locked
Horizontal Span (Windows 7) RRS feed

  • General discussion

  • Forget about the nVidia and ATI.

    My question is:

    Will Windows 7 have this feature added later on?

    Very simple and direct question.

    Thanks,

    /.
    • Moved by Ronnie VernonMVP Thursday, May 28, 2009 4:36 PM Focus (From:Windows 7 Installation, Setup, and Deployment)
    • Changed type Ronnie VernonMVP Monday, March 22, 2010 7:48 PM Discussion
    Thursday, March 26, 2009 9:43 PM

All replies

  • Yes, it is a very simple and direct question.  What we need is a very detailed and direct question.  A horizontal span of what?
    Friday, March 27, 2009 3:15 AM
  • VER-7  - I have my Windows 7 machines with spanned monitors set up to have Vertical span - if this is what you are refering to.

    In addition - an improvement (fix) since Vista is that the setting of having my monitors Vertically spanning is remembered between log off and log on and also is remembered between reboots.

    As Darien has suggested.. if this is not what you mean .. then maybe expand more!

    Cheers

    Kyle

    MCT, CCI, Beta Tester, Australian - choose the order!
    Saturday, March 28, 2009 6:41 AM
    Answerer
  • What he means is Horizontal span, exactly as he said.
    Instead of having 2 monitors set up as dual screen both displaying say 1680x1050, he means having both monitors setup to horizontal span so the resolution is 3360x1050
    This enables full screen games to use a resolution of 3360x1050 spanning both monitors.
    The dual screen in vista was capable of allowing dual monitors running 1680x1060 but when you launched a full screen game, it turned off 1 monitor and only used your primary one.
    in XP horizontal span meant that you could use a full 3360x1050 resolution within a game with 2 monitors next to eachother.

    So far I have not been able to find horizontal span in windows 7, which means I cannot play WoW on 2 screens, So yet again we are forced to use windows XP, unless we want to waste a perfectly good 2nd monitor.
    Monday, April 13, 2009 10:11 AM
  • What he means is Horizontal span, exactly as he said.
    Instead of having 2 monitors set up as dual screen both displaying say 1680x1050, he means having both monitors setup to horizontal span so the resolution is 3360x1050
    This enables full screen games to use a resolution of 3360x1050 spanning both monitors.
    The dual screen in vista was capable of allowing dual monitors running 1680x1060 but when you launched a full screen game, it turned off 1 monitor and only used your primary one.
    in XP horizontal span meant that you could use a full 3360x1050 resolution within a game with 2 monitors next to eachother.

    So far I have not been able to find horizontal span in windows 7, which means I cannot play WoW on 2 screens, So yet again we are forced to use windows XP, unless we want to waste a perfectly good 2nd monitor.

    Hi Carl

    There is a lot of misconception and misinformation about exactly what is meant by 'horizontal spanning' as opposed to the 'extended desktop'.

    Your description is articulate and spot on. This is the first time I have seen an understandable description of horizontal spanning, from anyone here.

    I have one system that is set up to dual boot XPPro SP3 and Windows 7.  It has an ATI X600 video card with dual output. I have dual monitors connected to this system. Looking at the display modes, in the Adapter properties, in either XP or Windows 7 the maximum resolution in 'List all modes' is 1280x1024. The only Windows option in the Display Settings is 'Extend Desktop' which seems to work OK to extend the display across both monitors. This allows me to use custom desktop wallpapers with a size of 3200x1200 pixels and these seem to display and span both monitors, without any stretching, as long as the 'extend' option in the display settings is enabled.

    I looked in XP, Vista, and Windows 7, and there is no default 'span' options at all?


    Doing a cursory search on this subject returns a massive amount of users 'finger pointing' about responsibility for this problem, but nothing that is really authoritative from any legitimate graphics industry manufacturer or Microsoft source? The only reference to any 'horizontal span' settings are those that are associated with, and enabled in the graphics adapter software/driver settings.

    If you have any links to any authoritative source about this issue, please post this information.

    Regards,


    Thank You for testing Windows 7 Beta


    Ronnie Vernon MVP

    Monday, April 13, 2009 10:49 PM
  • Hello,
    in a picture, this is what we would like to have in Vista:



    nVidia says (not available on their site anymore, or I can't locate it):
    Horizontal and Vertical span modes are no longer available under Windows Vista.
    Due to architectural changes in the new Windows Vista Window Display Driver Model (WDDM), span mode cannot be supported in NVIDIA graphics drivers. NVIDIA recommends using the built-in Windows Vista multi-display modes.

    Is there any hope left? =)
    • Edited by SlimDeluxe Saturday, April 25, 2009 11:44 AM
    Saturday, April 25, 2009 11:42 AM
  • There is one workarround but it takes additional software to make it work. Note this is only for Nvidia display adapters using latest nvidia drivers in Vista. I do not know of the software and this workarround work in windows 7. I also use World of Warcraft as the example game/software since it's what i was trying to get spanning in vista at the time. Step 1. Create a custom resolution in the nvidia controll panel. it should be same height but twice the with *assuming both monitors are same size/make/model. Step 2. Purchase/install Ultramon. Step 3. choose a hotkey for you to use to cause any window application to span both monitors. Step 4. open World of warcraft. Under video in resolution section you will see your custom resolution available. select it. Make sure you selected windowed mode and maximized. step 5. Push the hotkey *i used ctrl-alt-numpad 0 * Enjoy spanning both monitors with the application. WARNING: Ultramon has not been tested with windows 7 and i do not know if there is a 64 bit version. This should work with any software that allows you to play/use in Windowed mode, maximized. some games and applications will still have a border when used in windowed mode. Another option is to purchase a Matrox Triplehead to go *assuming you wish to use 3 monitors instead of 2*
    Thursday, May 21, 2009 8:22 PM
  • I'm having a similar problem.  Nvidia has the correct resolutions, Windows has the ability to layout monitors over an extended desktop.  I have 4 monitors and a mount for them with 2 up and 2 down.  Using Windows 7 RC.  The Nvidia Control panel can set the resolutions correctly (1680x1050) but cannot configure the extended desktop.  The Windows Control panel does see the correct resolution, but as soon as you reconfigure the "Change Appearance of your Displays" it resets the resolution incorrectly on 3 of 4 of the monitors.

