy with its double height.>>

Paul

Uninstalling speccy and ccleaner might be something to consider too.

There are much better programs than these old turds.

(I don't think I've installed ccleaner on this machine.) Depends on your definition of "better".

Have a look at HWinfo, or Glow system info.

I just figured if you were running a turd like speccy, you probably
also use c-cleaner (from the same shady company).

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-10

On 2025/9/25 2:38:18, Hank Rogers wrote:

J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/24/2025 7:20 PM:

On 2025/9/25 0:40:9, Hank Rogers wrote:

[]

Uninstalling speccy and ccleaner might be something to consider too.

There are much better programs than these old turds.

(I don't think I've installed ccleaner on this machine.) Depends on your
definition of "better".

Have a look at HWinfo, or Glow system info.

I just figured if you were running a turd like speccy, you probably
also use c-cleaner (from the same shady company).

(You really don't like Speccy, do you! What's it done to offend you?)

Remember that most of the time, I don't even use anywhere near all that
even Speccy tells me; so what extra do those two do for me that I'd
actually use?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Was she ahead of her time? No, we were so very far behind hers.
- "Charlie Greyfriars" (on Delia Derbyshire) on YouTube, around 2022/5.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-10

J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/25/2025 1:34 AM:

On 2025/9/25 2:38:18, Hank Rogers wrote:

J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/24/2025 7:20 PM:

On 2025/9/25 0:40:9, Hank Rogers wrote:

[]

Uninstalling speccy and ccleaner might be something to consider too.

There are much better programs than these old turds.

(I don't think I've installed ccleaner on this machine.) Depends on your >>> definition of "better".

Have a look at HWinfo, or Glow system info.

I just figured if you were running a turd like speccy, you probably
also use c-cleaner (from the same shady company).

(You really don't like Speccy, do you! What's it done to offend you?)

Remember that most of the time, I don't even use anywhere near all that
even Speccy tells me; so what extra do those two do for me that I'd
actually use?

You probably don't need either program. You can access all that info in windows.


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-10

On Thu, 9/25/2025 7:48 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:

J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/25/2025 1:34 AM:

On 2025/9/25 2:38:18, Hank Rogers wrote:

J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/24/2025 7:20 PM:

On 2025/9/25 0:40:9, Hank Rogers wrote:

[]

Uninstalling speccy and ccleaner might be something to consider too. >>>>>
There are much better programs than these old turds.

(I don't think I've installed ccleaner on this machine.) Depends on your >>>> definition of "better".

Have a look at HWinfo, or Glow system info.

I just figured if you were running a turd like speccy,a you probably
also use c-cleanera (from the same shady company).

(You really don't like Speccy, do you! What's it done to offend you?)

Remember that most of the time, I don't even use anywhere near all that
even Speccy tells me; so what extra do those two do for me that I'd
actually use?

You probably don't need either program.a You can access all that info in windows.

Moninfo can give you the EDID table.

The realtime tables, are freshly collected.

https://entechtaiwan.com/util/moninfo.shtm

And that tells you, mostly about the monitor itself,
instead of how Windows is using it at the moment (work area).

Paul
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.comp.os.windows-10

On 2025/9/26 4:22:26, Paul wrote:

On Thu, 9/25/2025 7:48 PM, Hank Rogers wrote:

J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/25/2025 1:34 AM:

On 2025/9/25 2:38:18, Hank Rogers wrote:

J. P. Gilliver wrote on 9/24/2025 7:20 PM:

On 2025/9/25 0:40:9, Hank Rogers wrote:

[]

Uninstalling speccy and ccleaner might be something to consider too. >>>>>>
There are much better programs than these old turds.

(I don't think I've installed ccleaner on this machine.) Depends on your >>>>> definition of "better".

Have a look at HWinfo, or Glow system info.

I just figured if you were running a turd like speccy,-a you probably
also use c-cleaner-a (from the same shady company).

(You really don't like Speccy, do you! What's it done to offend you?)

Remember that most of the time, I don't even use anywhere near all that
even Speccy tells me; so what extra do those two do for me that I'd
actually use?

You probably don't need either program.-a You can access all that info in windows.

Very true. Though I do like things that collect all such info. in one
place, rather than having to hunt all over Settings and Control Panel
for them. (OK, I still have to do that hunting if I want to _change_
settings.)

Moninfo can give you the EDID table.

The realtime tables, are freshly collected.

https://entechtaiwan.com/util/moninfo.shtm

I won't profess to know what EDID is.

And that tells you, mostly about the monitor itself,
instead of how Windows is using it at the moment (work area).

I remember using the EnTech stuff on an earlier machine. I really like
freeware like that: simple; compact code; does what is required without
any fanfare. I've collected the other three from the same page (even
though I'll probably never use them - though am tempted to put the
executable after installing one on a memory stick, so I can tease
friends I visit by turning their monitor upside down!).

Paul

John
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

You make it from scratch?
Yep.
Do you make your own scratch?
--
"pyotr filipivich" in alt.windows7.general 2017-5-20
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2