OK.........I installed those driver updates (must be different from what ASUS has on their site) and 1440 x 900 appeared!! However, when I switched to it, the monitor acted like it didn't support it......even though it IS the native resolution. So, I switched back to the 1024 x "whatever" that did work. Then, just for the heck of it, I decided to switch from 32 bit color to 16 bit color........and BAM, there it was. When I switched to 16 bit, not only did that change but it also switched to the 1440 x 900 at the same time. The monitor "is" showing up as "plug and play monitor" but as mentioned before, I see NO where where there are any drivers for the monitor ( MAG LT1919W Series ).

So, it is now working........all bit it w/ 16 bit color instead of 32 bit........but not sure that's too big a deal anyway.

Any thoughts on the color setting situation?

Thanks so much for the assistance!!

Ok, I can't say fairer than that!

So, lets get to the business end ...

There are 3 possible reasons for the monitor to support 16bit over 32bit @ 1440x900;

1) The driver doesn't support it properly for some reason
2) The mobo is incapable of supporting the resolution at 32bit
3) The monitor was attempting to sync to a refresh rate outside of it's operating range

What do you refer to when you say the monitor acted like it didn't support it?

If it displayed a no sync/out of range message, then this is more than likely due to the refresh rate being above the threshold and not due to driver/mobo.

In reality, the only place you'd probably notice 16bit over 32bit would be during gaming, or watching movies/tv shows etc. I wont explain any further, this does it for me in a very simple way Windows Display - infopackets.com. If you want a techy explanation (including RGB calculations), wikipedia is your friend RGB color model - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. The specific section relating to 16/32bit is here. As a reference, I came across a graphical comparison between 16/32bit while trawling the interweb for suitable articles to post here. You can view this file on imageshack here.

With regards to the drivers from the Asus site, they are usually out of date. Personally, I think the Asus driver list for mobos is a good enough point of reference when hunting for newer drivers without digging out the manual, or consulting the device manager/belarc etc.

However, having said that, by far the best place for drivers, is direct with the manufacturer .

As for the monitor, it appears MAG rely completely on DDC (Display Data Channel) for the la-*test*-('") TFT series monitors. This in effect has removed the need for drivers. In your case, if the monitor isn't picked up as the actual device instead of plug and play, there probably isn't much that it can be done.

With it set on 32 bit......it just has a choppy, sort of scrambled picture....a little hard to describe.......you can make out what is there, but that's about it........there is "no" message of any kind. The refresh rate is set at 60, so that shouldn't be an issue.

This guy doesn't do any gaming........and rarely, if ever, watches movies on it so he should be OK.

Thank you very much for your time and responses!

The only things coming to mind that could cause the bad display at 32bit would be an underpowered gpu, or possibly a bad driver release.

You could try raising the refresh rate up the scale, but I'm doubtful as to whether that would fix the bad display at 32bit.

In the short term, 60hz is fine, but I wouldn't suggest using it for a prolonged period. In terms of refresh rates, the higher you go, the sharper the displayed image appears.
I have probably permanently damaged my eyesight looking at 1280x1024 @ 60hz on a 17" CRT for far too long (we're talking years here, but it all still counts). This was due to physical hardware and monetary consraints at the time, and now, there's not much I can do about it, without handing money over to an optician.

I am currently running a dual screen setup both at home and at work. On a previous occasion, I set one monitor to run at 85hz, and another to 60hz. The difference was noticeable as a flickering out of the corner of my eye when looking directly at the other monitor.
The display is less drastic and noticeable, but similiar (on a larger scale) to the effect you'd get if you were to point a webcam/video camera at your monitor, and view what is being recorded, or the effect sometimes seen on tv if another tv/monitor is caught in the background shot. This is always due to differences in refresh rates.

As a general rule, a higher refresh rate is better for you in terms of on screen quality and for your eyesight. I'd suggest bumping up the refresh rate up as high as windows will allow. Windows will lock you out of any refresh rates you can't obtain when "hide modes this monitor cannot display" is selected.

Obviously, the problem isn't totally resolved. But if your friend is happy with it how it is, then this all appears pretty much done to me.

I'm glad I could be of assistance.