    Here is what I am stuck with

    [Monitor1][Monitor2][Monitor3][Monitor4] in the windows config even though my monitors are installed in a rack like this:


    [Monitor1][Monitor3]
    [Monitor2][Monitor4]

    Thursday, May 28, 2009 1:50 PM
  • Ronnie,

    Why was this moved to performance?  Troubleshooting, setup or hardware maybe.  My fear is it will get lost
    Thursday, May 28, 2009 5:00 PM
  • looknow12 and others,
    this does not relate to the horizontal span problem. Also, the post marked as the answer totally missed the point, as explained later in the other posts.
    Though I am sure you have a real problem, since the multi-monitor support in Vista and later is bull.
    Thursday, May 28, 2009 10:25 PM
  • Looks like I am using XP till Windows 8, I run 2 Gateway Extreme HD 1600's off a Nvidia 8800 GTS and have 9 virtual desktops.
    You cannot fit all my same time apps on a single task bar.
    One you go horizontal span you don't go back.
    Saturday, June 27, 2009 3:29 PM
  • "Spanning" is the only way I've ever used dual monitors (side by side in my case).  Other than arranging them vertically, I can't begin to imagine how any other mode would be useful or acceptable.

    Just to be clear, when I drag a window that opens on the left monitor, at some point it starts to drag onto the right monitor (and parts of it are shown on both).  Maximizing a window makes it show on only one monitor, but it's actually possible to stretch windows to cover both monitors.  Generally speaking this doesn't work all that well because of the bezel space between the monitors, so I usually run apps either on one or the other, but being able to drag back and forth is essential.

    Currently (under Vista) my start bar only shows on my left monitor.  This is actually the way I want it, as it keeps the right monitor simple and clean.  It may be that at some time I set it to work that way, as I kind of recall being able to have it on both at one point.

    My only complaint is that while I have some images at high enough to span both monitors, selection of a desktop background through Vista's control panel duplicates the image on both monitors.

    Is the OP saying this kind of operation isn't possible in Windows 7?  I've only run Win7 in a virtual machine, which may not represent the way it will run on "real" hardware very well...

    -Noel

    Saturday, June 27, 2009 7:28 PM
  • Does this dialog, from Win7, not cover the issue?

    Win7 dialog

    -Noel
    Saturday, June 27, 2009 7:39 PM
  • Is an easy way to ask the question, "What size window do you get when you maximize it?" Assuming 1600 x 1200 displays, with normal ("extend desktop to this monitor") spanning, you'd get 1600 x 1200, while what you'd like to have is 3200 x 1200? -Noel
    Saturday, June 27, 2009 7:45 PM
  • I disagree with you Noel, being able to have a single window larger than a screen is a fundamental advantage of horizontal and vertical spanning.

    you cannot do this without spanning: http://www.circlesoft.com/images/ourkinshiphouse.jpg

    In gaming the bezel space becomes an advantage with character long relocation.
    Tuesday, June 30, 2009 12:51 PM
  • you're right gjpc!
    i need this horizontal span to use full screen 3D software on all my 3 screens. why microsoft has decided to delete this configuration? (to sell the matrox system like a last chance to use span with an expensive price?)

    if someone knows how to add a custom resolution in the nvidia panel, it could work with the Maelstorm_1's method.
    i cant add my resolution 2880*900 (1440*900 + 1440*900 = horizontal span)





    Athlon x64 6400 2x3.3Ghz - 4Go DDR2 - GeForce GTX 260 SLI - RAID0 WD 2x500Go
    Tuesday, June 30, 2009 7:07 PM
  • You disagree with what?  I'm asking for clarification more than anything.

    The thing is, I can stretch windows across both my monitors.  I don't understand the problem...

    Here we see Internet Explorer, stretched wider than one monitor

    Are you saying that certain games, when told to go to "full screen" mode only use one monitor, instead of both? 
    If so, isn't that an issue with the game more than Windows?  Or possibly the video driver?

    -Noel

    Wednesday, July 1, 2009 9:33 PM
  • Are you saying that certain games, when told to go to "full screen" mode only use one monitor, instead of both? 
    If so, isn't that an issue with the game more than Windows?  Or possibly the video driver?

    -Noel

    Well, I am not all-knowing but as it seems the video drivers is based on the WDDM (Windows Display Driver Model) which is made by the OS manufacturer. Like, you can't put a horse saddle on a cow.
    Please see CarlUK's post above for a pretty straightforward clarification of resolution virtualization.
    Also, keep in mind that games are not the only applications that can go fullscreen.
    • Edited by SlimDeluxe Wednesday, July 1, 2009 10:20 PM
    Wednesday, July 1, 2009 10:19 PM
  • I guess I don't use things that go "full screen" so much, and so I don't see the issue.  Like I said and I showed above, windowed apps can easily be stretched across multiple monitors.

    Isn't Windows all about...  Windows?  Perhaps Microsoft is making just another small move away from its DOS origins.

    Can the games not be played in a stretched window?

    -Noel
    Wednesday, July 1, 2009 10:32 PM
  • Haha that's really funny, lol...
    Wednesday, July 1, 2009 10:36 PM
  • What's funny?  Outside of games there are very few things (I haven't found any I need) that need to switch to the special video modes.  Perhaps with modern advances in video card technology they figure running games at full speed AND full resolution on the normal desktop is just around the corner.

    Frankly, Microsoft would quite likely prefer we buy XBoxes to play video games.

    -Noel

    Wednesday, July 1, 2009 10:46 PM
  • apllications using all screens in span mode:

    - a lot of screen savers
    - 3D apps designer (i use Blender)
    - i have eard Photoshop CS4 x64
    - ALL GAMES (i use counter strike source)
    - full screen video player (i use media player classic)
    - the start menu of windows stretch on all screens
    - one background image over all screens
    - etc...

    see this picture with the original span mode in windows xp:
    (the dualview mode is the vista and seven extended desktop.)


    Athlon x64 6400 2x3.3Ghz - 4Go DDR2 - GeForce GTX 260 SLI - RAID0 WD 2x500Go
    Thursday, July 2, 2009 8:59 AM
  • I really really hope M$ will bring this mode back.

    Theres a huge bunch of ppl out there who are in need of this.
    Basically everything that uses DX or OGL rendering might run into problems when used on "extended Desktop" mode instead of span mode (i.e. not rendering context menues etc..)

    As far as I understand, M$ cut that function short to virtually "improve" their display performance, or just to save some additional work.

    For myself I'm currently stuck between X64 and W7 as some hardware drivers require to update to Vista / W7 as nobody is supporting  XP X64 anymore (at least not for new hardware). But the Software and games I use NEED the horizontal span mode...

    This really is some utter ____ :(

    Does anyone has yet set up, or knows how to set up a Petition or something for M$ to, if not force them, but at least tuck their nose into this issue again and again?

    Searching the Web for that issue, I can find a lot ppl complaining, but never saw any official answer other than "I'm stupid and don't get what u use this for" or stating "this is a G/K Vendors Problem".

    Honestly, I'm quite ç%@#@ pissed about that issue and I don't care who has to fix it, but I WANT SPAN MODE BACK!

    p.s: no, buying a Matrox TripleHead2Go isn't an option as this won't "scale" with future bigger display resolutions and it costs a 250 f-ing bucks...
    Tuesday, July 7, 2009 9:43 AM
  • I find it very peculiar that some people just say "gee, I don't need that mode so why should I try to understand it?". Its obvious that there is a real issue here and its just being ignored.

    For ther record, I want span mode but not for gaming.  I need it for MS word, excel, remote desktop, ... everything. With span mode, if I want to use the both screens for word, I just click maximize. Without span mode, I have to move the window so the top left corner is at the top left of the screen, then move the mouse down/over and drag the lower left corner of the window down to the lower right of the screen. And even then it doesn't use the whole screen due to the borders and scroll bars.  Try this with remote desktop and you have to scroll up and down and back and forth just to move around the screen.

    Try doing that 50 times a day and see if you'd like span mode.
    Tuesday, August 11, 2009 1:52 AM
  • Looks like ATI might be adding spanning back in the mix in 9.10 drivers (current is 9.9) with a new tech called ATI Eyefinity 
    http://www.amd.com/us/products/technologies/eyefinity/Pages/eyefinity.aspx

    "ATI Eyefinity is defined as two or more display outputs operating simultaneously and independently from each other. Support is available for Duplicated (Clone) and Extended multiple monitor modes, with new support for the capability to group displays into a massive single large surface spanning across multiple displays for use with your desktop workspace, video playback, with support for both windowed and full screen 3D applications."

    dont know if this will work non DirectX 11 cards though.
    Tuesday, September 22, 2009 4:02 PM
  • i would like to know the price.
    Windows span mode = $0
    ATI Eyefinity = $$$$$
    Matrox machin = $$$$$


    (on regretterait presque le bon vieux temps)
    Athlon x64 6400 2x3.3Ghz - 4Go DDR2 - GeForce GTX 260 SLI - RAID0 WD 2x500Go
    Tuesday, September 22, 2009 5:02 PM
  • why oh why has this feature been removed?
    this is just very frustrating indeed.

    my triple screen setup just doesn't work like it used to...

    please add this feature back in to windows. please!!
    Sunday, October 25, 2009 8:46 AM
  • Spanning and Extending are 2 different video modes based on the Video driver support.  The Video drivers, most popularly nVidia and ATI...as well as Intel, are only able to provide the features allowed them by the WDDM...as described above. Extending has been a base option since the 95 days. More advanced modes for graphical editing applications, 3D rendering, gaming, as well as productivity software and others....have been able to optimize the user experience with SPANNING. This is the ability for Windows to recognize a single desktop resolution that spans multiple monitors instead of recognizing multiple desktops matched to an associated monitor.

    The underlying architecture that provided spanning (again, not extending) features to the video manufacturers was removed in WDDM 1.1 which was the underlying model for Vista and beyond.  We were hopeful that WDDM 2.0 was to be completed by Windows 7, but it would seem that MS is behind their estimates and have released Win7 with WDDM 1.1, although there was no solid responses as yet that WDDM 2.0 was to provide spanning support back to the manufactures. There is currently a race between ATI and nVidia (currently with ATI in the lead) to try and replace the spanning feature that advanced computer users spoiled themselves on in the XP days with a driver specific replacement.  ATI's EyeFinity is the first replacement.  nVidia's version is currently unknown (since my last foray into researching this topic).

    I personally, am an nVidia owner and have been disappointed in their lack of enthusiasm to provide a spanning feature replacement as ATI has worked on. Thru all my research, those spoiled by desktop spanning is certainly a large number of folks that are well into the double digits percentage-wise. I utilize spanning in video editing, image editing, and gaming.  I have been in an MMO game for 4 years with an XP gaming system that I replaced with a Vista system last year and lost the spanning support.  I then moved the Vista system down to a seconday workstation and brought the XP back to life until earlier this year.  Since May, I have been forcing myself on Windows 7 (without spanning) to try and break myself from the spanning habit. The peformance difference I get from the dual socket, quad-core x64 platform with SLI nvidia and 8GB of RAM surpasses what I am capable of with the XP system far enough to try and make the Win7 work.  But so far...I am unable to go back to the level of productivity I had with desktop spanning.  After 4 months of work arounds, 3rd party software, and even trying the Matrox solution...I find no 100% replacement....not even a 30% replacement...for native spanning support and the performance inherent with native support.

    Our only hope is that WDDM 2.0 is being developed with the achitectural support builtin and will be delivered soon as an update or service pack.....or nVidia and/or ATI develop's alternative solutions within their driver support that does not sacifice too much peformance (I'd rather wait for nVidia to get their's developed and released even if ATI's is fully functional).

    Here's to hoping....
    Monday, October 26, 2009 2:56 AM
  • I am also personally disgusted with the lack of spanning support in Vista. I just crossed over to Win 7 to find out that it too is lacking the horizontal spanning feature. I've used a program called SoftTH for my triplehead setup to do triplehead gaming. It doesn't support dual monitors though. I am planning on picking up a new ATI HD 5870 after the new year so I can utilize the eyefinity spanning feature that is included in all of there new 5000 series cards. It really puzzles me that microsoft removed this fantastic feature. I used spanning mode all the time in XP for gaming and other productivity. Wake up Microsoft and fix this issue!
    Friday, December 18, 2009 7:12 AM
  • Ok then, if the span function are changed Win7 is no longer an voluntary option for me.
    I have appreciated the span feature in WinXP where I can use 2 screens as one in
    resolution 3840x1200.
    Sorry, hope they supply WinXP for a long time to come:-(

    Wednesday, January 27, 2010 9:50 AM
  • aww :(

    I bought my second monitor for this very reason. I never bothered with installing Vista as it's been a nightmare to use whenever I touched another computer than mine, but have to say I'm pleased with windows 7.. until now I guess.

    Good thing you guys have brought it up though, I hope this thread seems some constructive updates as well.
    Wednesday, January 27, 2010 11:26 PM
  • I'm using W7 since the RC1 now, as I had to switch due to unavailability of XP x64 drivers for some new hardware...

    As far I'm not as happy with W7 as with XP x64 (90% for the missing s-mode) but I've arranged myself a bit. The missing span mode really is an annoying issue but here's what I've done to get around so far.

    - I'm using Display Fusion to have the "maximize to whole desktop" button on all windows
    - I moved the taskbar to to right outer border of my desktop, so applications can stretch on the full height
    - I've set up a custom resolution to be able to play games over both monitors.
            Backdraw from that workaround: I have to stay with a 180.XX version of nvidia drivers as the new ones won't allow custom resolutions that your hardware doesn't supports per definition... And I have to play in windowed mode which is not exactly a problem, but a nuissance...

    From the workflow and performance I'm getting from W7 I'm happy with it, it's really just that damn span mode which is killing my joy on it.. :( pls MS, screw that DRM poop and let Nvidia reimplement that funciton again...


    Edit: pwned by swearing filter :D
    Thursday, January 28, 2010 10:15 AM
  • I downloaded the beta driver released from nvidia on the 27th in the hopes it would help, but then my only hope is a third party app like Display Fusion and a older driver then?

    If I understand correct, like an earlier poster wrote about UltraMon.. you set the custom resolution, boot up the game you want in the custom resolution, then have the third party application adjust the window to fit perfectly.... hope it will work with Eve Online, Eve needs this more than any other game imo.
    Thursday, January 28, 2010 10:30 AM
  • @Bjens

    Besides of my DAW (which is usable with Display Fusion and the "stretch-all" button) EVE was the main reason why I was so upset about the missing span-mode.

    I tried to hack drivers, modify the registry information etc. but the only way I was able to get EVE recognize the custom resolution was with the old Driver that was released for W7 RC1. If you need the exact version number I can have a look at home in the evening.
    However, repositioning the window by EveMon doesn't work so far but I haven't tried out other repositioning tools yet. If you find anything working for that I'd be interested too.
    So far I'm able to run up to 3 Accts. over both Monitors in windowed mode with all set to "high" on 2560x1024 without problems.
    It's working, but comfort would be a different thing :)

    My hope is that mybe CCP will reallow custom resolution in the prefs.ini or something like that... hope dies last...
    Monday, February 1, 2010 9:35 AM
  • I am fairly new to Win7.. and never bothered with Vista so, wouldn't mind that bit of info to be honest. Saves me some trial and error I guess.

    Tried UltraMon as suggested above, but didn't really help me alot. There was some software in the monitor driver cd. Something for repositioning windows by hotkeys or some such thing. If there is a way to enable span by using a old driver, I can give those apps a go again I guess.
    • Edited by Bjens1 Monday, February 1, 2010 9:07 PM new info
    Monday, February 1, 2010 9:04 PM
  • This is the exact problem I am having.  I've got the latest NVIDIA drivers installed on a new, clean Windows 7 x64 build.  I used to be able to just double click in my vertical span and have it work.

    Now, as you've mentioned, I have to drag the screen to the right spots then drag the other handle to fill both monitors.

    If anyone has found a solution for Windows 7, I'm all ears!  I'll also be checking with NVIDIA support today.  This worked fine on my same workstation under XP x64.
    Thursday, February 4, 2010 5:05 PM
  • As of today, horizontal spanning with nvidia and a quadro isnt enabled.  sign.  poor noel, he just didnt get it.
    Friday, March 12, 2010 12:24 AM
  • As someone said before, ATI have done it.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZAkCoaq384
    Friday, March 12, 2010 12:36 AM
  • No worries, I done figgered it out.

    You have to admit that some folks are complaining as though they can't use Windows at all with just an extended desktop.

    Hope y'all find a solution that works for you.

    -Noel
    Friday, March 12, 2010 2:59 AM
  • Virtual Computers to the save!
    Friday, March 12, 2010 6:51 AM
  • Here's the nitty gritty:  Since moving to Windows 7, everyone here isn't "complaining", but merely pointing out that the latest operating system from Microsoft has lost a feature that used to be there with XP.

    The driver vendors ATI and NVIDIA say they can't make drivers that do horizontal or vertical spanning because of the underlying OS architecture.

    W7 is supposed to be kick ____ with video so why deprecate the feature of horizontal or vertical spanning.

    I've adjusted to the problem, but still think back to "what was".....and wonder why Microsoft took away my "toy".  :>)
    Friday, March 12, 2010 1:35 PM
  • I didn't say "everyone", I said "some folks".  Please don't generalize your position into that of the rest of us.  Wording like "I used to be able to just double click in my vertical span and have it work.  Now, as you've mentioned, I have to drag the screen to the right spots then drag the other handle to fill both monitors" implies it's no more than a minor inconvenience.  You have even said you have adjusted to the change.

    The reality is that even with two identical monitors you just don't need to use both for one app very often.  I've been using dual monitors daily for 8 years now, and I do a lot of stuff with my computer.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not for the reduction in features - but I *am* for trying to make the best of what's available.

    The change in WDDM architecture might make more sense when you consider that desktop spanning would have to be an exception in an environment where you could conceivably have 5 monitors arranged in a + pattern, or any number of different resolution monitors.

    That said, how do display drivers handle the big displays (e.g., 30" with 2560 x 1600 pixels) where two DVI dual view interfaces are required to get the data out there?  Seems like that is virtually the same problem to solve.

    -Noel

    Friday, March 12, 2010 7:14 PM
  • The topic at hand is desktop spanning, not extended desktops. ATI had plenty of customers (albeit a smaller footprint than nVidia so not sure why nVidia hadn't done this first) complain and was able to identify the loss with WDDM 1.1 moved native support for spanning.  Eyefinity worked around that and provides same function in their driver model.  nVidia still hasn't done anything of the sort (nVidia is still hopeful native spanning support will be re-introduced back with WDDM 2.0). Extended desktops and dual view is a totally different subject and irrelevant to spanning.  Spanning has been explained above in comparison to extending.  SoftTH is one option, but not compatable with all applications that took advantage of spanning. Matrox...don't get me started.  Are we at risk of converting to the dark side (ATI)?  What we need, since no complete alternative exists, is spanning support with SLI. I am hopeful that WDDM 2.0 could provide.
    Friday, March 12, 2010 11:39 PM
  • You say "Please don't generalize your position into that of the rest of us".......then make the statement:  "The reality is that even with two identical monitors you just don't need to use both for one app very often."

    1.  Based on what?
    2.  Who's generalizing now?
    3.  How do you know how anyone on this board uses their monitors and apps?

    You say you've been using dual monitors for 8 years yet, by what I read in the beginning of this thread you didn't know what spanning was until recently and confused spanning vs extended desktops at the beginning.  Your response was even bold enough to state "Other than arranging them vertically, I can't begin to imagine how any other mode would be useful or acceptable."

    Here's a generalization for everyone:  If you don't know what you're talking about then kindly refrain from contributing.

    Geez.....

    Sunday, March 14, 2010 3:41 PM
  • 3.  How do you know how anyone on this board uses their monitors and apps?
    Really good question.  And one gets very few answers out of this thread, in that almost no one here is saying exactly what they need spanning for, just that they NEED it, like some kind of drug fix. 

    So... What do YOU really NEED it for?  Be specific.

    Video games?  The convenience of being able to use the "Maximize" button to cover two screens?

    Here's a generalization for everyone:  If you don't know what you're talking about then kindly refrain from contributing.

    I asked for clarification in the beginning, because I have used multiple monitors for so long with an extended desktop in many versions of Windows, yet never needed this additional spanning capability. Frankly, I think it's a GOOD thing my Taskbar runs across only one monitor.  The entire second monitor is clear for use that way.

    Oh, and kindly refrain from telling others what to do or not do.  No one elected you president.

    -Noel
    Sunday, March 14, 2010 5:00 PM
  • I would like to know if the ability to have horizontal span will be added back into windows 7.

    I have read a lot of things on the net about why this was dropped for vista and there is a lot of finger pointing and no-one seems to want to own this issue. How possible is it for the various parties to get together to come up with a solution?

    I have been developing for 35 years, I own my own software company, and I am an MSDN subscriber. I use windows 7 at home and I like it. I can't (and I mean can't not won't) use win 7 at work due specifically to the lack of horizontal span mode. I figure I would lose 15-20 minutes a day screwing around with window sizing that I don't need to do using windows XP.

    The problem is with all programs, but most notibly MS Word, Excel and Access, as well as for development tools - I use both visual studio and eclipse. Without horizontal span, I find that using these applications is akward and frustrating on my dual monitor setup.

    I hope that there is someone from Microsoft who can give some consideration to this issue. I have read about the frustration people have with this issue on many forums around the net so there is at least some percentage of the user base who have a need for this feature that was taken away.
    Wednesday, March 17, 2010 12:56 PM
  • Hi Dkuehner,

    Can you list a specific example of where spanning provides you a different experience than extending the desktop across two monitors?

    As a dual monitor (extended desktop) user myself for a long time, I've not felt that I'm missing any functionality, and I'm really curious about what it is you and others who want spanning support are actually doing (and clearly that I'm not able to do) that improves your user experience... 

    Making that very clear in a forum like this will no doubt increase your chances that someone at Microsoft will take your request seriously.

    I have, for example, a comparison tool (Beyond Compare by Scooter Software) that I run across both monitors, so I can get a comparison of two sources each of which has long lines side by side.  The tool happily "spans" both monitors, remembers its position, and comes up that way next time.  Here's a screen capture:



    Are there applications that simply won't come up on more than one monitor?  If so, which ones?

    As far as I can see, Word (I'm using 2003), Excel, and Visual Studio happily open at whatever location they're left at, including running across both monitors.

    Personally, I find the bezel space between the monitors causes such a discontinuity that for other than applications that naturally break in the middle (such as the above comparison tool) that I wouldn't want them to cross that boundary.

    Please don't take this as a criticism; I'm genuinely curious about what I may be missing.

    The *one* thing I can think of is that I virtually never use an application in maximized mode.  I can only think of one exception, and that is RDP, which I maximize to the right monitor.

    Is this mostly an issue with maximizing windows?

    -Noel
    Wednesday, March 17, 2010 4:55 PM
  • Noel, do you work for Microsoft? When I look at your profile it says you work at ProDigital Software.

    I am trying to communicate with Microsoft about something and I would rather not cloud the issue with discussions with a 3rd party.
    Wednesday, March 17, 2010 7:07 PM
  • This is an open forum; it is not a "you ask and Microsoft answers forum", though they are known to look around here from time to time.

    And if anything my participation is helping you here.

    * I'm telling you that you need to put more info into the reasoning behind why you feel you need spanning.  I certainly don't understand why you need it from what you've written.  You claim you cannot work with Windows without spanning...  Let's hear why.  Gosh, someone might actually even be able to suggest an alternative way to use Windows that could actually save you time over the way you work now!

    * My reply pushes your thread to the top, where it's more likely to be seen.

    You need to come to grips with the fact that Microsoft has apparently made the same (mis?) judgment that I have, that spanning isn't an important feature in light of desktop extension.

    So uncloud the issue.  Please.  I'd love nothing more than to see you get your favorite feature back.  But I don't expect Microsoft to say anything here about it.  They don't even acknowledge their blatantly obvious bugs, much less reveal their policy on bringing back features that have been actively eliminated.

    Let me put it another way:  As an impartial observer with the same experience as you and who knows his way around Windows, I cannot discern what is so important about spanning that you feel you cannot use Windows without it...  Are you unable to game?  Do you find maximizing Windows essential to what you do?  Without some specific justification it sounds like so much griping with no substance, and being evasive doesn't help your cause any.  That's the honest truth.

    -Noel
    Thursday, March 18, 2010 3:44 AM
  • But I don't expect Microsoft to say anything here about it.  They don't even acknowledge their blatantly obvious bugs, much less reveal their policy on bringing back features that have been actively eliminated.
    I couldn't agree more.


    Regards Picsoe
    Thursday, March 18, 2010 9:44 AM
  • I'm sorry Noel, but both you and I have been involved in threads about this issue before and I have already seen people trying to explain why this is an important issue. I don't have a problem with you not wanting horizontal span, but I also didn't want this thread to become like the previous one which just became an attempt to explain what horizontal span means.

    However, to clarify the issue...

    Horizontal Span. There is often a misunderstanding of what the difference is between horizontal span and extended desktop. The most important distinction for me is that if you have a dual monitor setup, with horizontal span when you double click the title bar of a window, the maximized window will stretch across both monitors.  With extended desktop, the window will maximize to only one of the monitors.

    Now then, why is this important and why my needs are not met by a window that is just re-sized to cover both monitors...

    I own a software company and I am involved with both design and develpment. While the horizontal span issue affects almost everything I do, I'll give a specific example using Microsoft Word.

    I use Word for my design docs. I also use data modeling tools, Access databases, requirements documents from clients, online resources, etc. for reference throughout the process. I like to toggle the window that word is in between a maximized state covering both monitors where I can view 4 pages of the document at once and a windowed state which typically covers only one monitor leaving the other monitor available to view the other applications mentioned above.

    So the typical session might be as follows.

    - d-click word title bar to view maximized to edit document
    - work for a while
    - d-click word title bar to window-ize and view both design doc and client requirements doc
    - cut and paste or something
    - d-click word title bar to maximize and edit
    - work for a while
    - d-click word title bar to window-ize to access data model
    - d-click data modeler title bar to maximize and make changes
    - work for a while
    - d-click data modeler title bar to window-ize and view both word and data model
    - cut and paste
    - d-click word title bar to edit in maximized state
    - work for a while
    - d-click word title bar to window-ize to refer back to data model
    - d-click again to maximize to work in 4 page goodness
    - work for a while
    - etc.
    - etc.

    The thing is that flipping between a maximized state where I can see only one app across both monitors and a windowed state where I can view more than one app at a time is just so convenient. Alt-tabbing doesn't help because sometimes I want to see 2 different apps at once. Resizing the window to stretch across both monitors doesn't help for the same reason.

    The thing is, that this was a feature that was specifically taken away. It may have been that it was removed to reduce complexity in the WDDM or increase performance or something, but if no-one says anything, it will never be brought back. I suspect that it may never come back even if I do say something, but what can you do.

    I use win 7 at home and I like it. At work I have win xp and win 7 in a dual boot setup. I tried win 7 at work for a while and I just couldn't get past this one issue (there were some other issues, but I got around them). So I am left working with XP. Which isn't actually so bad, it does what I need it to do. It's just too bad that I can't move up to the latest windows.
    Thursday, March 18, 2010 11:00 AM
  • This is an open forum; it is not a "you ask and Microsoft answers forum", though they are known to look around here from time to time.
    One other thing. I have an MSDN subscription and I was under the impression that this gave me access to forums that were monitored by people from Microsoft so that you could get real answers about things.

    When I log in to the MSDN forums, it redirects here for windows 7 issues. I presumed, therefore, that this actually was a "you ask and Microsoft answers forum" and that Microsoft employees would answer questions that were not taken care of by someone else in the community.
    Thursday, March 18, 2010 12:14 PM
  • Okay, I'd say what you've written is a decent justification for why you find spanning increases your productivity, and having done so (in my opinion) greatly increases your chances of having someone at Microsoft say, "hey, I guess that feature does have some good uses after all, and it's not just people complaining because of their resistance to change".

    I'll refrain from offering you workarounds, as you seem to know what you're doing.

    -Noel
    Thursday, March 18, 2010 2:23 PM
  • I don't use span for games, I like span for the fact that it looks a whole lot better than dual view. the desktop is more complete and looks professional and i have a lot of tasks and windows open therefore having them easily accessible on a larger taskbar is ideal for me.

    i believe if u dont use span, then don't curse it. its obviously important to many people (myself included) and has held other people from upgrading from xp to w7.

    and noel, a minor inconvenience is still an inconvenience. why change it when it wasnt broke. its like going from fuel injection to a carburetor. they both get you to your final destination but could you have done it more efficiently

    Friday, March 19, 2010 2:21 AM
  • I'm not cursing anything.  I WANT you to have the feature you like.  I certainly don't believe in eliminating features people want.

    What I am doing is trying to point out that if you're Microsoft, and you're trying to figure out what features to eliminate to make Windows cheaper to maintain, you're going to be taking a hard look at why you'd want to spend effort (money) to make spanning work when an extended desktop does 99% of the job.  Apparently these things are entirely different to maintain under the covers.  And few people are putting their needs for spanning in writing, other than to say they just prefer it.

    Lots of folks preferred putting their icons in their own order in their Explorer windows, too, and guess where that feature went.  :-/

    Why fix it if it wasn't broke?  Perhaps they wanted to create a more flexible architecture where any number of monitors could be positioned in any number of configurations.

    I'm also trying to help people find the best ways to use the desktop extension feature that IS still available, since I don't hold a lot of hope for Microsoft to fix the lack of spanning any time soon.

    And now, it seems, the video card makers are making it work anyway.

    -Noel

    Friday, March 19, 2010 3:26 AM
  • Vegan Fanatic

    I tried the spanning on my ATI card and it works fine. My 6600 GT worked too when I pulled it out to try.

    Can you tell us how you did that with the 6600GT? This is a big issue and I'd like to know what can be done.

    Is this with a new set of NVIDIA drivers or something?
    Monday, March 22, 2010 3:32 PM
  • I am not sure what the problem is, could be some rigs are not so good with Windows 7. I bought a corporate platform and I have not had problems.

    Drivers are built-in for it, so I am happy as its stable.

    Vegan Fanatic. Sorry to belabor the point, but this goes to the root of this thread.  If you can actually do horizontal span with window 7 there will be a lot of happy people here.

    Can you do something for me to ensure that this is actually horizontal span and not just extended desktop? Can you open a window so that it is not maximized and you can drag it around from one screen to another. Then just double-click on the title bar and see if the window maximizes to cover one screen or both of your screens. Then double-click the title again so that the window resumes its previous size. Then post your result back here. If you could do that it would be really really appreciated.

    If it maximizes to cover both screens, could you tell us how you configured your video? What are the settings in whatever video driver dialogs you use? If this works, it might be more recent drivers or something.

    I use NVIDIA cards myself so I'd really like to know how this could be done with your 6600GT, but if it works with ATI but not NVIDIA, I'd happily go out and buy an ATI card.

     

    Tuesday, March 23, 2010 4:41 PM
  • OH my God.  I'm glad someone actually gets what my trouble is. I have the same issues as DK, as well as I also hate having the same desktop background repeat on both screens.  I used to love to have my panoramas. 

    Don't forget that the taskbar doesn't "span" either. You have one on one screen or the other, but it is much smaller. I hadn't realized that they had "removed" spanning, or I wouldn't have "upgraded" last week. 

    I know some of my complaints seem like aesthetics, perhaps, to some, but It truly just bothers me to see a product go "backwards". 

     

    EDIT: I found this, an actual answer from an actual support person. Basically it's "no, but please drop a note in the suggestion box". It links to another page where a support engineer gives an overly complicated non-fix for the issue. 

    http://social.answers.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/w7desktop/thread/ee1a4777-eba2-
    4ed8-8421-2a8d8005066f

    • Edited by rexrock Monday, March 29, 2010 9:13 PM new info
    • Edited by Ronnie VernonMVP Friday, September 24, 2010 4:24 PM edit
    Monday, March 29, 2010 8:56 PM
  • OH my God.  I'm glad someone actually gets what my trouble is. I have the same issues as DK, as well as I also hate having the same desktop background repeat on both screens.  I used to love to have my panoramas. 

    Hi

    You can still use your dual monitor wallpaper on the extended desktop.

    There are tons of websites that offer freely available dual monitor walpapers.

    I use wallpaper configured as 3360x1050 and set to the Tile option. This works very well.

    Hope this helps.

    Thank You for using Windows 7


    Ronnie Vernon MVP
    Tuesday, March 30, 2010 5:11 AM
  • Thanks for the workaround on the background, Ronnie. Cheers. 
    Tuesday, March 30, 2010 4:17 PM
  • Yeah, thanks for that Ronnie!  It's a combination I hadn't tried, and it works great!

    For what it's worth, one thing that makes having the Taskbar on only one monitor very handy is if you do remote desktop into other computers...  Assuming your primary monitor (with the local Taskbar) is the left one, maximizing the RDP client viewer on the other monitor puts all the remote computer's controls on the second monitor, and it's easy to not confuse them with the controls on the local computer.  I'm not saying everyone should want to work that way, but it does turn out to make having the taskbar on only one monitor kind of nice.

