Color, the SCO console vs FacetWin

[John Esak]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: GCC Consulting [mailto:gcc at optonline.net]
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 5:00 PM
> To: john at valar.com
> Subject: RE: Color, the SCO console vs FacetWin
>
>
> John,
>
> Have you tried one of the electronic KVM switches?
>
> I really can't answer you question directly.  But, have you tried
> reversing the
> connections to see if it may be the switch is causing the difference?
>
> I have been using Linksys & Belkin 2 position KVM switches(With
> attached cables)
> lately on my windows systems.
>
> I prefer the Linksys as the only require you to tap the scroll
> Lock key twice to
> toggle between pc's.  The Belkin requires tapping the Scroll Lock
> and then the
> up arrow.
>
> The Belkin does come with longer cables.
>
> I've moved away from mechanical switch as I have found that after
> a while one or
> the other contact starts to cause problems do to arcing caused
> when switching
> positions.
>
> It may be that your Unix side contact is cleaner and passing more
> power to the
> monitor.  Again, if you haven't reversed the connections, try it
> a see what
> happens.
>
> Richard
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com
> [mailto:filepro-list-bounces at lists.celestial.com] On Behalf Of John Esak
> Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 4:37 PM
> To: Fplist (E-mail)
> Cc: Support at Facetcorp. Com
> Subject: OT: Color, the SCO console vs FacetWin
>
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm going to ask a very off-topic question here just in case
> anyone knows the
> answer. I'm also forwarding this to FacetCorp support.
>
> I have a 2 position (manual, passive no electronics) KMV switch.
> (A keyboard,
> mouse and video switch)...  It lets me change between my Unix
> machine and my PC.
> I never use the Unix side... except in very rare occasions when I
> might reboot
> the machine or something. My current uptime is
> 142 days (knock on wood :-)  Anyway, the other side of the switch
> puts me onto a
> PC with very fast CPU, big (you know, powerful) video card running Win 2k
> Professional.
>
> This question is, oh I don't know... about the electronic level
> of things inside
> the drivers of each system I guess. Here is the situation. If I
> run FacetWin's
> terminal emulator on the PC side into the Unix box and issue a "setcolor"
> command, I get the display of colors just fine. Everything looks
> great. I mean
> really, how can you judge these things?  It looks fine to me and
> everyone else.
> No problem. The very same is true of the Unix side of the switch.
> If I issue a
> "setcolor" command, the display is perfect, crisp clear, just
> fine. The only
> difference and it is significant and dramatic to me... is that
> the brightness of
> the colors on the Unix side (direct console in other words) is
> WAY brighter. I
> don't mean a little brighter. I mean WAY WAY brighter. So much
> so, that I can
> see the little word "red" next to the red block of color. When I
> switch to the
> PC side (Windows running the video driver now) the little word "red" is
> _completely_ invisible to me.  Now, my wife says it is fine,
> still very visible,
> so it is not wrong or anything, just very, very dim in comparison to the
> Unix/console driver side.
> (Incidentally, she does say that the Unix/console display of
> setcolor is WAY
> brighter to her also... but she has no problem seeing the red in
> either case.
> She tells me that the colors on the Windows/driver side is
> probably 30% dimmer
> than the Unix side... the word "red" is much harder to see, but
> doesn't present
> a problem to her.  Well, you all know I can not see most of any
> day, but the
> times when my eyes do come on, I like to see whatever I can even
> if it is just
> for minutes and just for very short periods of time. So, you have
> to believe me
> I can not see the little word "red" at all on the Windows/driver
> side... not
> even a tiny bit. There is just the pure black of the background
> screen there
> where the word should be.
>
> Now, of course, this has to do with my retina and the whole
> functioning (or lack
> of it) in my eye. No problem. I can deal with that. However, what
> I want to know
> is this... What in the world can the SCO/console driver be
> issuing to the pins
> on that 15 pin DB video connector that the Windows driver is not
> issuing?  I
> mean, there are no _varying_ degrees of intensity for the color
> scheme on SCO
> O/S5. Other than blinking the color, there is no way to get
> various shades of
> red, or what is more important to me, various levels of
> intensity. I believe
> it's just high and low... that's it.
>
> So, why is it that the display on the Unix side of the switch
