Wide-screen in portrait mode, can I get full-screen through RDP on windows 2003 ?
Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
machine I have two Dell 2005FPW (Wide-screen) monitors, which can be
rotated, and I have done so. The screens are currently displaying at
1050x1680 pixels.
When I connect to a Windows 2003 Server through RDP
(Start->Accessories->Communications->Remote Desktop Connection) in
full-screen mode, the screen is capped at 1048x1200 pixels, showing
black bands above and below the screen from the server.
Is there anything I can do to trick the server/client (I don't really
know which part I need to look at but I assume it is the server) to use
the whole screen?
I downloaded the same .INF file I used on my desktop machine and
installed this on the server but of course hardware id's like this
doesn't propagate over rdp so it doesn't know that it's this type of
monitor that is actually displaying the contents.
Any thoughts would be welcome.
// Lasse
Vera Noest [MVP]
So it seems to make sense that you get 1048 x 1200, since you are
running at 1048 x 1680.
Don't think that you can get it any better.
Why don't you rotate your screen to portrait before starting the rdp
client?
_________________________________________________________
Vera Noest
MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
*----------- Please reply in newsgroup -------------*
Lasse Vågsæther Karlsen
> Maximum screen resolution in a rdp session is 1600 x 1200.
Ok, that seems to explain the resolution I get, but see my question below.
> So it seems to make sense that you get 1048 x 1200, since you are
> running at 1048 x 1680.
> Don't think that you can get it any better.
> Why don't you rotate your screen to portrait before starting the rdp
> client?
Not sure what you mean by that last question. My desktop machine has
their monitors rotated to portrait already. Do you mean I should rotate
the server monitor to portrait first ? Can't do that as the server is
used by others as well, without portrait monitors.
However, there's one question. If I rotate the screens back to landscape
(ie. 1680x1048) and then run RDP in full-screen resolution, RDP takes up
the whole screen, so 1600x1200 is apparently not the maximum in that
case, at least width-wise.
Anyway, thanks for the reply. Looks like I'll just live with that
resolution :)
// Lasse
pilaster
Vera Noest [MVP] wrote:
> Maximum screen resolution in a rdp session is 1600 x 1200.
> So it seems to make sense that you get 1048 x 1200, since you are
> running at 1048 x 1680.
> Don't think that you can get it any better.
> Why don't you rotate your screen to portrait before starting the rdp
> client?
> _________________________________________________________
> Vera Noest
> MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
> TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
> *----------- Please reply in newsgroup -------------*
Vera,
I can show you Windows 2003 Server running with clients at 2560 x 1024.
The restriction appears to be in the *client* not the TS server. (This
is using a non-Microsoft RDP client.)
--
Pilaster
Vera Noest [MVP]
microsoft.public.windowsnt.terminalserver.protocols.rdp:
> Vera Noest [MVP] wrote:
>> Maximum screen resolution in a rdp session is 1600 x 1200.
>> So it seems to make sense that you get 1048 x 1200, since you
>> are running at 1048 x 1680.
>> Don't think that you can get it any better.
>> Why don't you rotate your screen to portrait before starting
>> the rdp client?
>
> Vera,
>
> I can show you Windows 2003 Server running with clients at 2560
> x 1024. The restriction appears to be in the *client* not the TS
> server. (This is using a non-Microsoft RDP client.)
That's interesting! Which client are you using?
_________________________________________________________
Vera Noest
MCSE, CCEA, Microsoft MVP - Terminal Server
TS troubleshooting: http://ts.veranoest.net
___ please respond in newsgroup, NOT by private email ___