VESA Video question
 

Hi there,

I am researching an interesting anomally in the VESA video implementations of different video chipsets. When calling 800X600 resolution at 8 bits/pixel, it would normally have a logical scan width of 800 pixels, but on some PCs it is showing up as 832 pixels! This can, of course, be coded around as the logical scan line length is not the same as the physical length, but...

I am trying to gather stats on what Video chipsets have this anomally.

I have put together a small routine that checks the video chipset for its version (1.2, 2 or 3) etc plus other information such as the screen mode number (usually 0103H).

It implements the VESA call 4F00h to check the VESA version, then asks for screen mode 800 X 600 at 8 bit colour depth. (download from here http://www.marbellacoast.com/800x600.exe). You can also see the source code here: http://www.marbellacoast.com/800x600.bas.

If you want to contribute to my research, have a go with this little executable from a command-line, it will write out to 800X600.txt. If you want to, please post the contents of the text file in this topic.

run it from the commandline as: 800X600.exe /log.

the /log option turns on the text file logging. Of course, if you happen to have a text file in the same directory of that name, it will overwrite it :), but I guess that would be highly unlikely!!!

Please also mention whether you saw the test-card (very imporant).

The test card is a series of vertical bars that should show cleanly on the screen with no diagonals or corruption. To quit from the test card, just press a key and the program ends (not that exciting really) but the data it writes to the text file is vital for my research!!

Hopefully this can be run on old as well as new machines.

Many thanks for your help.

vidmaster

Your source code file "could not be found". I wouldn't download an executable if my brain was completely atrophied.

Indeed, I made a change to the code before uploading it.

As for trust, I could be an evil nut, but as it happens, I am just a nut. Take a look at the source first. It is pretty simple really. You can always compile it with PB instead of downloading EXE.

Correct. An atrophied brain would be hard-pressed to complete such a task. However, I will leave the code available should your brain undergo an unforeseen hypertrophy.

My brain is not atrophied; note the use of the word, IF. IF you do not understand IF constructs, how do you expect to make a working program. You can kiss my ass and take a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut, if you can find any equipment to do so about your person.

Correct again, but only to a degree. The IF premise was a context that was correctly maintained in my response to your brain-atrophy scenario. I agreed with you and still do. If your brain has atrophied, the resulting aberration would likely impair you ability to download an executable. It is reasonable to assume from your response quoted above that you wish to express my lack of consideration for the fact that this was a 'premise'. Be assured however that such a misinterpretation has not occurred.

I have reflected on the less unintelligent aspects of the rest of your comment with the sincere desire to extract a valid point. As a result, I have noted that the lack of understanding of IF constructs that may well still exist, appears not to do so on my part.

I am comforted by the wide birth such an accusation makes as it hurtles past me and heads menacingly towards the other poster to this thread - dragging with it the very implications for programming ability you had suggested at its launch. I would suggest you duck.

Seem to have cleared out the suckers now.

btw, the first exe link is formatted wrongly, it has an extraneous bracket.

Try this http://www.marbellacoast.com/800x600.exe

Many thanks.

Uh huh. I'm not seeking help, and I'm not asking novices to download my executables. There is no need for ME to duck. I wouldn't download your SOURCE now without a guaranteed contract and a very thorough background check of your so-pristine person. However, if you hang around, you may very well find another taker. Members here like to help when properly encouraged. If you read my original response (presuming you can read and comprehend), you will find there's no insult there, merely a position statement. Your response to that was normal. Your immedialy following post was apparently placed after you decided that declining to download your executable was a mortal insult. My response to that was as you see. Perhaps you should grow up and forego mama's teat before you pretend that you are a peer to ANYONE but your kindergarten classmates.

Here, otherwise returning back to the thread topic.

wait.... I thought VESA was the generic video driver for Linux? Why is this a windows executable???? :confused: