Free Weekly Tech Newsletter

**thefultonhow** · 01-30-2005, 01:59 PM

So I finally got around to taking a picture of my computer and putting it in my sig, as you can see. Now, my new sig looks fine on my 2001FP (1600x1200 resolution), but I realized when I was testing it out that it probably would start to look crappy at lower resolutions (as in, the picture wouldn't take up the whole left cell -- it would have a kind of letterbox look with borders on the top and bottom). I tested it out, and sure enough, it looks fine on anything 1152x864 or larger... but once you get down to 1024x768, it looks bad.

So I was wondering, in a PC enthusiast community such as this, how many people actually run 1024x768? In other words, how many people run a res that makes my sig look bad?

In case anybody wonders why I don't just make the image taller, the PCMech rules on images in sigs say they can be a maximum of 125 pixels tall. Mine is exactly that.

WhatsThisBoxFor? · 01-30-2005, 02:06 PM

It fits my screen perfectly - I run at 1280x1024. But at my school, which is set at 800x600 it will be a different story.

**pam123** · 01-30-2005, 02:37 PM

I run at 1024 x 768, it's a 17" monitor, and your signature doesn't look too bad.

Hi Ho · 01-30-2005, 02:45 PM

I run at 1024x768 on a 17in monitor. Your signature looks fine to me.

lil Jimmie · 01-30-2005, 02:50 PM

I run at 1024 x 768 for normal use and games at 1280x1024, as far as the sig goes I block all signature images.

diver203_98 · 01-30-2005, 02:56 PM

1024 x 768 on my Gateway 19" monitor

1280 x 768 on my Viewsonic VP201b 20.1" monitor

**Panama Red** · 01-30-2005, 03:03 PM

I'm at 1280 x 1024 on my 19" lcd and 1024 x 768 on all my 17" lcd's and crt. Looks fine. I increased the DPI on my 19" to 110% tho.

mikezel · 01-30-2005, 03:05 PM

1024 x 768 on my 17" Dell CRT

***glc*** · 01-30-2005, 03:51 PM

1280x1024.

That said, enthusiast forum or not, we firmly believe in keeping this place friendly for everyone - which means low resolutions and dialup. Your sig, although very tasteful and well done and technically within the rules, could be overwhelming on a low res screen. If you wish to use it, I'd ask you to only use it once per thread, not in every post you make.

RJ · 01-30-2005, 04:15 PM

1024x768 here. It's the max res that my 15" TFT supports.

RJ

**thefultonhow** · 01-30-2005, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glc

1280x1024.

That said, enthusiast forum or not, we firmly believe in keeping this place friendly for everyone - which means low resolutions and dialup. Your sig, although very tasteful and well done and technically within the rules, could be overwhelming on a low res screen. If you wish to use it, I'd ask you to only use it once per thread, not in every post you make.

Is there any way to do that automatically? It's certainly a good suggestion, but although I know you can scroll down on the post screen and uncheck the "show signature" box (I did that on this post, obviously), chances are I will forget to do that on most of my posts and I'll end up just showing my beautiful rig to everyone anyway.

On the other hand, if there was an option somewhere to only show my sig on the first post in a thread and remove it on the rest, I would gladly enable that.

raftero · 01-30-2005, 04:22 PM

1280x1024

**mairving** · 01-30-2005, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thefultonhow

Is there any way to do that automatically? It's certainly a good suggestion, but although I know you can scroll down on the post screen and uncheck the "show signature" box (I did that on this post, obviously), chances are I will forget to do that on most of my posts and I'll end up just showing my beautiful rig to everyone anyway.

On the other hand, if there was an option somewhere to only show my sig on the first post in a thread and remove it on the rest, I would gladly enable that.

Users have the option in their user cp to show or not show sigs.

**Force Flow** · 01-30-2005, 05:20 PM

1024x758 on a 17" CRT. On workstations I use with larger screens, I sometimes crank it up to 1280x1024

**HAL9000** · 01-30-2005, 05:26 PM

I have a 17" CRT monitor and run at 800x600... my reason, I can still see a flicker at 85Hz and need to run 100Hz before it goes away and I can only do that at 800x600... I REALLY need a flat panel. At work, I run at 1280x1024 on a LCD and at 75Hz it doesn't bother me.

Now while GLC mentioned it about your sig technically being within the rules.... it takes up WAY too much room at 800x600. This is what I see... and while the image is within guidlines, the sig is not.

**Alaron** · 01-30-2005, 05:35 PM

2560x1024

17" LCD and 17"CRT in Dual Monitor.

