BEEN_Nath_58 wrote on 2024-04-18, 09:15:

For example, my Windows 98 SE always booted into 256 colour, 640x480 mode. When I moved to XP, it used 16-bit colour, 640x480

Windows 98 usually bumped things up to 800x600x16 as soon as an appropriate video driver installs. XP advised 800x600x16 a minimum (and will warn about that)

I think so, I guess.

GEM 1.x wants EGA in 640x350 pels, because that was among the highest resolution available to GEM PCs.

About 400 lines was maximum to early GEM, because the use of signed numbers put an restriction on the maximum resolution (can be patched to use unsigned numbers).

The Atari ST version, built on TOS, could use up to 640x400 (high resolution monochrome) on standard hardware back then.

MS Windows 1-2 expected EGA or Tandy 2000 graphics (its former development system), so 640x340 pels 16c or 640x400 pels 16c, respectively. Using 256c colour capable graphics hardware doesn't hurt, though.

MS Windows 3.x was from VGA era, so 640x480 pixel 256c.
256 colours rather than 16c, because Windows has a total of 20 system colours.
640x480 also had been used by games that were using fake fullscreen mode.

SVGA 800x600 pixel in 16c/256c was second most popular resolution, I think.

Most Windows 3 applications were being made to fit a 640x480 screen, though.

leileilol wrote on 2024-04-18, 10:02:

BEEN_Nath_58 wrote on 2024-04-18, 09:15:

For example, my Windows 98 SE always booted into 256 colour, 640x480 mode. When I moved to XP, it used 16-bit colour, 640x480

Windows 98 usually bumped things up to 800x600x16 as soon as an appropriate video driver installs. XP advised 800x600x16 a minimum (and will warn about that)

Was there really a reason to stick to 16-bit color if the driver could do 24 or 32-bit?

BEEN_Nath_58 wrote on 2024-04-18, 14:10:

leileilol wrote on 2024-04-18, 10:02:

BEEN_Nath_58 wrote on 2024-04-18, 09:15:

For example, my Windows 98 SE always booted into 256 colour, 640x480 mode. When I moved to XP, it used 16-bit colour, 640x480

Windows 98 usually bumped things up to 800x600x16 as soon as an appropriate video driver installs. XP advised 800x600x16 a minimum (and will warn about that)

Was there really a reason to stick to 16-bit color if the driver could do 24 or 32-bit?

Performance on slower/older hardware.

For Unix(y) systems, XFree86 since the latter 90s supported generic EDID and SVGA, thus it would come up autoconfigured in a highest possible resolution/depth combo. Resolution was preferred over depth.
IMO I didn't like this default and always changed it, since it configures your CRT for lowest possible refresh rate. I'd turn the system around to prefer the modeline with the fastest refresh rate. It's not nice looking at 1024x768 in 60Hz on a 14".

But XFree86 is not a zero-config system like Windows gui, as far as I recall for monitor stuff you manually add the supported modelines to X configuration file, modelines you can pull out of a Windows .inf file for monitor if you have one.