Win 7 HDMI and poor text clarity

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bob Newman
  • Start date Start date
B

Bob Newman

I am not sure if this would be considered a hardware or software issue so I
will double post. Please forgive me.

I am using a 19" HD flat panel TV as an external monitor for my laptop (Win
7). Text was crisp and clear with the RGB connection but when I switched to
HDMI (to get the audio also) the text got pretty blurry (graphics are still
pretty good). I've tried adjusting the resolution, the Clear Type text, and
the Smaller 100% and Medium 125% settings but nothing seems to help. I've
also tried various adjustments on the TV to no avail. Suggestions please.

Thanks... Bob
 
try changing the resolution and/or refresh rate.
Click to expand...

To expand on that: if the external monitor has a different resolution from
the the built-in one, then unless you (the OP) set the two monitors
separately to their respective native resolutions, you will have what you
describe.

Of course, once you do that, you get other problems, e.g., things might fit
on one screen but not the other.
 
Hello DanS.
You're a fracking cretin.

First off, loss and hence noise become significant with length.
Yes I am an EE.
Who are you?
An "M.V.P.? MWAHAHAHAHAHA.
Do you know the difference between Butterworth & Chebychev Filters?
Or Friis formula?

You see in American, the term engineer is now applied eaully to a high-
school diploma holder who drives a train, a software "troubleshooter"
aka MSCE Cetified "engineer", and a real engineer. But in EuraAsia
they still distinguish between two. In frnech it's "ingénieur" whuch
is of the same root as "ingenuity"
You know nothing about RF and highspeed Digital signaling if you buy
$10 HDMI cable for any substantial length over 2-3 meters - only
exception could be someone desperate selling it on Ebay from China,
made from toxic plastics and cheap labor.
Quality DOES MATTER.

Now as of audiophile testing.
There's an exception from each rule - yes there's many people whose
ears are too generic to hear the difference between a bottom and top
quality cable.
Or difference between Kenwood or JVC garbage and Marantz or Rotel on
the other side. Sorry for you guys. You're not an audipphile.
But there's also people to whom music is a daily, necessary ingredient
of their life and their ears can pickup subtle degradation resulting
from usage of inferior cables when running over substantial length
when mutlichannel audio-video is jammed into one highdensity cable.
In this case the obvious choice is Opticfiber.
But you're correct that over a short distance, say 1 meter, the
difference is only sensed by a selected elite musician's ears, to
which none of us belongs.

Now if you haven't used the term "moron" I'd not have used the term
"cretin".
Tête-à-tête, Monsegnor Cretin.
 
This is to DanS.
Not to Stan, obviously.
DanS's posting does nto appear on Microsoft Forum but does appear on
GoogleGroups which do not practice censorship, unlike here.

Here's my point.
Stan Starinski is correct - bravo.
But DanS is not correct - two thumbs DOWN.

Here's my response to DanS:
Hello DanS.
You're a fracking cretin.

First off, loss and hence noise become significant with length.
Yes I am an EE.
Who are you?
An "M.V.P.? MWAHAHAHAHAHA.
Do you know the difference between Butterworth & Chebychev Filters? Or
Friis formula?

You see in American, the term engineer is now applied eaully to a
high-school diploma holder who drives a train, a software "troubleshooter"
aka MSCE Cetified "engineer", and a real engineer. But in EuraAsia they
still distinguish between two. In frnech it's "ingénieur" whuch is of the
same root as "ingenuity"
You know nothing about RF and highspeed Digital signaling if you buy $10
HDMI cable for any substantial length over 2-3 meters - only exception could
be someone desperate selling it on Ebay from China, made from toxic plastics
and cheap labor.
Quality DOES MATTER.

Now as of audiophile testing.
There's an exception from each rule - yes there's many people whose ears are
too generic to hear the difference between a bottom and top quality cable.
Or difference between Kenwood or JVC garbage and Marantz or Rotel on the
other side. Sorry for you guys. You're not an audipphile.
But there's also people to whom music is a daily, necessary ingredient of
their life and their ears can pickup subtle degradation resulting from usage
of inferior cables when running over substantial length when mutlichannel
audio-video is jammed into one highdensity cable. In this case the obvious
choice is Opticfiber.
But you're correct that over a short distance, say 1 meter, the difference
is only sensed by a selected elite musician's ears, to which none of us
belongs.

Now if you haven't used the term "moron" I'd not have used the term
"cretin".
Tête-à-tête, Monsegnor Cretin.
 
now i'm :confused:
Click to expand...

Any LCD monitor displays pictures better at its native resolution, which
means one data pixel per screen pixel. E.g., 1024x768 is the only
resolution that looks good on a monitor with 1024x768 pixels.

The OP possibly is sending the same picture (I mean with the same
resolution) to the built-in monitor and to the external monitor, but the
two monitors might have different resolutions, i.e., different numbers of
pixels on their screens.

So perhaps the external monitor is getting a picture it can't display well.
 
Back
Top