CyBerkut

The Windows XP OS included support for both Horizontal and Vertical spanning of displays. That support was removed in Windows Vista (and remains removed for Win 7). The only work-arounds that we have had available have been the Matrox TH2Go (and DH2Go) and SoftTH, that I'm aware of. As you say, the Matrox products do not do Vertical spanning, only Horizontal. I don't know about SoftTH (for Vertical spanning), but I'm sure the answer would be in their forums. Of course, things are about to change with ATI's 58xx eyefinity series. That solution will take monitor spanning out of the realm of being OS dependent. In the meantime, maybe you could live with hozontally spanning the two monitors with your Matrox TH2GO and turning the monitors 90 degrees ( 2 x 1050 x 1680 => 2100 x 1680 ). However, that may result in a significant performance hit... (and the bezels may not be where you would prefer...)

The message *posting* dates are on the red bars. I suspect that the non-chronological dates that you are seeing are the join dates of the various message authors. ;) The info, AFAIK, is still relevant. Vista, and Windows 7, had an important capability removed from them (for Digital Rights Management concerns) that Windows XP had built-in... Horizontal and Vertical spanning of the display. Yes, it sucks. Fortunately, it looks like the new ATI cards "eyefinity" capabilities are going to give us a new way to get around Vista / 7's brain damage. :thumbup:

Another review of the Logitech G940, this one by Chris “BeachAV8R” Frishmuth on SimHQ: http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_155a.html

Alex, I can not authoritatively say "That will not work" with absolute certainty... but I'm fairly sure that you can not do SLI between the 260+ and your 295 in any form. If the three monitors all work from the 295, and you are satisfied with that performance, then you have some options: 1. Remove the 260+ if you don't have other uses for it. That would reduce the power draw and heat load in your computer case. 2. If you go with item 1 above, possibly slap the 260+ into another machine. Maybe get TouchBuddy working over a LAN connection. 3. Keep the 260+ and hang a display, or two, off of it. Maybe have dedicated ABRIS and/or Shkval displays... Maybe get TouchBuddy working (in local mode) ... Or maybe get / make an MFD bezel or two, and run the display(s) that you mount behind them off of the 260+ (as opposed to using USB based LCDs).

Alex, have you ever tried running the third display off of the 295's HDMI port via an HDMI to DVI adapter? I saw reports over on the SoftTH forums that it works. With all three monitors on the same card, it might offer you some possibility of improvement.

Has Wags made a profile for his? If so, and if he is willing to share it, it could save you a lot of command keystroke entry, even if you rearrange the mapping...

'Finally',... about a year and a half ago! :lol:

My approach on the controls configuration is that I use the DCS:BS options axis control settings for designating which (non-banded) axis does what, and the SST software to configure the buttons and any 'banded' axis.

I'm thinking "dynamic/persistent campaign".

sandymac69, congrats on getting up to 3 monitors. As to what is "best", that is going to depend on what you want, and what else you have. What CPU / RAM / graphics card(s), etc. are you running with? Are you using a Matrox TH2Go, SoftTH, or ??? Are you using any Head Tracking, such as TrackIR? What sizes and resolutions are your monitors? Are you looking to use the touchscreen for the clickable 3D cockpit controls built into DCS:BS, or were you thinking of using TouchBuddy, or ??? Are you thinking that you prefer having all three monitors showing you what can be seen by looking out the windows and inside your cockpit... or perhaps dedicating a screen (or screens) to the Shkval and/or Abris?

Well, if something like that is added in, I hope it is a separate option from the FFB trim holding that we have now. People could then select both functions, or just whichever one they wanted. Personally, at this time I'm not really interested in having my cyclic stick getting shaken around by shooting, etc. But that is just me. I can see why others would want it.

Logitech has not indicated any plans, or interest (so far), in selling the throttle controller by itself. Even if you could adapt it over with some converter plug (like a game port to USB adapter), it probably wouldn't end up with all ofthe functionality it has when combined with the Logitech 940 FFB Stick. I'd say that your best bet is to resign yourself to buying the set, and possibly selling your current stick to someone else. Other possibilities, in no particular order: - Wait, and buy Saitek's X-65 FFB HOTAS when it comes out. Its split throtle controller looks like it may even be better than Logitech's (depending on what you want / like / need, I suppose). No rudder pedals included in Saitek's upcoming offering. - Offer to buy the Logitech split throttle from smeone who bought the set, but is only interested in the FFB stick. You will then have to figure out how to make the throttle into a useable USB device. Leo Bodnar's boards are well suited to the task, but financially, it probably makes mor sense to just buy the G940 HOTAS set. - Find an old Suncom SFS split throttle (game port device), and then convert it to a USB device. Once again, see Leo Bodnar's boards. - If you are talented in the right disciplines, make your own. Yet again, one of Leo's boards can make it a USB device. As an alternative to buying one of Bodnar's boards to make the conversion, you can look at scavenging the USB controller board out of some used USB joystick or throttle controller. Figure out how many axis / buttons / hats you need, and look for an old USB stick and/or throttle that has enough to cover what you need.

Yes, holding off for a little while, if you can stand it, will probably be worthwhile. The initial ATI 58xx series card(s) that are reportedly due out later this month will initially only be the version(s) that support 3 displays. The 6 display version(s) will probably be out by Christmas. Hell, even the 3 display version should let you do Camera + Shkval + Abris without being in windowed mode, in Win Vista or 7. In light of my own long-term grandiose plans, I'm looking at holding off for the 6 display version (or if nVidia releases something comparable / competitive...).

This is off topic for _this_ thread. However, since it is here... I'd say it's either your video cable, or video card. The cable is probably cheaper / easier to test first, but I'd suspect the card is the most likely culprit. Good luck! As for the topic... How are you folks with the Wiimote / glove touchscreen emulation making out, now that you've been running them awhile?

I'm not using his profile, but it is for the newer SST (using .pro files) software version. I'm not sure what you mean about drivers, as that is a different, though related, issue. Folks using X52 Pro sticks, as opposed to X52 sticks, should have the correct drivers installed for their equipment. Someone posting a profile shouldn't have to concern themselves with advising people on the drivers for their own hardware.

sweinhart3. A common method of passing electrical current through to/from rotating elements is a slip ring. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slip_rings

It may not be something that can be controlled by software. Since it is there as a safety function (in the designer's mind), they may have the stick built where that function is hard-wired into the electronics, rather than programmable.

I have indeed done those things. I haven't measured it with an instrument. I know that leaves us in 'subjective' territory. FWIW, I can say that it is holding the trimmed position with *far* less force than what the stick is capable of (as in, for instance, the force exhibited while testing it via control panel tests). If it were just me, I would discount it as an isolated case, or some sort of heavy-handedness on my part. However, if you do a search of the forums, you'll find that I'm not alone. In fact, I was pretty much portraying it as, 'this works, it just isn't as strong as you would like'. I'd say that is still a fair assessment, but it is peculiar. It would be nice if either E.D., or Saitek, came up with some means for us to make it stronger in the sim. This seems to be potentially even more important now that the Saitek X-65 FFB HOTAS is out there on the horizon (as well as Logitech's G940 being on the scene now). Since the existing test routine can already make the stick utilize heavy force, I have to think that there must be some software solution to get the desired behavior in DCS:BS. I realize this has been an issue for only a small subset of DCS:BS users, but the number of FFB users is obviously about to go up (probably significantly), and whatever is discovered / developed may help more people.

And that one explicitly stated that it is seen as one display by the OS... that it would work with Vista, Win7 and linux. :thumbup: It kind of looks like there may soon be a glut of slightly used Matrox TH2Go available. I hope E.D. is looking at this stuff and starting to ponder the impact. I can forsee the requests for some additional options on display choices... (ie. How about a display setup with the cameras on the top 3 *and* the center display of the bottom row [lets you see the gauges along with outside], with a shkval on the bottom left, and an ABRIS on the bottom right?) Hoo man! A display manager application may be in order, as this is likely to get a LOT more complicated.

Thanks! That article indicates 6x2560x1600... available later. Whoa! I may have to start thinking about eating healthier, so I can stick around longer to see where this stuff goes. ;)

Regarding ATI eyefinity / 5800 series cards: I can't open some of the links where I'm at right now, but along with seeing references to 3 monitors running 2560x1600, I'm also seeing a pic of 6 monitors (3 wide x 2 high).... I would presume those are more on the order of 1080p resolution. [Yeah, throw me in that briar patch.] No specific mention of OS requirements / compatibility yet, but the references to competing against the Matrox TH2Go give me the (wishful thinking here, perhaps) impression that the spanning could be happening as a function of the card, and not the OS. If so, they could have a killer product on their hands! Rumored release of 9/24 or /9/25. Supposedly, 2 of the cards can be combined for approximately x1.8 performance improvement. Anybody got any dope on what to expect from nVidia in the near future? Excuse me, I need to go clean up... :P

Hi Immermann... I just tried the link. Linky no worky... :( However, a google search on ATI eyefinity does turn up other places to look. Interesting!

A quality cold war era sub sim would be nice. I was a reactor operator / technician on a Permit class sub, but it varied from the class in a number of respects. I doubt the Jack would ever get modeled in a sim due to that, but it would be nice to be able to virtually walk through one of our sister ships.

dragony, thanks for chiming in. I have a Saitek Evo FFB. As I have posted in the past, after tweaking it to settings that some others have recommended, I got it to where it will hold a trimmed position. However, I will concede that it is a very weak hold. The stick itself is capable of exhibiting strong force, but we aren't seeing anything like that being applied to holding the stick in the trimmed position. A very small amount of pressure on the stick will jostle it out of the trimmed position. If you have information on some people getting more solid results with the Saitek Evo FFB, can you tell us how we can accomplish the same? Thanks!

sobek, I believe he is saying that he finds it helpful to know whether he is on the upper or lower half of the pot's travel... and to know when it is transitioning from one to the other. I believe he is also saying that the detent doesn't cause him problems with setting the trim slightly off of the detent's position. FWIW, I have to say my experiences have been the same. I think detents at the halfway point in the rotation are useful, for pots that have a lot of "travel". I think for a pot with a limited arc of travel, such as 90 degrees, I would prefer to not have a center detent.