# Any Win98-and-graphics experts here?



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

I recently purchased a Samsung 151s LCD monitor.

But I'm having problems with it, because scrolling is sluggish, graphics have delayed display (unlike my previous CRT), and text is jagged.

My resolution is set at 1024 x 768, but my refresh rate is problematic. Because when I set it at 60 hz, and it asks "Did Windows appear correctly?" the display appears even blurrier than the 75 hz (which was blurry as well). But then, even when I "apply" 60 hz, my system insists on auto-setting it back to 75 hz.

I have an integrated video card, but when I spoke w/the Samsung support guy, he said that the problem lies with either my system (Win98) or else with my CPU, but not with my graphics card.

He said my jagged display has to do with the refresh rate, and it's a problem with my Win98 which is not holding the rate at 60, but rather (inflexibly) insisting on remaining at the old setting of my CRT

And re: the delayed scrolling and sluggish graphics, he said that's related to
EITHER my Win98
OR my CPU

Is there any Win98 expert here who can offer a solution?


----------



## pyritechips (Jun 3, 2002)

Hello:



> But then, even when I "apply" 60 hz, my system insists on auto-setting it back to 75 hz.


May I ask you why you want a lower refresh rate? 75hz is far better than 60hz. The lower the rate the more flicker, or "jagged" it is.

When you go into display properties your OS and card will determine how high a rate is safe for your monitor. Select a rate about 75 or 85hz. If the display looks sharp and steady then leave it there.


----------



## pyritechips (Jun 3, 2002)

P.S.

If your fonts look rough, right click the desktop and get display properties. Click the effects tab and check the "Smooth edges of screen fonts".


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

The sluggish scrolling has nothing to do with the monitor. It could be caused by cpu overload, or it could be that you have inadvertantly lowered or disabled hardware acceleration for the video card. Check by right clicking on My Computer and selecting Properties > Performance > Graphics. The hardware slider should be full to the right

If lowered hardware acceleration is not the cause, give us a post of the HijackThis Scanlog:

http://www.tomcoyote.org/hjt/

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by jagged graphics. LCD monitors do provide more detail and this can look jagged with some fonts.

One improvement that I've seen is to use Microsoft's :

http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cleartype/default.htm?fname= &fsize=


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

Well, I just smoothed the edges, but now (even if it's more rounded) the display became more blurry/blotchy sorta like writing with a fountain pen and then using an ink blotter.

My V-Frequency is at 75 Hz, and when I asked it to "show all the refresh rates" it gave me a warning that:



> "using refresh rates not compatible with your monitor can cause permanent damage"


----------



## Dick Lewis (Jun 18, 2003)

I would check the monitor home page, some cards and monitors just dont play well together, Then make sure both have the latest drivers. then check the monitor on someone elses computer.
Not to many people/techs are used to LCD problems yet, there still kinda new because of their price


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

The refresh rate will not affect scrolling, just flicker. Best to leave it at 75 hz. That is why the Monitor driver is locking you in there.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Rollin' Rog:_
> *The hardware slider should be full to the right*


*

It is fully to the right




If lowered hardware acceleration is not the cause, give us a post of the HijackThis Scanlog:

http://www.tomcoyote.org/hjt/

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by jagged graphics. LCD monitors do provide more detail and this can look jagged with some fonts.

One improvement that I've seen is to use Microsoft's :

http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cleartype/default.htm?fname= &fsize=

Click to expand...

*I have Win98, so if you're referring to cleartype, I'm not sure it would work on my system.

Here's the scanlog:

StartupList report, 7/4/03, 5:01:13 AM
StartupList version: 1.40.1
Started from : C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\_ENZTMP\STARTUPLIST.EXE
Detected: Windows 98 Gold (Win9x 4.10.1998)
Detected: Internet Explorer v6.00 (6.00.2600.0000)
* Using default options
==================================================

Running processes:

C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\KERNEL32.DLL
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\MSGSRV32.EXE
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\MPREXE.EXE
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\mmtask.tsk
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\SA3DSRV.EXE
C:\PROGRAM FILES\GRISOFT\AVG6\AVGSERV9.EXE
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\ZONELABS\VSMON.EXE
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\DDHELP.EXE
C:\WINDOWS\EXPLORER.EXE
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\SYSTRAY.EXE
C:\PROGRAM FILES\GRISOFT\AVG6\AVGCC32.EXE
C:\PROGRAM FILES\REGPROT.EXE
C:\PROGRAM FILES\ZONE LABS\ZONEALARM\ZONEALARM.EXE
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\RNAAPP.EXE
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\TAPISRV.EXE
C:\PROGRAM FILES\ENZIP\ENZIP.EXE
C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\_ENZTMP\STARTUPLIST.EXE

--------------------------------------------------

Listing of startup folders:

Shell folders Common Startup:
[C:\WINDOWS\All Users\Start Menu\Programs\StartUp]
ZoneAlarm.lnk = C:\Program Files\Zone Labs\ZoneAlarm\zonealarm.exe

--------------------------------------------------

Autorun entries from Registry:
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run

ScanRegistry = c:\windows\scanregw.exe /autorun
SystemTray = SysTray.Exe
LoadPowerProfile = Rundll32.exe powrprof.dll,LoadCurrentPwrScheme
Aureal A3D Interactive Audio Init = A3dInit.exe
AVG_CC = C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\avgcc32.exe /STARTUP
RegProt = c:\program files\regprot.exe /start

--------------------------------------------------

Autorun entries from Registry:
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\RunServices

LoadPowerProfile = Rundll32.exe powrprof.dll,LoadCurrentPwrScheme
Aureal A3D Interactive Audio = sa3dsrv.exe
Avgserv9.exe = C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\Avgserv9.exe
TrueVector = C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\ZONELABS\VSMON.EXE -service

--------------------------------------------------

Enumerating Active Setup stub paths:
HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Active Setup\Installed Components
(* = disabled by HKCU twin)

[{89820200-ECBD-11cf-8B85-00AA005B4383}] *
StubPath = rundll32.exe advpack.dll,UserInstStubWrapper {89820200-ECBD-11cf-8B85-00AA005B4383}

[PerUser_LinkBar_URLs] *
StubPath = c:\windows\COMMAND\sulfnbk.exe /L

[{44BBA840-CC51-11CF-AAFA-00AA00B6015C}] *
StubPath = rundll32.exe advpack.dll,UserInstStubWrapper {44BBA840-CC51-11CF-AAFA-00AA00B6015C}

[{44BBA851-CC51-11CF-AAFA-00AA00B6015C}] *
StubPath = rundll32.exeadvpack.dll

[>IEPerUser] *
StubPath = RUNDLL32.EXE IEDKCS32.DLL,BrandIE4 SIGNUP

[{7790769C-0471-11d2-AF11-00C04FA35D02}] *
StubPath = rundll32.exe advpack.dll,UserInstStubWrapper {7790769C-0471-11d2-AF11-00C04FA35D02}

[{9EF0045A-CDD9-438e-95E6-02B9AFEC8E11}] *
StubPath = C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\updcrl.exe -e -u C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\verisignpub1.crl

--------------------------------------------------

Load/Run keys from C:\WINDOWS\WIN.INI:

load=
run=

--------------------------------------------------

Shell & screensaver key from C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM.INI:

Shell=Explorer.exe
SCRNSAVE.EXE=
drivers=mmsystem.dll power.drv

--------------------------------------------------

Checking for EXPLORER.EXE instances:

C:\WINDOWS\Explorer.exe: PRESENT!

C:\Explorer.exe: not present
C:\WINDOWS\Explorer\Explorer.exe: not present
C:\WINDOWS\System\Explorer.exe: not present
C:\WINDOWS\System32\Explorer.exe: not present
C:\WINDOWS\Command\Explorer.exe: not present

--------------------------------------------------

C:\WINDOWS\WININIT.BAK listing:
(Created 27/5/2003, 7:13:56)

[rename]
NUL=C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\$AVGUPD$.483
C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\version.avg=C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\$AVGUPD$.483\version.avg
C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\avgk32.dll=C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\$AVGUPD$.483\avgk32.dll
C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\avgse.exe=C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\$AVGUPD$.483\avgse.exe
C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\avgcc32.exe=C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\$AVGUPD$.483\avgcc32.exe
C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\avgw.exe=C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\$AVGUPD$.483\avgw.exe
C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\avgcore.vxd=C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\$AVGUPD$.483\avgcore.vxd
C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\setup.exe=C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\$AVGUPD$.483\setup.exe
C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\avgscan.exe=C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\$AVGUPD$.483\avgscan.exe
C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\avg.ovl=C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\$AVGUPD$.483\avg.ovl
C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\avg6.avi=C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\$AVGUPD$.483\avg6.avi

--------------------------------------------------

C:\AUTOEXEC.BAT listing:

@C:\PROGRA~1\GRISOFT\AVG6\bootup.exe
@ECHO OFF
SET BLASTER=A220 I5 D1
IF EXIST \CPQS\BACKWEB\PROGRAM\BACKWEB.EXE \CPQS\TOOLS\MINIFER2.EXE CREV=,200
ECHO bw_workgroup=,"Service Connection">>%DSHD%\CPQS\BACKWEB\USERPROF.DAT
IF EXIST \PIPOST.BAT CALL \PIPOST.BAT
IF EXIST \PIPOST.BAT DEL \PIPOST.BAT

--------------------------------------------------

C:\CONFIG.SYS listing:

DEVICE=C:\WINDOWS\HIMEM.SYS
DEVICE=C:\WINDOWS\EMM386.EXE NOEMS
DOS=HIGH,AUTO,UMB
DEVICEHIGH=C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\CPQIDECD.SYS /D:IDECD001
FILESHIGH=40
BUFFERSHIGH=20,4

--------------------------------------------------

C:\WINDOWS\DOSSTART.BAT listing:

@echo off
LH C:\WINDOWS\COMMAND\MSCDEX.EXE /D:IDECD001 /M:12
SET MOUSE=C:\COMPAQ\IMOUSE
LH C:\COMPAQ\IMOUSE\IMOUSE.COM

--------------------------------------------------

Checking for superhidden extensions:

.lnk: HIDDEN! (arrow overlay: yes)
.pif: HIDDEN! (arrow overlay: yes)
.exe: not hidden
.com: not hidden
.bat: not hidden
.hta: not hidden
.scr: not hidden
.shs: HIDDEN!
.shb: HIDDEN!
.vbs: not hidden
.vbe: not hidden
.wsh: not hidden
.scf: HIDDEN! (arrow overlay: NO!)
.url: HIDDEN! (arrow overlay: yes)
.js: not hidden
.jse: not hidden

--------------------------------------------------

Enumerating Task Scheduler jobs:

Tune-up Application Start.job

--------------------------------------------------

Enumerating Download Program Files:

[Shockwave Flash Object]
InProcServer32 = C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM\MACROMED\FLASH\FLASH.OCX
CODEBASE = http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab

--------------------------------------------------
End of report, 7,019 bytes
Report generated in 0.987 seconds

Command line options:
/verbose - to add additional info on each section
/complete - to include empty sections and unsuspicious data
/force9x - to include Win9x-only startups even if running on WinNT
/forcent - to include WinNT-only startups even if running on Win9x
/forceall - to include all Win9x and WinNT startups, regardless of platform
/history - to list version history only


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Dick Lewis:_
> *I would check the monitor home page, some cards and monitors just dont play well together, Then make sure both have the latest drivers. then check the monitor on someone elses computer.
> *


I don't think the fault is with the monitor, so I won't bother checking. It's too much trouble anyway, in my case.

As for the rest, can you please explain? I don't understand what you mean by monitor home page, and "latest drivers".


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

You're right, I forgot about the operating system requirement.

I don't see anything in those startups that should be bogging things down. How fast is your cpu?

Oh yes, one other thing that can make quite a difference is having the color depth set too high. Make sure it's not above 16 bit true color.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Rollin' Rog:_
> *I don't see anything in those startups that should be bogging things down. How fast is your cpu?
> 
> Oh yes, one other thing that can make quite a difference is having the color depth set too high. Make sure it's not above 16 bit true color. *


It's set at 16-bit high color

My system resources are 58% free (is that bad?

I have:
Compaq AMD-K6 3D processor
Intel MMX tech.
96 mb RAM

So, is there no solution to my problem?
For one thing, if my system would only let me set a resolution with a higher array of pixels, I bet the problem with the jaggedness would clear. Because I'm able to SEE the pixels, and that's the reason for the jaggedness that's causing my eyes to hurt.

But I can't understand why suddenly, upon switching to the LCD (from my KDS CRT) it suddenly scrolls sluggishly, plus delayed graphics display. Because I didn't suddenly add alot of icons to my desktop or anything. I do know, that during the process of installation of my monitor, Win98 decided to jump in and override the installation process by automatically setting up the monitor the way IT decided to. So the only thing I can think of, is that maybe Win98 clogged up my memory with some non-essentials that I was able to do without before.

*Note that quite a while ago, while I was on the KDS CRT, there was a phone support guy who had told me a way to optimize my speed by clearing some Startups, and indeed it worked well. At the time, this is what I did, with that guy's guidance:*

Start, RUN, msconfig, OK, Startup
Then I removed checkmarks from everything except:
scan registry
task monitor
systray
load power profile
backweb
zonealarm
AVG

*Well, now I checked again & found that these were checkmarked:*

Scan registry
System tray
Load power profile
Aureal A3d interactive audio init
AVG_CC
RegProt
Load Power Profile
Aureal A3d interactive audio
avgserv9.exe
truevector
zonealarm
*NOTE THAT BACKWEB & TASK MONITOR LACK CHECKMARKS*

Does all this provide a clue?


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Stuff that is not checkmarked is not running and so out of the picture entirely. Taskmon just optimizes the arrangement of programs during a defrag. If you wish to take advantage of it being UNchecked you should also delete the Applog folder in c:\windows. It is a "hidden" folder, so you have to have 'show all files' checked in Folder Options > View.

Backweb is just used for certain software updates, it is also often considered "spyware", leaving it unchecked is a good idea.

===========================

To verify that NOTHING in the startup group is affecting the scrolling you could temporarily boot up with all but ScanRegistry and Systray disabled, or just uncheck the whole Startup Group.

=============================

If your settings are as you say they are, I'm puzzled about the slow scrolling, but not the 'jagged' display.

You say when you installed the Monitor, Windows installed its own settings. Well, that's to be expected on first detection. What you then must do is install the driver disk that came with the Monitor. You should have got one. If not, you may need to go to the Samsung website and download the file for it. Then go to Display settings and click "change Monitor" and browse to the location where you have the file.
=======================

One thing you might want to do is boot up in Safe Mode and go to the Device Manager. Look for duplicate and invalid Monitor entries and delete them all. Especially if you still see kds there.
==================================

58% free resources is fine for general surfing, but too low for a fresh boot. I think you would see a higher figure if you check first thing after booting. This doesn't affect scrolling though.

If one of those processes is taking up too much cpu time you need a process monitor to identify it. Process Explorer can be used for this:

http://www.sysinternals.com/

When you run it, ignore "system idle process" which is unused cpu time and should be very high.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

Rollin Rog, hi again  & sorry for the delay in responding.

OK, here's what I did thus far, then maybe we'll take it from there:

In Safe Mode, here's what displayed in Device Manager Monitors:

Compaq Presario FP500 Flat Panel Monitor
Compaq Presario MV400 Color Monitor
Compaq Presario MV500 Color Monitor
Compaq Presario MV700 Color Monitor
Plug n Play Monitor
Plug n Play Monitor

I don't understand - I have the SyncMaster 151s Flat Panel (so why does it say Compaq?

Also, which of the above (if any) should I remove? Is that what's causing my problems?

P.S. I failed to mention that upon bootup, the desktop display sorta ripples swimmingly like the ocean.


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Well I would remove them all. But here's the rub, Windows is probably looking for the only "Flat Panel" drivers it can find on your system, and evidently those are Compaqs.

You SHOULD have gotten a drivers disk with your new Monitor. Where be it? That is what you need to install the drivers.

If necessary, you can download from Samsung, a devil of a site to navigate.

These appear to be the correct ones for Win9x, but I'd suggest you pay a visit to the site personally.

http://www.samsungusa.com/SamsungUSA/DOWNLOAD/20030104/w9x151s.exe

http://www.samsung.com/support/

I don't know if we are barking up the wrong tree here. Typically "ripple" scrolling like that is a function of hardware acceleration or overload of the Video Memory on the video card using too high a color depth, but you say you have ruled that out.

Have you verified the problem goes away if you switch back to your old Monitor?

To install the new drivers, download them if you don't have the disk, remove all the old ones in Safe Mode, reboot to Safe mode, and run the exe.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

I _had_ gotten a driver disk with the Samsung. Problem was, it had not automatically installed the driver.

When I followed your instructions & deleted all the monitors in Safe mode, I then Restarted, whereupon Windows was about to kick in & automatically install drivers. So instead of clicking "Next" I clicked "Cancel".

Then, once again (deja vu), following your instructions, I inserted the SyncMaster driver disk.

I then clicked the area where it said "Install Driver"

It then showed a menu saying
"automatic install"
and "manual install"

But the automatic install was not clickable (a "hand" did not display)
Only the manual install was clickable, whereupon all it did was tell you to download the driver installation from the Samsung site.

I had gone into that site upon initially connecting my monitor (when I purchased it). The site was clear as mud & I waded through various webpages, till I got to something that told me to download the Samsung instructions onto a blank disk. So I then went to DOS to format a diskette & proceeded to do that. For all the good it did.

NOTHING was automatic, it was of no use.

What beats me, is how am I able to presently view my monitor without there being any monitors defined in Device Manager? Weird.

P.S. I had also tried inserting the Syncmaster Driver-CD while in Safe Mode, but absolutely nothing happened. Is that what you meant by instructing me to "run the .exe"? Another thing: Every time I start my computer now, Windows kicks in & wants to install my drivers, but what's weird is that my monitor is displaying the exact same way whether I have monitors defined or not, so why should I want Windows to kick in & put the resolution back to 800 x 600 plus small font, etc.?


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

It appears the download is a self-extracting zip file. These have exe extensions. Usually they will produce a new folder with a set of files in them, one of which will have a .inf extension. If that's the case, then you right click on the .inf file and select install, OR you can simply point the Windows installation wizard to it, usually best method of installing drivers.

If it just produes a .zip folder, then you must copy the files in that folder out to a new folder first.

I'd test it out but I'm not sure that some of these can be self installing when run, so let me know exactly what happens when you try to "open" that file.

You don't have any CD-Rom drivers in Safe Mode, so no, that's not what I meant -- I wanted you to download the file to the hard drive at that point.

By the way, is there any chance you have more than one Video Adapter Device showing in the Device Manager? This could be an explanation for the Monitor and display behavior, as those will be associated with specific devices.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

OK, re: the jagged/blurry text:

For the first time I clicked on the download url that _you_ gave, which (unlike the download that I found on the Samsung site) _was_ the right one.

But here's what happened:

When I clicked the INF file, a "merry loop" began. It said:



> Cannot find installed monitor section. Please reboot first


So I rebooted. Then Windows kicked in and I cancelled it (deja vu, see above posts).

Then I clicked the INF file, 
loop de loop de loop...
"Madam I'm Adam I Madam I'm Adam...


Now, about the delayed graphics, that doesn't seem to be a problem anymore. It may have just been a temp. slow connection with Access4less recently. I think that may have been it. Sorry about the confusion on that score! 

Same thing _MAY_ go for the delayed scrolling. See, (even though this may be a matter of perspective, because my eyes _are_ very photosensitive perhaps due to my mercury toxicity, it _does_ seem that scrolling is harder on my eyes since I got this LCD. I can't explain, it's sorta like, with each Page-Down or with each Page-Up, there's a nano-second when the display "disappears" unlike my previous CRT. Can you relate to what I mean?


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

With .inf files you don't try to "run" them like others. You must Right Click on them and select "install". I don't know if you were doing that.

But in the case of a monitor driver, the best procedure is to go to the Display settings applet, click the "change monitor" tab, where ever it may be there (usually Settings > Advanced > Monitor), check "display a list of all the drivers in a specific location, and Point, by browsing (click "have disk") to that folder where you have the .inf file 

After doing it, go back to the Display settings applet and see if it Specifically identifies the Samsung monitor. If it does, you've installed the driver successfully.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Rollin' Rog:_
> *With .inf files you don't try to "run" them like others. You must Right Click on them and select "install". I don't know if you were doing that.*


*

When I right clicked, there was no Install listed in the drop-down, but rather "Open", and more options. So I tried clicking "Open" whereupon the same loop-de-loop (Cannot find installed Monitor, please reboot) displayed.




But in the case of a monitor driver, the best procedure is to go to the Display settings applet, click the "change monitor" tab, where ever it may be there (usually Settings > Advanced > Monitor), check "display a list of all the drivers in a specific location, and Point, by browsing (click "have disk") to that folder where you have the .inf file

Click to expand...

???
Here's what I have:

Display> Settings>
(unknown monitor) on 3D RAGE

Display> Settings> Advanced> Color Management
Current Monitor:
Default Monitor Profile: <none>

(In the Add menu, here's some of the listing:
Cpqmv (several), Diamond, Hitachi, Mnb22 (several), Mnp22 (several), Trinitron, NEC, etc.




After doing it, go back to the Display settings applet and see if it Specifically identifies the Samsung monitor. If it does, you've installed the driver successfully.

Click to expand...

*


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Do I understand correctly there is no Monitor tab in Display Settings and no Monitor any longer shown in the Device Manager? In either of those places you should see a "change monitor" or "update" driver tab which launches the driver wizard. Then you follow the directions I gave.

If neither of those now exists, you must go to the Control Panel > Add/New hardware wizard and either try 'search for new hardware', or 'select from a list'. If the latter case you want to get a list of choices. Ignore them all and click "have disk". Then Browse to and select the folder with the .inf file in it and continue.

I'm surprised there was no 'install' option in your right click menu if that was a .inf file. You may have a registry entry missing, I'm going to look into that.

If you run *regedit* can you navigate to this key:

HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\inffile\shell\Install\command

>> with 'comman' highlighted, do you see on the right:

*c:\windows\rundll.exe setupx.dll,InstallHinfSection DefaultInstall 132 %1*

?


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Rollin' Rog:_
> *Do I understand correctly there is no Monitor tab in Display Settings and no Monitor any longer shown in the Device Manager? In either of those places you should see a "change monitor" or "update" driver tab which launches the driver wizard. Then you follow the directions I gave.*


*

See Post #14 above. 
http://forums.techguy.org/showthread.php?postid=961589#post961589. 
(You had told me to delete all of the monitors listed in Safe Mode) which I did. Including the Cpq flat panel that had been listed.

As for the Add/New hardware, I first have to attend to something, then I'll get to it. See ya *


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

I know I had you delete them, but Windows is expected to automatically detect and replace the entry. However when that doesn't happen, you must use the Add Hardware wizard.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

Uh, my head is swimming from all the talk about driver tabs & driver wizards  (way over my head)

Anyway, I followed your instructions, and the Windows Wizard automatically brought me to a dialog box with the search or select options.
Since it defaulted that the Search radio button was chosen, I left it at that, and went thru all the Next's (etc.) automatically.

And, you'll be happy to hear  that Windows correctly designated Syncmaster as my exclusive monitor which now displays in my Device Manager.

Now where do I go from here? Since my text is still jagged & blurry-ish unlike my previous KDS CRT.
Though, I must admit, that this monitor does seem to be emitting less EMFs (which was why I desperately sought to purchase a flat-panel). But it seems I'm exchanging the EMFs for eye pain (since my eyes are also sensitive thanks to my amalgam toxicity.

BTW, I also ran the *regedit* and the exact string of text that you mentioned _did_ display on the right. So that's fine.


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

If you now see the Samsung monitor correctly identified when you visit the Display Properties or Device Manager it is correctly installed. You will want to verify this after a reboot or two as the information added through the New Hardware wizard can get lost and need to be added again through the Display Properties > Change Monitor applet. It's a Windows bug.


I'm not sure there is much that can be done for the jagged text other than what was already described. I found the same thing when first setting up my Flat Panel display, but fortunately MS offers the ClearType tuner for XP.

One thing you might experiment with is different font types, and perhaps an 800x600 screen resolution instead on 1024x768. I would try the lower resolution first. I know the lower resolution seems counter intuitive to you, but that's just what lower resolution does: you don't see some of the pixels which give the jagged look.

Different font selections for IE can be selected through Internet Options. Before making any change I would strongly advise that you WRITE down the current selection so you can easily return to it after making changes.

It is also possible to make font choices through Display Properties > Appearance. The same advice goes here double. Make sure you know what you have to begin with, because the changes are hard to predict. Usually the defaults work best.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

I had already tried the 800 x 600 resolution & its much worse.

As for the fonts it's no use because fonts within any particular URL override any fonts I'd specify through my Options anyway.

Why doesn't MS offer ClearType for Win98? I don't understand.

I'm also confused because I'm able to *sorta see* the pixels in my screen. Wouldn't that indicate that the Samsung monitor's pixels aren't spaced together enough?

Or is it really the fault of Win98?

It's not right that MS doesn't offer this - don't they realize that peoples' eyes hurt? Maybe I should sue them for eye pain! Like, I wouldn't expect monetary compensation - rather just ClearType for Win98.

At the time that Win98 was created, were there LCD flat panels in existence yet? Because if so, then wouldn't there be legal grounds for a lawsuit? Y'know, just to get some action...


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Lol, no I don't think you can blame Microsoft. It's not really an operating system problem. Some people are just more sensitive to this I think than others.

I don't know exactly why ClearType isn't available for 9x, I just assume the Operating system doesn't have the wherewithall to run it.

But I'm surprised you tell me the 800x resolution made it worse. Perhaps I just don't have a clear picture of what you are seeing.

I wonder if you can post a screenshot, though it might not display as you see it on our screens.

To post a screenshot, you must press ALT+PrintScreen.

You then have the file in the clipboard. It must be pasted into a program like MSPaint and saved as a gif or jpeg. Unfortunately not all versions of MSPaint allow this.

A better alternative is to install a graphics viewer like IrfanView, which has "capture" utilities. It's an excellent freebee and you won't be sorry for installing it. Just don't let it take over all file associations.

http://www.irfanview.com/

Once you have an image saved as a jpeg or gif, you can upload it here as an attachment, just so long as it isn't too large a file size.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

Rollin' Rog, I actually had downloaded IrfanView long ago & over the years found it very handy (and MSpaint very awkward!

OK, now I'll see how the TSG attachment feature works:


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

As you can see, TSG didn't accept it because it was too large. I took a screenshot of your response to me. And the gif is approx. the size of my SyncMaster screen area.

Any idea how I can trim it by using either MSpaint or IrfanView?
If so, how much should I trim off?


----------



## pyritechips (Jun 3, 2002)

Hello jelleym:

1) Open the picture in Irfanview.

2) click Image > Resize/Resample.

3) At the bottom left check Preserve Aspect Ratio.

4) Near the top left it says Set New Size. Make sure it is selected.

5) in the width window choose a smaller size. 500 is good. The height should automatically adjust to the proper porportion.

6) Click ok.

7) On the main Irfanview toolbar click the little floppy, which is "Save AS..."

8) Choose a name and place for the picture to be saved and most importantly, at the bottom in the "Save as type:" box select jpg.

9) Save the new size and format of picture then you should be able to post it here


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

OK, Pyritechips I changed it to 500 x 361.

Here's another attempt, but please note that originally it was a gif, and now you said to save it as jpg (which I did). 

Another thing: I believe I was aware of image resizing, but I thought that makes it proportionally smaller, so would that represent a true representation of my screen?

I thought a truer representation would be to trim some of the original, and retain the same proportion.

Whatever. Here goes:


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

When you upload an attachment, be sure you do NOT use the preview function afterwards or you will have to upload it again.

And the resizing may be a problem, but if the jaggedness is evident to you after the resizing, it should be to us as well. Some people are able to get full size screenshots posted here but darned if I can remember what the file size limit is. I think it will tell you if it gets rejected for that reason. If it tells you, you can experiment with resizing until you just get under it.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

Oh, I didn't know about the preview. I'll try again full size, & if it doesn't take, I'll experiment resizing. For the screenshot, I decided to use a site other than TSG, for a better sample of blurriness.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

WHEW, FINALLY! 
I guess it's bringing coals to newcastle if I tell you that you have to mouseover toward the bottom right of the JPG (whereupon 4 diagonal arrows display) & then click on that arrow-thingee to maximize the JPG so it should be viewable in full size


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Yeah, that's exactly what my flat panel display looks like without the XP cleartype tuner.

In IE, you can try some different fonts; If you want to try a different browser -- Opera7, it gives a little more control over fonts and font sizes, some of which may be more acceptable than others. 

IE doesn't seem to give any control over font sizes other than small, medium, large, etc.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

But I don't think that fonts would help. I already tried changing font size from 125% to 114% and it wasn't any better.

I think it's the fact that there's no ClearType.

Why doesn't MS provide a solution? Don't they realize peoples' eyes are being ruined? I have bad enough problems with my mercury toxicity that has turned me into a basket case. I can do without eye pain on top of that. This isn't a trivial matter!

I think it's a nerve to make people go thru an upgrade to XP just for health purposes - it's like blackmail. I'm so angry at them!  

But anyway, Rollin', I appreciate all your help & patience. Thanks! And if you ever hear of a magic fix, lemme know, kay?


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Will do. It's a shame to have a great Monitor and not be able to enjoy it -- but I don't know of any solution at this time.

You're welcome for the efforts 

I do believe Opera7 is easier on the eyes though without ClearType.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

Reviving this thread, because I just got a new Dell system complete with WinXP and Cleartype, yet now my screen is even blurrier than it was with Win98!

And I tried everything above, including switching from 32 to 16 bit (the latter didn't make a difference), Refresh is at 75hz and it's set at Cleartype. Font is "normal" (large didn't make a difference) and resolution is at 1024x768 (lower resolution wasn't better). I also clicked the "Auto" button on my Samsung SyncMaster LCD, but the text was not made sharper - it's still blurry.


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Can you provide a screen shot?


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

I give up. TSG doesn't allow people to delete posts, & it's making me nuts. (For some reason - that's really creepy - it's keeping on superimposing my old toolbars, which are private.

Thanks anyway. But for sure - my text is blurrier than before.


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Just include the screenshot as a jpeg or gif attachment. You should not have any problem as long as it is under the size limit AND you do not use the Preview function after uploading it.

If you are using Internet Explorer, what text size do you have selected under View > Text ?

And under Internet Options > Fonts, what font styles are selected? I use Web Page > Verdana and Plain Text > Courier New and these work well for me using medium or small text sizing on a 1024x768 screen size.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Rollin' Rog:_
> *If you are using Internet Explorer, what text size do you have selected under View > Text ?*


*
Medium




And under Internet Options > Fonts, what font styles are selected? I use Web Page > Verdana and Plain Text > Courier New and these work well for me using medium or small text sizing on a 1024x768 screen size.

Click to expand...

*Well, I just switched to Verdana (like yourself) but it didn't help. And it was already set to Courier New.

Here's the screenshot:


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

P.S. Note that the above screenshot was done before having switched to Verdana (but it doesn't make a difference anyway


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Well I don't know whether it is because I am using a different monitor, but it doesn't look much different than what I am seeing. Your true type "tuning" may be a little different is all

You also may want to adjust your screen brightness and dim it a little. And if your Video Card has a "gamma" control, you can play with that a little. I'd try to improve the contrast somewhat.

Here is a comparible screen shot from IE


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Rollin' Rog:_
> *Well I don't know whether it is because I am using a different monitor, but it doesn't look much different than what I am seeing. Your true type "tuning" may be a little different is all*


*
So what do I do to tune it?




You also may want to adjust your screen brightness and dim it a little.

Click to expand...

I did that long ago, as well as contrast. Nothing helps. I also clicked the Auto adjust button. Again no dice (all it did was made the screen brighter and really hurt my eyes. But text was till blurry.




And if your Video Card has a "gamma" control, you can play with that a little.

Click to expand...

*??


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

The tuner is on the webpage where you originally activated it, you go through a process of selecting the type display that seems best for you:

http://www.microsoft.com/typography/cleartype/tuner/1.htm

Gamma is a type of brightness control available through your Display options. It's probably not going to make much difference if adjusting Monitor brightness didn't help.

Your current example does not have the jagged look of the Win98 one. That's the main difference Cleartype makes.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

OK, thanks for the link. I'll soon be taking a look at it & getting back to you. Please bear w/me.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

OK, I went through the tuner, but none of the choices they offered made my screen's text any sharper.

I just now decided to try Standard vs. Cleartype & see how I fare with that.

Maybe jaggedness will agree w/me more than blurriness!


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Wish I knew for sure what you were seeing. When you look at my screen shot and compare it to yours, do they look any diferent?

If they don't look any different and both are blurry, then it is a pure hardware problem with the monitor you are using. If they look different and mine is sharper, then it is a configuration issue of some kind, such as choice of type face and size -- though you are forced into the font style of TSG when on this site.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

Rollin' here's the story. When I looked at your screenshot it was just as blurry to me as text I view on my screen. I don't believe it's just the monitor, because this same monitor (Samsung SyncMaster 151s) was clearer when I used the Compaq. But even that wasn't as clear as when I had the KDS CRT.

Also note that bold text is blurrier than non-bold text (regardless whether the setting is Standard or ClearType). Also, I'm finding that the ClearType setting is blurrier than the Standard setting. So I've left it at Standard. But it's still not so clear.

Do you have an LCD monitor? If so, which brand? The reason I'd bought the SyncMaster 151s is because it was highly recommended. Now I'm wondering why. Not only isn't the LCD solving my electrosensitivity, but the blurriness is making me even dizzier than when I had *just* the EMFs from the CRT!


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

I'm using a Dell 1702FP, ('ultrasharp', I think -- they had a question mark after it in the packing list)

I've both seen and read reviews of Samsung Monitors. They are considered top notch. And the ones I've seen seemed every bit as good as mine, although I've mostly seen them displaying graphics, not text.

If this were a "crt" you were referring to, I'd say something was out of alignment on the hardware -- but no such possibility for that on a flat screen.

I don't know if it makes any difference, but I have mine set up with the digital (white) cable. If yours came with two installation cables, blue and white, and your video card has both analog and digital inputs -- make sure you have the right cable for the connection you are using. I haven't looked to see whether you can physically mis-match them.

I know one thing that helps me, is I have had my glasses that I use for Monitor viewing especially made for the distance at which I view the monitor -- roughly arms-length. I don't use them for anything else.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Rollin' Rog:_
> *I don't know if it makes any difference, but I have mine set up with the digital (white) cable. If yours came with two installation cables, blue and white, and your video card has both analog and digital inputs -- make sure you have the right cable for the connection you are using. I haven't looked to see whether you can physically mis-match them.
> 
> I know one thing that helps me, is I have had my glasses that I use for Monitor viewing especially made for the distance at which I view the monitor -- roughly arms-length. I don't use them for anything else. *


No mine came with one installation cable, that's white & it isn't thick. The connector-part which screws into the tower is royal blue.
Re: the video card, I checked the Dell owner's manual, and the only info I see under "specifications" is that the Video controller is AGP8X. In the Index, there's no "video card" listed.

Also, I don't wear glasses (thank goodness & hope it stays that way - I have enough problems already.

To better explain what I'm viewing, I decided to take screenshots in both Cleartype & Standard view, of an URL that has alot of bold text. This way, maybe you'll see what I mean. I'll post the shots in the next two posts below:


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

Standard Display:


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

Cleartype Display:


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Ok you are going analog to analog again. The blue connector is analog. I'm not sure you would even get a display if they were misconnected (if they can be), I've never tried it.

Your posted pictures look exactly what I woud expect to see. The difference made by "ClearType" is most evident in the red, left panel type. But for my taste, the ClearType display is the most consistent and easiest on the eyes.

I don't think I am seeing the blurryness you describe, so I would assume the problem has to be in the way your monitor is handling the text graphics, not in the computer's settings configurations.

I guess that just puts us back at square one, fiddling with the monitor controls, but I know you've covered all that. For what it's worth my monitor tells me the "optimal" refresh rate should be 60hz. I don't see any real difference at 60 or 75, the two choices, so I leave it at 60


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

I don't get it. If my attachments to TSG are rendering *my* display, then I don't understand how you're not viewing the same blurriness that I am? After all, isn't a screenshot supposed to be a faithful replica of one's own display?


----------



## kevt (Aug 19, 2003)

Haven't read the whole of this thread, so sorry if you've already been through this...  

I had unacceptable bluriness on my LCD also. I found that it worked best for me with neither Standard nor Cleartype smoothing selected. In windows XP I simply unchecked the box which gives the option of font smoothing, this disables the drop down for selecting Standard or Cleartype. I am not sure how this is done in Windows 98 however. The downside to this is that the edges of angled letters (W,V, etc) will be jagged, but you may prefer this to the blurriness.

As for refresh rates, my understanding is that there is a specific fixed setting for all LCDs. There is no need to worry about flicker, because they don't  Unlike CRTs they do not emit light, they may be back lit but that is different. The only requirement is for them to refresh at a rate faster than the flicker fusion rate for humans which is reported to be 55Hz. Of course I could be wrong...


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

> _Originally posted by kevt:_
> *In windows XP I simply unchecked the box which gives the option of font smoothing, this disables the drop down for selecting Standard or Cleartype.*


kevt, which steps do I take to get to the font-smoothing check-box?


----------



## kevt (Aug 19, 2003)

In XP, right click on the desktop, and select properties. This brings up the display properties dialog. Select the appearance tab, then click the effects button. On the effects dialog box, uncheck the box headed 'Use the following method to smooth edges of screen fonts:'. If you leave it checked then it applies one of the two methods of font smoothing. Unchecked performs no font smoothing at all.

Now how this is done in Windows 98 I don't know, but since recent posts had talked of font smoothing I guessed you knew how to get at the property.  

Hope this helps...


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Kevt, she's on XP now. I had forgotten all about "font smoothing". However unchecking it for me produces the unwelcome "jaggedness" that you get on a LCD display.

Jellym, that's the point I was trying to make. I undersand it's a bit confusing. What I'm trying to say is that the difference is either caused by the monitor hardware, which can only be configured on the monitor itself, or is being caused by text or display settings from within Windows. I will see differences caused by your font or display settings because they are rendered in the screen capture. I will not see differences caused by your monitor hardware settings because they are not encoded in the data which you upload. My monitor is my monitor and yours is yours. For example if I had my brightness turned all the way down, you would not see it if I sent you a jpeg of the screen display.

Also, thinking a little more along these lines, you say the same monitor was clearer when you used the Compaq. Is the Compaq the original Win98 system, or is this an entirely new hardware setup?

The reason I ask, is that if the monitor performs differently on different computers, it's going to point the finger at the video card.
However, if this is a new system now, it really should not be having any problem. But if it is using older hardware, it might. The Display Adapter has some controls which affect the signal to the monitor, such as gamma and color management which will not be representable in a screen capture.

Some video cards allow you to create different "profiles" for different monitors.


----------



## kevt (Aug 19, 2003)

I guess it comes down to a matter of opinion on which suits you better. For me, the bluriness I saw was worse than the jaggedness. So I turned off font smoothing. However, it is undoubtedly true that the hardware will be a primary factor in how these settings are displayed to the user. Font smoothing may look fine on one brand of LCD, but not another.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

First of all, kevt, thank you so much (I didn't realize I could uncheckmark that option, because the dropdown choices under it distracted me!


It seems we're in the same boat, in that our monitors aren't so compatible with XP. It's crazy, because it was clearer with Win98! Anyway, like yourself, now I'm finding that the text is more readable even with the jarring jaggedness (which, btw, is worse than it was with Win98)

And Rollin', addressing your Q, my previous system was entirely different - a Compaq tower with Win98 OS, and now I have a Dell tower with WinXP.


----------



## kevt (Aug 19, 2003)

Hey, glad I could help. The checkbox caught me out too  

Guess this can be marked as solved. :up:


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

Gotta say I'm amazed it made an improvement on a new XP system. I think it comes down to a difference in taste, not so much differences in what we are actually seeing, because THAT means we really are both seeing the same things in your attached images.

But happy to see some resolution to this!


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

Actually, guys, you may wanna strangle me, but the story continues. While the text on the Syncmaster became a bit sharper (yet ughily jagged), still, here's what has been going on:

Due to my EMF sensitivity, when I got up today, I had such sharp abdominal pains, brain throbbing, and drained muscles & bones that I desperately dragged up my [ancient] spare monitor from the basement, in the hope of testing to see whether I'd have less electrosensitivity with that. This wasn't a stupid idea because years ago when using another old-fashioned monitor, I don't remember having such problems as I've been having with the newer KDS CRT or Samsung LCD. And, btw, I also met another guy on a group whose EMF problems didn't improve either upon upgrading to LCD. So I'm not the only one.

The brand of this monitor is "Impressions3Plus" Non-Interlaced, and has dial-knobs to control screen adjustment. It's what I'm using right now.

And it's blurry no matter what I do with the Display Properties checkbox or dropdown options (it had *not* been blurry when it was connected to my old Compaq tower during a transitory period).

Is there a way to make this monitor more clear, so that I can comfortably test my EMF sensitivities against it?

P.S. Regarding EMF protection, note that I'd purchased a $300 "EMF Protector" machine but it didn't help me, so I returned it. Prior to that I'd purchased a $20 "anti-EMF-pendant" which hadn't worked on me either.

Also, Rollin' I'm sure it's not a matter of taste because I bet if you'd be viewing the blurriness that me & kev are - you'd change your mind. I don't wear glasses and have clear vision otherwise, so I'm not imagining things. Trust me (make that "us"  On second thought, just like with food there are non-tasters & super-tasters, maybe there's such a thing as people who have high tolerance for all sorts of distortions, be it taste, hearing or visual? That's a possibility, so you may have something there...


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

I'm not really familiar with the issues of EMF sensitivity. But if a CRT monitor is producing fewer, less severe symptoms than a LCD, then we must be talking about something outside the range of the normal electrostatic generating forces of a CRT monitor. 

If you want to test that, just cut yourself a very thin strip of polyethelene plastic about 6 to 8 inches long and hold it near one of the screens. A CRT will pull it right into the monitor face. An LCD will not.

I suspect you must be sensitive to particular frequency ranges. Just curious, do microwave ovens or cell phones have this affect also?

Other than the font smoothing option Kevt referred to I don't know of any text formatting options within Windows that make things any cleared. It's just a matter of selecting the screen resolution and font styles that you have real control over.

And you're right about my tolerance for distortions, freaky food and all kinds of stuff. I went through a very "perfectionistic" period in my life and it was hell overcoming it and getting back to my "normal" muddle through, just keep the mess under control ways of living. Much healthier too, you build up all kinds of immunity!


----------



## kevt (Aug 19, 2003)

I'm guessing the Impression3Plus is a pretty old monitor, since theres nothing much for it on their web site. So perhaps its not as good as it was. Also, its now on XP and a different machine, so you can't really compare it to how it worked before. Perhaps you were using it at a different resolution.

I can't think of any ways you could improve the bluriness other than changing the adapter refresh rate to see which suits you best, and perhaps changing the resolution. There doesn't appear to be any drivers that would help.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

> _Originally posted by Rollin' Rog:_
> *If you want to test that, just cut yourself a very thin strip of polyethelene plastic about 6 to 8 inches long and hold it near one of the screens. A CRT will pull it right into the monitor face. An LCD will not.*
> 
> Yep, I just now tried it on the CRT, and it sure did pull it in!
> ...


 OK, Rollin', here's the Busy Dizzy Doc speaking - stick out that immune tongue 'o yours - alright you passed, cleaner than your driver's license!

Seriously, I plan on sticking to this CRT for at least a week (after all, it was no easy physical task for puny me to switch monitors) just in order to test how I hold up physically. I've found that when I make it dimmer, it becomes more visually tolerable. And if I find that it doesn't wipe me out the way the LCD does, well, that in itself would be a big clue in sniffing out the "culprit"!


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

> _Originally posted by kevt:_
> *Perhaps you were using it at a different resolution.*
> Actually, it's set at 800 x 600, which I'm pretty sure is what it was set at on the other system, because that's what's optimal for this monitor.
> 
> *I can't think of any ways you could improve the bluriness other than changing the adapter refresh rate to see which suits you best, and perhaps changing the resolution. There doesn't appear to be any drivers that would help. *


The refresh rate didn't change things (gosh, when I set it at 85 hertz, the monitor went wild on me - and I breathed a sigh of relief when XP reverted it back automatically.  It also went just as loco when I tried raising the resolution. Thought it was going AWOL on me - tonight may be among the few instances I'm thankful for the ultra-automated incontrollable Windows tendencies 

Anyway guys, I guess this wraps it up, & I might just report back the results of my EMF experiences after a week or so - if this thread remains unlocked  And thanks SO much for all your support!


----------



## Rollin' Rog (Dec 9, 2000)

The better LCD monitors can be particularly bright, but of course you can dim those as well. Perhaps there is some combination of the brightness and refresh rate that is particularly annoying.

The LCD is not likely to accept a refresh rate above 75, and as a general rule they last longer at the lower settigs. Personally I can't tell the difference, but some people say the higher rates produce less flicker. Must be a sub conscious thing.

But there are certainly documented cases of lower frequency flicker producing even epileptic type symptoms. 

It's a shame not to be able to use a good LCD monitor you payed for, but you have to go with what works for you. We'll look forward to your hopefully working this out somehow.


----------



## jelleym (Sep 6, 2001)

Update:

So far it's been a couple of days (& maybe too early to tell) but it seems to me that this older monitor is causing less EMF problems for me.

So maybe it does have more to do with the fact that older monitors are capable of being made alot dimmer than LCDs.

Problem is that this monitor doesn't have a wide screen area, that's a nuisance, and also its tendency to [very occasionally] flicker is a pain. If I continue using it it will probably soon die on me. So I think I should keep it as a spare.

But I still want to test it for a longer period of time, and see how I feel. It's crazy how once erroneous ideas get hold of the public, they're like dyed in the wool & it's hard to change peoples' minds, for example, the idea of ulcers being psychosomatic. Everyone is being told that LCDs are "healthier" but that's just not true! At least not for everybody, as I know from at least one other testimonial.


----------

