home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.misc:37477 comp.os.os2.advocacy:8706
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!rutgers!njitgw.njit.edu!hertz.njit.edu!dic5340
- From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.advocacy
- Subject: Re: OS/2 is NOT Crashproof!
- Message-ID: <1992Nov23.211229.8910@njitgw.njit.edu>
- Date: 23 Nov 92 21:12:29 GMT
- References: <Mf4HHkm00WBNQ5RFV5@andrew.cmu.edu>
- Sender: news@njit.edu
- Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.
- Lines: 23
- Nntp-Posting-Host: hertz.njit.edu
-
- In article <Mf4HHkm00WBNQ5RFV5@andrew.cmu.edu> cj00+@andrew.cmu.edu (Carl B Jabido) writes:
- >Excerpts from netnews.comp.os.os2.misc: 23-Nov-92 Re: OS/2 is NOT Crashproof! by David Charlap@hertz.njit
- >> Why? I don't think I've ever had a need to regularly change the
- >> desktop resolution.
- >
- >Actually, I have. It's not a Mac, it's not a workstation (ie,
- >Decstation, Sparcstation, NeXTStation, etc). It's a PC running the
- >version of Mach which was released here at CMU. I saw someone
- >demonstrate it for me. He went from 800x600x16 to 1024x768x256 with the
- >touch of a hotkey. Something like ctrl-alt-+ (plus). Likewise, c-a--
- >went back to 800x600x16.
-
- I've seen this running. A professor here is dabbling with PC-Mach.
- But I didn't say it couldn't or hasn't been done. I just can't see a
- reason you'd want to. I mean, if you've got this great 1024x768
- desktop, why would you want to drop to a lower res? Or if you like
- the low-res, why would you want to pop back? This is a curious
- feature, but one that would get little real use, IMO.
- --
- |) David Charlap | .signature confiscated by FBI due to
- /|_ dic5340@hertz.njit.edu | an ongoing investigation into the
- ((|,) | source of these .signature virusses
- ~|~
-