**thefultonhow** · 01-30-2005, 05:46 PM

HAL and GLC -- thanks for the input from a moderator perspective. I didn't realize how large a percentage of people ran 1024x768, and I just hadn't thought of the fact that a fair number of people are still on dial-up. I guess I didn't really need to put in the specs for my laptop anyway, so I took those out (although I may add a link to some site later on), and in addition I compressed the JPEG down to 10 KB. Hopefully that should be sufficient for both those on dial-up and those running low resolutions.

Quick question for anybody who knows -- will my image just download once, or does it download separately every time it appears on a page? My hunch is that the former is true, but if it's the latter, it would still kill dial-up people.

netnamakan · 01-30-2005, 06:03 PM

I run 1280 x 1024 on a 17" crt, the 60hz refresh doesn't seem to bother me.

namakan

Tebone1 · 01-30-2005, 06:15 PM

1280x1024 @75 refresh

lil Jimmie · 01-30-2005, 06:16 PM

I just hate scrolling past lengthy sigs.

**HAL9000** · 01-30-2005, 06:28 PM

I agree... I'm still against pictures in sigs all together and brought this up in the admin in 2000. I would rather see either a short quote that represents your personality or a brief (reduced font) description of ones system.

flanzig1 · 01-30-2005, 07:05 PM

1024x768 on 17" CRT
1280x1024 on 21" CRT
1536x2048 on 3mp LCD portrait monochrome monitors at work

Propain · 01-30-2005, 08:01 PM

1024x768 x85mhz refresh rate on a 17" Micron crt and running a small sig as requested by peers

shadowbreaker513 · 01-30-2005, 08:24 PM

Used to run at 1280x1024 on a 17" Digiview CRT. I moved it farther away from me when I got my desk so now I run at 1200x900. It seems when you put the taskbar over the left side of the screen, it lets you use higher rez's without the fisheye effect of having it on the bottom.

TwoRails · 01-30-2005, 10:22 PM

1600x1200 on my main (this) computer. Can't remember the other two off hand...

colecifer · 01-30-2005, 10:44 PM

1024x768 at 60hz. I'd prefer a higher refresh rate but thats all my monitor will do at this resoloution. This is also as high as it will go. Its a fairly cheap 15" crt. I really should replace it, its going out on me. Saving money sucks!

mjkovis · 01-30-2005, 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lil Jimmie

I just hate scrolling past lengthy sigs.

LOL, me too! But I am guilty of forgetting to uncheck my box underneath the reply box all of the time! That said, I will uncheck now...

I run my computer screen at 1280x1024 @ 60 hertz. No problems at all with my Sony LCD.

AK

spyder003 · 01-30-2005, 10:50 PM

1280 x 1024 @ 75Hz 19" CRT

**HAL9000** · 01-30-2005, 11:09 PM

Dang... I don't know how you guys can look at 60Hz and not get a headache.

ghost2003 · 01-30-2005, 11:25 PM

1280 x 1024 @ 72 Hz on a 16" CRT

View Poll Results: What resolution?
less than 1024x768	1	2.00%
1024x768	27	54.00%
1152x864	1	2.00%
larger than 1152x864	21	42.00%
Voters: 50. You may not vote on this poll

01-30-2005, 01:59 PM	#1
thefultonhow Moderator Staff Premium Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD Posts: 2,915	What resolution do you run? So I finally got around to taking a picture of my computer and putting it in my sig, as you can see. Now, my new sig looks fine on my 2001FP (1600x1200 resolution), but I realized when I was testing it out that it probably would start to look crappy at lower resolutions (as in, the picture wouldn't take up the whole left cell -- it would have a kind of letterbox look with borders on the top and bottom). I tested it out, and sure enough, it looks fine on anything 1152x864 or larger... but once you get down to 1024x768, it looks bad. So I was wondering, in a PC enthusiast community such as this, how many people actually run 1024x768? In other words, how many people run a res that makes my sig look bad? In case anybody wonders why I don't just make the image taller, the PCMech rules on images in sigs say they can be a maximum of 125 pixels tall. Mine is exactly that. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ Computer: Intel Core i5-750 2.66 GHz quad-core processor @ 3.71 GHz \| Asus P7P55D-E motherboard \| Crucial 4 GB DDR3-1333 RAM \| nVidia GeForce 8600GT \| 2x WD Caviar Black WD1501FASS 1.5TB hard drives in RAID 1 \| Antec Sonata III case with Antec EarthWatts 500-watt PSU \| Dual Dell UltraSharp 2408WFP 24" widescreens \| Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Other: 2005 Subaru Legacy 2.5GT sedan 5MT \| Samsung Epic 4G Smartphone \| Mamiya M645 1000S medium-format SLR with 55mm f/2.8, 70mm f/2.8, 210mm f/4, teleconverter, 120 and 220 film backs \| Olympus E-PL1 Micro-4/3s DSLR with 14-42mm and 40-150mm lenses

