Magnifier

I hope future versions of windows does a better job with the
magnifier. The one in 7 really is not very easy to use, while it
magnifies the screen, having to pull it around is clumsy.

I would like to see one of these two features in later versions.
Either normal window what will expand at a click point or what I would
really rather have is a 4x3 inch mouse pointer window that only
magnifies what is inside the window.

On 07/12/2017 02:40 PM, Seymore4Head wrote:
I hope future versions of windows does a better job with the
magnifier. The one in 7 really is not very easy to use, while it
magnifies the screen, having to pull it around is clumsy.

I would like to see one of these two features in later versions.
Either normal window what will expand at a click point or what I would
really rather have is a 4x3 inch mouse pointer window that only
magnifies what is inside the window.



I just change the screen resolution and/or increase the font size.

Got me several geriatric customers who wank four inch letters.

T wrote:
On 07/12/2017 02:40 PM, Seymore4Head wrote:
I hope future versions of windows does a better job with the
magnifier. The one in 7 really is not very easy to use, while it
magnifies the screen, having to pull it around is clumsy.

I would like to see one of these two features in later versions.
Either normal window what will expand at a click point or what I would
really rather have is a 4x3 inch mouse pointer window that only
magnifies what is inside the window.



I just change the screen resolution and/or increase the font size.

Got me several geriatric customers who wank four inch letters.

There used to be video drivers that supported "pan and scan".

You could set the resolution to 1600x1200, on a machine
with a 1280x1024 screen. You would be shown a 1280x1024
portion of that desktop, and as soon as your mouse pointer
touched the edge of the screen, the x,y origin of the
slice you were looking at would be adjusted. You could
then "slide" around inside a larger desktop, which has
the appearance of being "magnified". And that mode
is smooth as butter.

Now, the question would be, does that work with any
brand of video ? Or only certain brands ? It seemed
to work with SIS chipset video, and I think I managed
to get that mode to work here once (on non-SIS), but I
can't remember what I was trying at the time. I think
there is some option in a video driver to
"list unavailable resolutions", and it's possible you
can select the "out-sized" desktop that way, causing
the driver to use the "pan and scan" mode.

Paul

On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:31:05 -0700, T wrote:

Got me several geriatric customers who wank four inch letters.


That must be funny grin.





--
Protect your civil rights!
Let the politicians know how you feel.
Join or donate to the NRA today!
http://membership.nrahq.org/default....ignid=XR014887

Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.

Seymore4Head wrote:
I hope future versions of windows does a better job with the
magnifier. The one in 7 really is not very easy to use, while it
magnifies the screen, having to pull it around is clumsy.

I would like to see one of these two features in later versions.
Either normal window what will expand at a click point or what I
would really rather have is a 4x3 inch mouse pointer window that
only magnifies what is inside the window.


CTRL and + will make the letter bigger. CTRL and -, smaller. This is
true in both Windows and Linux. I don't know about Apple.

On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 09:37:07 -0400, slate_leeper
wrote:

On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:31:05 -0700, T wrote:

Got me several geriatric customers who wank four inch letters.


That must be funny grin.

There's a fetish for everything, it seems.

--

Char Jackson

On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 15:40:49 +0200, Jack Fate
wrote:

Seymore4Head wrote:
I hope future versions of windows does a better job with the
magnifier. The one in 7 really is not very easy to use, while it
magnifies the screen, having to pull it around is clumsy.

I would like to see one of these two features in later versions.
Either normal window what will expand at a click point or what I
would really rather have is a 4x3 inch mouse pointer window that
only magnifies what is inside the window.


CTRL and + will make the letter bigger. CTRL and -, smaller.



Alternatively, hold down the Ctrl key and scroll the mouse wheel.

For both methods, this is a Windows standard and works in most, but
not all, applications.

On 07/13/2017 06:37 AM, slate_leeper wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:31:05 -0700, T wrote:

Got me several geriatric customers who wank four inch letters.


That must be funny grin.

Oh no! Usually my typos are just annoying. Hopefully
there are not a lot of British readers on this group!

:'(

Ken Blake wrote:

I hope future versions of windows does a better job with the
magnifier. The one in 7 really is not very easy to use, while it
magnifies the screen, having to pull it around is clumsy.

I would like to see one of these two features in later versions.
Either normal window what will expand at a click point or what I
would really rather have is a 4x3 inch mouse pointer window that
only magnifies what is inside the window.


CTRL and + will make the letter bigger. CTRL and -, smaller.



