There is no estimated date. No version of MA has had one. There is currently no beta testing being done on it as 3.0 hasn't reached beta status yet.

/Tiny When It's Done

It's still just in Jim's head at this point, I believe!

I just recently upgraded to a dual monitor setup, and I have it configured to 'extend desktop' to the 2nd monitor. I wanted to test MA2 with this setup - and found the following problem. I opened MA2 in window mode. Of course, it runs great as long as you keep it on one monitor. However, if you drag the MA2 window so that a portion appears on each monitor - MA2 slows down so bad that it looks like a slideshow.

Long time no see, SunKing. :) - Welcome back! ...... Dual monitors? - Try DreamAquarium. ;)

Thanks for the recommendation - I will certainly check out Dream Aquarium. Yeah, it has been a while since I've posted here - but I still drop by occasionally to check in on y'all.

Glad to know you are still around SK.

SunKing, don't forget to check out the Garden thread, 'specially if you like tomatoes. I may be up to my eyeballs in 'maters a month from now. ;)

Glad to see you stopped by. Hope to see more of you.:TU:

disproportionately yours...
 

I have an nVidia FX1300 running two 19-inch Dell monitors in span mode. I use a setting of 2560x1024 x 32.
I've been running MA2MD for some time.

I just purchased the upgrade to 2.6.

I'm trying to fiddle the settings to make the background fill the spanned monitors. Either I can have it span fully, but the fish are distorted horizontally, or I can have the fish roughly proportional but the aquarium straddles the middle of the two monitors leaving wide black bands at the outer extremities. I've had no luck with "Use Widescreen" on or off and a range of anamorphic settings.

Is there a way to have a full span, and have the background extend above and below the viewing area, to keep the fish in proper aspect ratio?

I'm not suggesting that I had it before. I'm just asking if there's a way. I prefer clipping the top and bottom of a properly proportioned tank if I can get the picture to fully use the left-right acreage of my spanned monitors.

Thanks,

Kevin (using mostly DreamAquarium these days)

Right now, you are trying to stretch a 12:9 (1024 x 768) background to 22.5:9 (2560 x 1024).

If you turn on Widescreen and then set the Anamorphic value to 1.0, then you'll be stretching a 16:9 (1280 x 768) background to a better-looking 22.5:9 (2560 x 1024).

Unfortunately, the fish are squished/stretched along with the background. I wish there was some logic to allow the fish to stay the correct size when the background is off-ratio, but this would require additional programming.

If you turn off spanning, then you'll have two instances of the 4:3 Aquarium, one on each monitor.

Yes, DreamAquarium is one of only a few that I have managed to fill both screens with, the way you suggest. (Aqua Garden is another). But I don't like Horizontal Span mode, I much prefer Dualview. Also I think DA and MA2.6 both look better when seeing the full height. And with DA you can have two separate tanks, - albeit with similar backgrounds, at the moment! ..... I am looking forward to seeing how the SerenScreen 3D background will be able to be used on dual monitors! - I'm keeping my fingers crossed! ;)

Here is a screen shot of the two-screen-wide DA, in span mode, (ie. cropped top and bottom, but correct proportions).

And I took a picture of my monitors showing just what you posted.:TU:

A very crazy (and rich) guy made "twelve 30-inch flatscreens mounted" !

http://gadgets.qj.net/Wall-O-Monitor...g/49/aid/21281

See below 2 sets of 4 x 30" Dell LCD with Aquarium :

http://gadgets.qj.net/uploads/articl...step7_full.jpg

Yeah, we discussed that one elsewhere on the forum. Consensus was he would've been less crazy and have more money left had he chosen a projector instead.

The projector will not give you the same pixel resolution.

And so we take it one more time...

Neither does the textures of the fish. Heck, we hear quite a lot of complaints about the resolution of the background not looking good above 1280x1024 - what are the odds of it for some reasong looking better at ten times that?

Besides, that's a wall of monitors. It's not like someone's going to be sitting two feet away from it so I'm sure the resolution of the projector would be fine.

/Tiny Projector

P.S.
if he had used a projector he could've covered the entire wall with just one installment of the aquarium instead of having to use multiple computers for several ones.

Most projectors of a reasonable price range stop at 1280 x 1024.

He's running the Aquarium in two separate instances, so a total beneficial resolution of 1280 x 768 x 2 or 1280 x 1536. Plus he has 4 independant screens running on the left, each at probably 1024 x 768.

The minimum operating resolution of those 16 monitors to match the resolution he's demonstrating in that picture is 4096 x 3072. Can you tell me again how a 1280 x 1024 projector is going to come even close?

By my calculations, the text in those four stacked screens on the left is going to be completely unreadable if the resolution available to each screen is 320 x 256 (1/16th of 1280 x 1024).

Maybe he wants 2 instances of the Aquarium?

Que?

Take another look at that post, Morg. That wall features 12 30" 2560x1600 Dell monitors, each one costing $2,200 totaling $26,400(!) (not counting the multiple computers he's using). I'd say that kind of money buys a pretty nice projector and even leaves enough to spare for some extra lamps...

The resolution should theorethically be 7680x6400, but since he can't power that from a single computer he's using multiple ones. Those 2x2 aquariums aren't windowed - they are fullscreen on two separate computers. He doesn't want two instances, he just can't show a single one...

I don't think that system is used only for the Aquarium. If it was then yes it was wasted. But if you need the resolution then that is the way to go.

What do you need a resolution like 7680x6400 for? Especially when you can't use it as a single screen.