01-30-2005, 02:06 PM	#2
WhatsThisBoxFor? PCMech: Saving Lives Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: England, the United Kingdom Posts: 1,839	It fits my screen perfectly - I run at 1280x1024. But at my school, which is set at 800x600 it will be a different story. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________

01-30-2005, 02:37 PM	#3
pam123 Computing Professor Staff Premium Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Posts: 11,639	I run at 1024 x 768, it's a 17" monitor, and your signature doesn't look too bad. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ Asus M4A77D, 64 X2 6000+, 4 GB Corsair DDR2 800 ram, Radeon 5770. Last edited by pam123; 01-30-2005 at 02:48 PM.

01-30-2005, 02:45 PM	#4
Hi Ho Certified Audio Nut Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Washington State Posts: 7,202	I run at 1024x768 on a 17in monitor. Your signature looks fine to me. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ "I'm not lying. I'm writing fiction with my mouth." - Homer Simpson My Miscelaneous Gallery ASUS P7P55D PRO / Intel Core i7 860 / 8GB Mushkin DDR3 1600 RAM / OCZ Vertex 2 120GB SSD / Seagate 1TB 7200.12 / Asus Radeon 5870 1GB / LG Super-Multi 22x SATA DVD-RW / Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit / Cable Modem / HT Omega Striker 7.1 Sound Card / FSP 700W PSU / Logitech MX1000 Wireless Laser Mouse / Asus 24" 16:9 LCD w/Webcam / Axiom Audiobyte 2.1 Speakers

Need Some Help? Type Your Keywords Here:

Still Need Help? Type Your Keywords Here:

Free Weekly Tech Newsletter

01-30-2005, 02:50 PM	#5
lil Jimmie HOT ROD Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: On the Edge Posts: 4,565	I run at 1024 x 768 for normal use and games at 1280x1024, as far as the sig goes I block all signature images. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ Fast enough 2 get by.....old enough 2 know what not 2 try -You know it was me

01-30-2005, 02:56 PM	#6
diver203_98 Member (9 bit) Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Watsontown, PA. Posts: 408	1024 x 768 on my Gateway 19" monitor 1280 x 768 on my Viewsonic VP201b 20.1" monitor Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

01-30-2005, 03:03 PM	#7
Panama Red Served with Pride Staff Premium Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: near the left coast of Michigan Posts: 14,538	I'm at 1280 x 1024 on my 19" lcd and 1024 x 768 on all my 17" lcd's and crt. Looks fine. I increased the DPI on my 19" to 110% tho. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ Computers have enabled people to make more mistakes faster than almost any invention in history, with the possible exception of tequila and hand guns.

01-30-2005, 03:05 PM	#8
mikezel Member (10 bit) Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Toronto Posts: 894	1024 x 768 on my 17" Dell CRT Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

01-30-2005, 03:51 PM	#9
*glc* Forum Administrator Staff Premium Member Join Date: May 2000 Location: Joplin MO Posts: 36,460	1280x1024. That said, enthusiast forum or not, we firmly believe in keeping this place friendly for everyone - which means low resolutions and dialup. Your sig, although very tasteful and well done and technically within the rules, could be overwhelming on a low res screen. If you wish to use it, I'd ask you to only use it once per thread, not in every post you make. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter Last edited by glc; 01-30-2005 at 03:55 PM.

01-30-2005, 04:15 PM	#10
RJ Member (14 bit) Join Date: Feb 2000 Location: Offenbach/Main (Germany) Posts: 8,485	1024x768 here. It's the max res that my 15" TFT supports. RJ Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ All's right with the world when your PC is working right.

01-30-2005, 04:22 PM	#12
raftero Member (11 bit) Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: lometa,tx. Posts: 1,399	1280x1024 Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ claude intel d850mv 1.6a 512 rambus ATI8500le solid as a rock. intel e5200 2.5 P5KPL-CM 2 gig memory also solid

01-30-2005, 05:20 PM	#14
Force Flow Barefoot on the Moon! Staff Premium Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Northeastern USA Posts: 13,285	1024x758 on a 17" CRT. On workstations I use with larger screens, I sometimes crank it up to 1280x1024 Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ There are two secrets to staying young, being happy, and achieving success. You have to laugh and find humor every day, and you have to have a dream.

01-30-2005, 05:35 PM	#16
Alaron Kickin' it Staff Premium Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: USA Posts: 7,723	2560x1024 17" LCD and 17"CRT in Dual Monitor. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ Fold for PCMech: Team 13761

01-30-2005, 05:46 PM	#17
thefultonhow Moderator Staff Premium Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD Posts: 2,915	HAL and GLC -- thanks for the input from a moderator perspective. I didn't realize how large a percentage of people ran 1024x768, and I just hadn't thought of the fact that a fair number of people are still on dial-up. I guess I didn't really need to put in the specs for my laptop anyway, so I took those out (although I may add a link to some site later on), and in addition I compressed the JPEG down to 10 KB. Hopefully that should be sufficient for both those on dial-up and those running low resolutions. Quick question for anybody who knows -- will my image just download once, or does it download separately every time it appears on a page? My hunch is that the former is true, but if it's the latter, it would still kill dial-up people. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

01-30-2005, 06:03 PM	#18
netnamakan Member (10 bit) Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: W. Canada Posts: 579	I run 1280 x 1024 on a 17" crt, the 60hz refresh doesn't seem to bother me. namakan Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

01-30-2005, 06:15 PM	#19
Tebone1 Member (6 bit) Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Long Island NY Posts: 45	1280x1024 @75 refresh Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

01-30-2005, 06:16 PM	#20
lil Jimmie HOT ROD Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: On the Edge Posts: 4,565	I just hate scrolling past lengthy sigs. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

01-30-2005, 06:28 PM	#21
HAL9000 Red-eyed Moderator Staff Premium Member Join Date: Dec 1999 Location: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada Posts: 17,525	I agree... I'm still against pictures in sigs all together and brought this up in the admin in 2000. I would rather see either a short quote that represents your personality or a brief (reduced font) description of ones system. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

01-30-2005, 07:05 PM	#22
flanzig1 Wrench Bender Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Plymouth,MN Posts: 5,949	1024x768 on 17" CRT 1280x1024 on 21" CRT 1536x2048 on 3mp LCD portrait monochrome monitors at work Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ "When sliding down the banister of life; look out for splinters pointing up."

01-30-2005, 08:01 PM	#23
Propain Member (10 bit) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ottawa, Canada Posts: 1,012	1024x768 x85mhz refresh rate on a 17" Micron crt and running a small sig as requested by peers Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ 3.40 AMD Phenom II X4 965--4G OCZ DDR3---Asus 5770 ATI Radeon----INTEL 78G SSD drive

01-30-2005, 08:24 PM	#24
shadowbreaker513 Soopa Squishy Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 1,175	Used to run at 1280x1024 on a 17" Digiview CRT. I moved it farther away from me when I got my desk so now I run at 1200x900. It seems when you put the taskbar over the left side of the screen, it lets you use higher rez's without the fisheye effect of having it on the bottom. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ Intel Core 2 Duo E6420 / EVGA NF68-T1 680i SLI / EVGA 320mb 8800GTS / Western Digital Raptor 74GB / 4x1024 Mushkin eXtreme Performance / OCZ Modstream 520w / Antec P180

01-30-2005, 10:22 PM	#25
TwoRails Member (14 bit) Premium Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: The Great NorthWest Posts: 12,594	1600x1200 on my main (this) computer. Can't remember the other two off hand... Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

01-30-2005, 10:44 PM	#26
colecifer Member (9 bit) Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Kansas City(westwood), KS Posts: 458	1024x768 at 60hz. I'd prefer a higher refresh rate but thats all my monitor will do at this resoloution. This is also as high as it will go. Its a fairly cheap 15" crt. I really should replace it, its going out on me. Saving money sucks! Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

01-30-2005, 10:50 PM	#28
spyder003 Blizzard Fanboy Join Date: May 2003 Location: Northrend Posts: 1,411	1280 x 1024 @ 75Hz 19" CRT Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ EVGA 750i SLI - EVGA 9800 GX2 - Intel Q6700 - 4GB Corsair PC6400 - 1TB Seagate HDD - X-fi Gamer - Logitech G51 5.1 - ViewSonic 22" WS - Vista Premium

Subscribe to THE INSIDER

Need Some Help? Type Your Keywords Here:

Still Need Help? Type Your Keywords Here:

Free Weekly Tech Newsletter

01-30-2005, 11:09 PM	#29
HAL9000 Red-eyed Moderator Staff Premium Member Join Date: Dec 1999 Location: Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada Posts: 17,525	Dang... I don't know how you guys can look at 60Hz and not get a headache. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter

01-30-2005, 11:25 PM	#30
ghost2003 Lest we forget Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,870	1280 x 1024 @ 72 Hz on a 16" CRT Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter __________________ redqueen: Antec Sonata, Pentium-D 2.5GHz, MSI G31M3-L, 2GB ram, 320 GB HDD, OpenBSD hal9000: Lenovo T61, 2GB ram, 120 GB HDD, FreeBSD

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread: