[leaderTR]

Hello everyone,
I recently bought a refurbished mini 10v from dell.
It was listed as having 1024x600 resolution.

I'm unable to get it to this resolution, because it is stuck at 1024x576. I'm aware that some early models had this resolution but my invoice from dell lists the better res. as one of the features (having 1024x600).

What should I do to get the resolution to x600? It came with xp installed, and didn't allow up to 1024x600.
Than I installed osx and it is still limited to the 1024x576.

I'd appreciate any help!
Thanks

[krs9999]

The display resolution is a hardware parameter.
There is nothing you can do to change the one you have to 1024x600, I would suggest you exchange it for one with the proper resolution.

[DMBryant]

The first batch of 10v's had the 1024x576 screen resolution. This was later changed to the 'standard' 1024x600. However, even thought the resolution of the LCD changed the physical dimensions did not which meant that 600 pixels had to be crammed into the same space as 576 which resulted in non-square pixels on the 1024x600 screens (see this thread - 10v 1024x600 display is squished; pixels not square).

I have one of the 1024x576 10v's and I dont find it a problem, in fact it is better in some cases (specifically video) as it has a perfect 16:9 aspect ratio :-)

[reflex]

If you're not sure if the screen is actually 576 or 600 px tall, check the screen's EDID. The EDID should contain the actual native resolution.

It should also be possible to tell the native resolution by eye. Because running non-native resolution should result in aliasing on diagonal lines.

Originally Posted by DMBryant

I have one of the 1024x576 10v's and I dont find it a problem, in fact it is better in some cases (specifically video) as it has a perfect 16:9 aspect ratio :-)

I prefer my 1012's squished 1024x600 16:9 screen for video playback. When setup correctly, Mplayer and VLC have fullscreen playback that works correctly on screens with non-square pixels (I dunno about other software).

[DMBryant]

Ah yes - that may well be the case - but 1024x600 is not quite 16:9

576 / 9 = 64
64 * 16 = 1024

600 / 9 = 66.66666666...
66.66666666... * 16 = 1066.6666666...

Practically I am sure it makes ZERO difference but I assume this is why Dell went with the 576 vertical res. to begin with.

[reflex]

Let me clarify... I can get perfect, letterboxing-free, and distortion-free playback of 16:9 videos on my squished 1024x600 screen, when I set my video player to use pixels that are 25:24. 25:24 is the ratio between 600 and 576, 576 being the "perfect" 16:9 resolution.

Unfortunately, video players are one of the few apps that can account for non-square pixels. Spreadsheets, web browsers, music players, etc. all show the slight distortion caused by assuming pixels are square on a screen where they aren't.

As an alternate case, my Mini 9 has a 1024x600 screen with square pixels, so I don't need to change pixel geometry settings. It's physical aspect ratio is 16:9.375, not 16:9, so 16:9 videos are letterboxed (black border above and below).

[krs9999]

I don't want to come across too negatively, but guys (and gals), this is a $300.- portable (I've actually seen an Acer like this for $199), with a 10-inch screen, do these slightly squished pixels really make a difference?
I have no intentions of using the Mini for any graphics work or anything else where a perfect image is critical.
Videos play just fine without adjusting the player pixel ratio, I didn't even know that was an option, and I never even noticed the slight distortion when using other applications.
I really think either screen is fine unless you need to run an application that requires a minimum 600 pixel vertical resolution.