aRTee Posted March 5, 2003 Report Share Posted March 5, 2003 Well, I am happy with xrandr. I guess that it would be nicer to have kde scale with the whole thing, so everything fits into the new screensize, which it doesn´t, but for me it´s good enough: it allows me to select a lower resolution, at which moment I can then connect my projector, and still have mplayer or xine do fullscreen correctly (and not, as currently, to the whole virtual screen, meaning that at 1280x1024 with a virtual size of 1600x1200 I would miss a lot of what´s going on in the movie...). BTW I do hope that kde and gnome etc will make things scale with the xrandr screensize. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ndeb Posted March 6, 2003 Report Share Posted March 6, 2003 Same thing could be done with ctrl+alt++/-. Currently, xrandr delivers very little of what it promises. And the next XFree release may well be in 2004. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aRTee Posted March 6, 2003 Report Share Posted March 6, 2003 Nope, with ctrl-alt-+- mplayer for instance would do fullscreen to the virtual desktopsize, which would be much bigger than the actual size/resolution, so I would only see part of the movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ndeb Posted March 6, 2003 Report Share Posted March 6, 2003 Nope, with ctrl-alt-+- mplayer for instance would do fullscreen to the virtual desktopsize, which would be much bigger than the actual size/resolution, so I would only see part of the movie.I am afraid u r wrong. I tried both xrandr and ctrl-alt methods and could make mplayer (fullscreen) occupy the actual screen size for both. In general, with xrandr, the disadvantage is that u cannot pan which means a part of the virtual screen is never viewable. There are other problems of xrandr as its vertical refresh rates do not match with those of xvidtune. For example, I run xrandr -r 84 and it sets a certain vertical refresh rate. However, both xvidtune and XFree86.0.log indicate that the value is 85.0 Hz. Other than that, the only refresh rates that xrandr accepts are the ones shown by the command xrandr while xvidune allows much better user interaction and finer control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aRTee Posted March 8, 2003 Report Share Posted March 8, 2003 Nope, with ctrl-alt-+- mplayer for instance would do fullscreen to the virtual desktopsize, which would be much bigger than the actual size/resolution, so I would only see part of the movie.I am afraid u r wrong. I tried both xrandr and ctrl-alt methods and could make mplayer (fullscreen) occupy the actual screen size for both. In general, with xrandr, the disadvantage is that u cannot pan which means a part of the virtual screen is never viewable. I stand corrected, I tried a very long time ago, and must not have payed attention to start mplayer after switching to the desired resolution, instead of before, then switch and make fullscreen. And so, I do agree. Only one thing: for tilting screens it is a good feature, if only because some people may want it and that other OS offers it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.