> where the Unix box
> drives the monitor directly SO much brighter (and completely and
> easily visible
> to me) is so much different from the Windows side which is
> running through some
> sort of a sophisticated full color driver first. Like I say, the
> colors all look
> very similar just the one side is very very dim comparatively. Is
> there some
> number the FacetWin side could add to its color pallet values that would
> duplicate the intensity of the direct Unix console driver?  If
> not, why not?
> What in the world is the number (electrical or
> otherwise) that the SCO driver is issuing that puts the display up so much
> brighter than the Windows driver?  And if there is some way the
> Windows driver
> could be made to generate this vastly brighter, more visible
> output, could it be
> implemented just inside the FaceWin terminal emulator program
> window and not the
> whole Windows desktop?  In other words, is such a thing
> application dependant or
> system dependant, or device driver dependant? What I'm getting at
> is how can the
> brightness be raised in the Windows driver to match that of the
> SCO console?
> Don't they both have to present equal electronic configurations
> of the signal to
> the DB15 video connector for the monitor's use? To make one signal so much
> brighter than the other, there _must_ be something different in
> the SCO video
> driver. I would love to know what it is and how to get it
> implemented in the
> Windows driver, but there is no such control under Windows... or
> SCO for that
> matter. They each just must be doing something different. Why
> would they???
> (BTW, this is absolutely NOT hardware related in any way. I have
> done numerous
> and I mean numerous experiments with many, many different cards in both
> machines. The situation remains absolutely constant... the SCO
> side is perfectly
> bright and visible, the Windows side is dim and "red" is
> invisible. Also, I have
> played for hours, and days and probably months with the various resolution
> settings of the various boards on the Windows side... this, of course, has
> nothing to do with the brightness of anything. I just wanted to
> assure myself
> that it is not any part of the problem.)
>
> The screen itself that I use is a 20" Planar thin screen. The model is
> unimportant, this happens on any and all screens I attach to the
> KMV switch.
> I have tried many. No difference. As for the tests I've done, I only use
> "scoansi" as the emulation under FacetWin and ansi as the TERM
> value on SCO.
>
> Thanks in advance for any advice about this. Anyone out there with a SCO
> OpenServer box a windows box and a passive switch that can do
> this simple test
> for me, please let me know if you see it the same way. Of course, I'd be
> interested if the problem exists on an active, software driven,
> electronic KMV
> system as well, but my bet is the displays would match exactly.  It is the
> direct connect to the Unix console driver that is making things
> so nice and
> bright which I want to learn about. I only want to know enough to
> determine
> whether the same level of brightness can be had _inside_ the
> FacetWin terminal
> emulator window. The rest of the PC side is fine as it is.
> However, if the only
> ability to fix this (and I think this is going to be the case) is
> to somehow
> juice up the output of the Windows video card itself... so that
> the whole screen
> gets brighter, I certainly wouldn't care.
> I realize I might have to pick one video card for the PC, get the problem
> demonstrable with it, and then send the whole situation to Microsoft...
> because since I've tried so many different cards and drivers and
> they all remain
> exactly the same, it seems that the problem must be somewhere in
> the Windows O/S
> itself. Perhaps, it is throttling back the intensity level being
> sent to the
> video jack...?  I don't see what else it could be. Something that
> SCO doesn't
> do, or they set the throttling to a higher level?  I hate being
> so technically
> naive about this stuff... some areas are just too involved to
> investigate and
> still maintain some rational level of work/time for normal life.
> :-)  So thanks
> for any ideas.
>
> John Esak
I'll try that last... but my guess is it would make _both_ sides dimmer! :-)

Or more likely, both sides unchanged would be going through the switch, so
it probably would not change the display... unless both got dimmer or
brighter in the same relative amount because of anything the switch might
add or subtract. Do you see what I mean?

Thanks,
John

By  the  way, I see what this reply looks like and am unable to change
it!!!  Sorry....

Have no idea why it is formatting like this... but can't seem to change it.