Poll

What size of displays are you using with your OS9 machines? Portables do not count.

17" 1280×1024
17" 1280×768
19" 1440×900
19" 1280×1024
20" 1600×1200
20" 1680×1050
21" 1920×1080
22" 1680×1050
23″ 1920×1080
24″ 1920×1200
15" and smaller
27" and larger
CRT
TV

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: OS9 and display size  (Read 2480 times)

ssp3

  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 857
OS9 and display size
« on: May 04, 2024, 04:34:45 AM »

This question intrigued me all the time, so I decided to run a poll. Spill the beans, guys  :)
Logged
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

Bolkonskij

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 231
    • Cornica.org
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2024, 04:46:33 AM »

Interesting poll!

Pretty sure I'm at the low-end (any Clamshell users out there? :D)

Running OS 9 on my Mini at 1024x768 on my Samsung SyncMaster. I find no use in using broader displays with OS 9, as my workflows usually including scrolling top-down (e.g. a word document, a website) rather than left-right, so the old SyncMaster still gets the job done. I'd need more height, rather than more width :-)
Logged
Reel changer over at cornica.org & cheat collector at the Cheat Emporium

ssp3

  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 857
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2024, 05:18:56 AM »

There's nothing wrong with using smaller displays. I personally, despite having several modern 24", find myself more comfortable using 17"-er with my Mini.
Unlike in the old days, where 17" Apple's Trinitron was my main display and PM9600 or G4 DA were my main drivers and I had icons on the desktop in two layers on top of each other, I simply do not have enough stuff to put on a 24" real estate anymore.
Sure, some audio editors/sequencers will profit from larger screens, but even then I find that old Cubase looks a bit odd on a big screen.

On the negative side, when using older displays, one might encounter:
1. Fading CCFL backlight that also changes in color.
2. Not so optimal viewing angles of TN panels.
3. Slow response times
« Last Edit: May 05, 2024, 01:14:47 AM by ssp3 »
Logged
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

IIO

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4556
  • just a number
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2024, 08:24:59 AM »

unfortunately the guy with the 30" can´t take part here. :)

oh, he can.
Logged
insert arbitrary signature here

joevt

  • Enthusiast Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 97
  • New Member
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2024, 05:00:37 PM »

My OS 9 machines (B&W G3 with G4 and PM 8600) are connected to a 5K display using a Gefen Dual Link DVI to DisplayPort adapter but they don't have GPUs that support more than 1920x1200 or 1600x1200. I do have a 7800 GT from a Quad G5 which can do 1440p60 or 4K30 but I haven't tried it in a PCI slot yet and it wouldn't have 2D or 3D acceleration in OS 9 if it could work. It would be for OS X Tiger or Leopard.
Logged

torvan

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
  • Old School
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #5 on: May 05, 2024, 01:00:41 PM »

My G4 Dual with the TI4600 is connected to a LG Curved UltraWide 34" using a DVI to HDMI cable I got years ago.  Sure I am limited to 1600x1200, but it does everything I want it to do!
Logged
15 Macs (13 of them ranging from an SE to a MDD), 2 iPads, 2 iPhones, 1 Hackintosh. Small house getting smaller with each Mac. . . . .  .Husband shakes his head but supports my habit.

Knezzen

  • Administrator
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1089
  • Pro Tools Addict!
    • Macintosh Garden
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #6 on: May 05, 2024, 01:34:06 PM »

1920x1200 on everything, baby ;)
Logged
Pro Tools addict and admin at Mac OS 9 Lives!, System 7 Today and Macintosh Garden.

V.Yakob

  • Enthusiast Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 90
  • Mac User
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #7 on: May 06, 2024, 03:38:45 AM »

PM9600, G3MT, G3 B&W have a PCI Radeon 7000 64 Mb with a DVI port, so the Apple Cinema Display 23" (A1082) monitor connects to them and works normally at 1920x1200 resolution. Thanks to the community, there is a driver even for Mac OS 7.6.1 that runs on the PM9600.
G4 QS and G4 MDD connect to the same monitor and work smoothly. But it goes without saying, because the flashed Radeon 9000 128 mb and the original 64 mb support it.
G5 DC with flashed X1900 256 Mb also copes with this without problems, but here is only Sorbet Leopard on SATA-III SSD, which I connected via SAS3041E.
The only machine in my modest Power Mac collection that can't boast of high resolution is the PM8100. Too old. ::) I use an HPV video card here, which connects via an adapter to an old Acer AL1917 monitor.
Logged
PPC — PM 8100/80, PM 9600/300, PM G3 Minitower (Rev. C), PM G3 B&W (Rev. B), PM G4 Quicksilver (2002), PM G4 MDD (2003), PM G5 (Late 2005).
Intel — Mac mini (mid 2010), iMac 5k (2017), Mac mini (2018).
AppleSilicon — Mac mini (2020), Mac Studio M2 Max + Apple Studio Display.

meow_mx

  • Newcomer
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
  • New Member
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #8 on: May 12, 2024, 06:08:15 PM »

3440x1440 via DVI on a G4 Mini  8)

(at 30Hz refresh rate--you can't win 'em all)
Logged

ssp3

  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 857
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #9 on: May 13, 2024, 06:26:44 AM »

3440x1440 via DVI on a G4 Mini  8)

(at 30Hz refresh rate--you can't win 'em all)

Wow! Which Mini and with what ATI driver?
Logged
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

IIO

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4556
  • just a number
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #10 on: May 13, 2024, 09:32:53 AM »

(at 30Hz refresh rate--you can't win 'em all)

i cant refind the old post, but there was that supersized CRT which allowed some mammoth resolution when runing at incredible 13,1 Hz. (probably useful for nothing but displaying stills in a store window?)

would be interested in your monitor model.
Logged
insert arbitrary signature here

robespierre

  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 142
  • malfrat des logiciels
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #11 on: May 13, 2024, 10:05:15 AM »

The IBM T221 runs at 3840x2400 and will use a refresh rate of 13 Hz when a single-link DVI input is used. It's an IPS LCD, not a CRT.
The highest raster CRT resolutions of which I'm aware are 2048x2048 used for certain navigation displays (air traffic control, etc). They use a 60 Hz refresh. A 13 Hz refresh would never work in a CRT because phosphors with such long persistence are not available.
This issue with phosphor persistence is the real reason for video interlacing: a progressive scan at 30 Hz (NTSC) or 25 Hz (PAL) would be intolerable. So the image is interlaced and scanned at twice that rate, which looks fine.
Logged

meow_mx

  • Newcomer
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
  • New Member
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #12 on: May 13, 2024, 11:33:31 AM »

3440x1440 via DVI on a G4 Mini  8)

(at 30Hz refresh rate--you can't win 'em all)

Wow! Which Mini and with what ATI driver?

1.25GHz Mini, basic Mac Mini v9 install CD driver set, on a Dell U3421WE monitor via DVI->HDMI cable.

My Mini fuzzes out trying 1920x1080@60 on the same display, so it's a fantastic spot of luck that it negotiates the native resolution at 30Hz.

My 9250 PCI card is unreliable at both of those settings, forcing me to stick with a Radeon 7000 in my PowerTower running MacOS 7.6.1. :-(
Logged

Jubadub

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 431
  • New Member
Re: OS9 and display size
« Reply #13 on: May 14, 2024, 01:54:04 AM »

This issue with phosphor persistence is the real reason for video interlacing: a progressive scan at 30 Hz (NTSC) or 25 Hz (PAL) would be intolerable. So the image is interlaced and scanned at twice that rate, which looks fine.

Fascinating, this explains a lot. I have long been a huge fan of CRT displays, so I really appreciate this info.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Recent Topics