Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 103460
Default monitor resolution for Nokia 447Za incorrect
Last modified: 2007-04-18 12:57:17 EDT
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030827
Description of problem:
The default monitor resolution for my Nokia 447Za chosen during installation is
way off. Bad enough that X wouldn't run before I corrected the resolution.
It does detect the monitor correctly.
These are the correct values, taken from my monitor manual:
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
(the one that came with RH9)
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Reconfigure X with a Nokia 447Za monitor
3. Profit! (You must have heard that joke before...)
Sigh - Iam not awake yet. I meant "refresh rates" where I said "resolution"
above. Sorry about that.
Now that I am at it, the best resolution (Yes, I do mean resolution) to run a
Nokia 447Za under is 1152x864, not 1024x768 as is default. (It maximizes screen
area under acceptable refresh rate; I saw this recommened in reviews of the
monitor, and I agree).
Are you sure? Looking around on the web, I've found some differing data.
On page 3 of http://sara.kgcomputer.com/documents/monitors/GA771.pdf, it says
that the Nokia 447Za does Horizontal 31-71 kHz and Vertical 50-120.
Then, on http://press.nokia.com/PR/199707/778221_5.html, it says the 447Za, "is
capable of a maximum refresh rate of 120 Hz, and has a horizontal frequency
range from 31 to 72 kHz."
Then, on http://press.nokia.com/PR/199903/777132_5.html, it says, "Top
horizontal frequencies range from the Nokia 447ZA's 86 kHz"
So I don't know what to believe. As root, try running '/usr/sbin/ddcprobe' and
see if the monitor returns the refresh rates from the firmware.
I can't find my manual right now, but those values I wrote was what it said.
Running ddcprobe supports rh's values:
[root@kg31 thue]# /usr/sbin/ddcprobe
Videocard DDC probe results
Description: Intel Corporation Intel(R) 815 Chipset
Memory (MB): 1
Monitor DDC probe results
Name: Nokia 447Za
Horizontal Sync (kHZ): 30-72
Vertical Sync (HZ) : 50-120
Width (mm): 300
(note that the first link you gave was to another monitor model)
I think I have to retract the claim that the rates setup caused X to fail. I
tried installing the new rh beta, and even though it was configured with the
same rates X works fine.
I don't know why X failed to work when I installed RH9, and I don't know why
reconfiguring fixed it. I just assumed that since those values were at odds with
my manual (and chosing them differently in reconfigure made X work) that they
were at fault.
Ok, well, the vaules that the firmware returned (50.0-72.0) and (50.0--120.0)
exactly match what we have in the MonitorsDB file, so I think we should leave
the refresh rates alone. I'm going to close as "Rawhide" since the problem does
not appear in the Fedora beta.