[ltp] SXGA+ versus XGA resolution, any suggestions?

[linux-thinkpad@linux-thinkpad.org]

So wrote Richard Neill on Saturday, 13 August 2005:
> Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2005 01:08:04 +0100
> From: Richard Neill <rn214@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
> To: linux-thinkpad@linux-thinkpad.org
> Subject: Re: [ltp] SXGA+ versus XGA resolution, any suggestions?
> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.6) Gecko/20050322
> Organization: Trinity College
> 
> 
> 
> prosolutions@gmx.net wrote:
> 
> >I've spent a lot of time trying out many different fonts for xterms, and 
> >I've found that good old misc is better than all others, usually by a 
> >long shot.  The vast majority of fonts just look terrible in terminals 
> >because they are not condensed.
> >I just read what the other guy posted about hinting, scaling, etc. but I
> >don't think this applies to terminal fonts.  Because I work as a
> >sysadmin, probably 80% of my time sitting at a computer is spent working
> >in xterms (actually I use rxvt-unicode).
> >
> 
> That's true: the hinting stuff isn't really relevant to the console 
> because you probably are using a bitmapped (non-printable) font.
> 
> However, if you do want to investigate, I'd really recommend the 
> "Konsole" progam (part of KDE) - it is a real joy to use compared to 
> xterm - and it has tabs too. In konsole, the font called "Unicode" is 
> the best (yes, I know "unicode" isn't the name of the font face, but 
> that is where it is configured)

I've used Konsole a long time ago.  But now I prefer "rxvt -bg 0 -fg grey -sb -sr -vb -sl 2048 -fn -misc-fixed-medium-r-semicondensed-*-*-120-*-*-c-*-iso8859-15" usually with other options, from a different scripts.  The resource overhead of Konsole (all the QT widgets, etc.) is just way too much for a simple terminal.  rxvt is symlinked to rxvt-unicode via debian's /etc/alternatives mechanism.

FWIW I just ordered an SXGA+ G41 from IBM.  Since they have a 30-day period to return for any reason, I'm not too worried.


Thanks you guys for your input.