Alternatively, hold down the Ctrl key and scroll the mouse wheel.

For both methods, this is a Windows standard and works in most, but
not all, applications.


True. I should have said "almost all".

On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 09:33:55 -0700, T wrote:

On 07/13/2017 06:37 AM, slate_leeper wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:31:05 -0700, T wrote:

Got me several geriatric customers who wank four inch letters.


That must be funny grin.

Oh no! Usually my typos are just annoying. Hopefully
there are not a lot of British readers on this group!


I'm not British, but I know the word.

The funny thing is that I didn't see the typo when I originally read
your message, I didn't see it when slate_leeper grinned at it, and I
didn't see it when I first read your message above. I had to reread it
multiple times before I saw it.

I'm a terrible typist and I make many typos. But the k key is far from
the t, so that one looks like a kind I am very unlikely to make. I
usually hit a key next to the one I want, omit a letter, reverse a
pair of letters, or double the wrong letter.

On 07/13/2017 09:58 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 09:37:07 -0400, slate_leeper
wrote:

On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:31:05 -0700, T wrote:

Got me several geriatric customers who wank four inch letters.


That must be funny grin.

There's a fetish for everything, it seems.


The 'o' key, as in loooooooooooosee.

--
"Moral indignation - jealousy with a halo." [H.G. Wells]

On 07/13/2017 01:04 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 09:33:55 -0700, T wrote:

On 07/13/2017 06:37 AM, slate_leeper wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 15:31:05 -0700, T wrote:

Got me several geriatric customers who wank four inch letters.


That must be funny grin.

Oh no! Usually my typos are just annoying. Hopefully
there are not a lot of British readers on this group!


I'm not British, but I know the word.

The funny thing is that I didn't see the typo when I originally read
your message, I didn't see it when slate_leeper grinned at it, and I
didn't see it when I first read your message above. I had to reread it
multiple times before I saw it.

I'm a terrible typist and I make many typos. But the k key is far from
the t, so that one looks like a kind I am very unlikely to make. I
usually hit a key next to the one I want, omit a letter, reverse a
pair of letters, or double the wrong letter.


A lot of my types are keys next to keys, but a lot
of them there is no explaining. I do double proof read
my stuff, but I think I see what I see.

And mistakes like these do not show up until I hit
send. Then EVERYTHING shows up. Mumble ...

On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 16:26:05 -0700, T wrote:


A lot of my types are keys next to keys, but a lot
of them there is no explaining. I do double proof read
my stuff, but I think I see what I see.

And mistakes like these do not show up until I hit
send. Then EVERYTHING shows up. Mumble ...


Same here!

On 07/14/2017 04:45 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 16:26:05 -0700, T wrote:


A lot of my types are keys next to keys, but a lot
of them there is no explaining. I do double proof read
my stuff, but I think I see what I see.

And mistakes like these do not show up until I hit
send. Then EVERYTHING shows up. Mumble ...


Same here!

I have an idea which will make me rich. It is a "take back
button". Press the button and it erases anything stupid you
said or wrote for the last 10 minutes. Can't figure out how to
do it yet. I would make a bazillion dollars off of husbands
alone.

In message , T writes:
On 07/14/2017 04:45 PM, Ken Blake wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 16:26:05 -0700, T wrote:

A lot of my types are keys next to keys, but a lot

Typos (-:

of them there is no explaining. I do double proof read

I've sometimes found I've used homophones - sometimes even including the
ones that I think "uneducated" when others use them, like their for
there or they're.

my stuff, but I think I see what I see.

And mistakes like these do not show up until I hit
send. Then EVERYTHING shows up. Mumble ...
Same here!

Here too (-:. Send or print.

I have an idea which will make me rich. It is a "take back
button". Press the button and it erases anything stupid you
said or wrote for the last 10 minutes. Can't figure out how to
do it yet. I would make a bazillion dollars off of husbands
alone.

(-: on the "said" and husbands aspect! As it happens, the news/email
software I use does nor post/send for a brief time - about a minute IIRR
- after you click Post or Send; IIRR, for exactly this reason: you can
open and edit (or delete) any email that's still in the outbox. (It can
be overridden if you want something to go out now, but most of the time
a minute doesn't matter.) I can't remember if I've used it to retract
something I've said (though since I've been on usenet since KA9Q days, I
probably have), but I've occasionally used it to add/change something
I've thought of subsequently.

I think there _may_ be other news/email clients (or in the case of
Thunderbird addons) that offer a similar facility.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I hope you dream a pig.