    -Noel

    Tuesday, March 30, 2010 5:30 PM
  • Good morning.  I am not Dkuehner but here is a real-world application of the "issue":

     

    This:

    http://9yjl8q.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pPmzLxB2LDPO42lLIMLfwiI9f_
    7v4R82cN78WShvODBZhqKQ2o34W-PX102wwqU3OOzQ_-p1dXcKJ8xEh7WMZ3PyPFo9NI0ht/CONUS%20Radar.jpg

     

    ...is better than this:

    http://9yjl8q.blu.livefilestore.com/y1poEv_gpZSO4PS-QHPZXrXoQg8V_q-G6shhhRG4hGfWdvgER36crvw8RACiOpi_QCnz6tjQlVZe
    VbwK5GVUkrUoWZMBrIEzWr5/CONUS%20Radar%201.jpg

     

    ...or this:

    http://9yjl8q.blu.livefilestore.com/y1pPDbzf6qsXkkzyrI
    WWd115vZKc4UVZp_Q3JnnXpXMRVA5pxQVScRGFlwX3leL
    c3eBWeVGZA2XNUiC4LtI6FCOkbTAywPCih6V/CONUS%20Radar%202.jpg

     

    For many high-resolution or broad imaging applications, the more screen space unobstructed by task bars, browser headers, etc..., the better.  That first image was stitched together from two screenshots so as to simulate proper horizontal spanning.  All images are screenshots from this site (http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~ovens/loops/wxloop.cgi?radar_us_full+1) which is a 4736x3000 meteorological radar mosaic that you can view and loop.  As is typical in many weather forecast and first responder offices, there are 2 and 4 screen setups that allow technicians and forecasters to get a broad view then drill down for locale-specific image data (radar, satellite cloud, fire, wind profile, lightening, etc...)  The more usable screen space there is displayed, the less time they have to spend panning around to get the information they need to make good decisions. 

    Friday, April 9, 2010 12:20 PM
  • So, I'm failing to see how this feature got so useless to now be deprecated.

    Is this getting added soon?

    I need it right now. Even when the OS is so great, Microsoft always utterly fails to list the missing features in the product ads.

    Monday, May 3, 2010 5:24 PM
  • I'm going to just add my vote in here that I would like this feature. This actually helps tilt my decision to switch to an ATI card if they aren't working on a fix.
    Tuesday, May 4, 2010 3:50 AM
  • I sent a request to the feedback service provided in here, which was on another forum though. I don't mind bumping this one anyway as it at least show this is one feature which shouldn't have gone missing. I sorta stopped trying, I'm not really interested in any form of third party software workaround to be honest. If it was in before, I can't imagine a reason whatsoever why it would be removed. I mean, if you have multiple monitors I cannot understand why one of two logical uses for em would be removed. You either use multiple monitors as multiple desktops (for the lotsa-windows-enthusiast), or as one major desktop spanning all monitors (everyone else apparently). I want the second option back!
    Friday, May 7, 2010 10:42 PM
  • It doesn't really matter afaik. It's in whatever ms is handing over to the guys making nvidia cards, ati cards and whatever else cards that is at fault if I understand the problem right. I have two 9800 cards in sli and don't have a proper way to come around it either unless something amazing has happen since this topic was launched.
    Friday, May 7, 2010 11:41 PM
  • I'd just like to add my voice to the growing crowd.  Being able to maximize windows across multiple monitors is a critical feature for me.  Had I known that Windows 7 dropped this feature, I would still be using XP.  The full screen mode of Visual Studio is something I frequently used to look at multiple code files at once.  It is no longer useful though since it covers only a single monitor.  I hope the spanning feature is restored soon. 

    Is there an official channel we should be pursuing to register our dissatisfaction?  If we organize it will be much harder for Microsoft and the hardware developers to ignore us.

    Friday, May 28, 2010 6:36 PM
  • So having to drag the corner of a window across two monitors, instead of pressing a Maximize button, is enough to make you continue to use an outdated operating system?  Am I reading you correctly?

    I have two monitors and Windows 7 and I use all kinds of apps across both of them.  I essentially never use Maximize - never have - but I do use all the screen space.

    Please don't get me wrong; I'm not being critical of what you want - I just don't see it as as big a deal...  Perhaps I'm missing something about the way you and others work, and I'd like to know what I'm missing.  If not, perhaps with a little change to your habits you can get all the functionality you need out of the current system.

    -Noel

    Saturday, May 29, 2010 2:51 PM
  • The difference is that your apps still know of your 2 independent shell resolutions given to each display. Horizontal span is giving a single resolution to a single display shell which is spanned across multiple monitors. In spanning, the applications know of a single resolution, not multiple individuals. At this point, there are a whole new set of rules for applications, like Visual Studio and recently mentioned, as well as in the gaming environment with games only supporting single monitors (not really single monitors, but single displays, which then utilize all attached monitors in spanning mode instead of just the primary display). Folks that don't know the difference appear to be limited on their knowlegde of the scope of those benefits, compared with just multiple displays in extended desktops. Folks should try not to be so obtuse when they don't consider, or take into account, the features and benefits of spanning...when it appears they have never tried it or simply confuse it with extended desktops. Similar to folks speaking out against the greener grass on the other side of the fence when they've never stepped foot across the fence or even tried taking the shoes off and feeling the cool, fresh blades between their toes.
    Saturday, May 29, 2010 11:01 PM
  • I'm not dissing spanning, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S DIFFERENT, practically speaking. 

    OF COURSE it's irritating not to have one particular feature (such as the maximize button causing the app to cover both monitors) work the same as what you're used to, but...  If it's just an irritation it's really not a big deal in the grand scheme of things; you can retrain yourself to use the system differently.  We all do, every time a new version is released.

    Please illustrate EXACTLY what Visual Studio does with spanning that I don't see with extended desktop.  I simply am not seeing what I cannot do.  Heck, if a grand new feature set is available that makes life better I'll be right with you in line pining away for spanning too.

    My logic, without having spanning to compare to directly, is this:  I am not seeing my applications doing anything on one monitor that they do not do on both.

    This may well be because I don't use Maximized windows, nor "full screen" modes of applications, as a rule.  I have large monitors precisely because I like to use applications in windowed mode.  Also, I don't WANT to use maximization and full-screen modes because they have never added obvious value for me in an extended desktop environment.  I use my computer for many things, usually at the same time, and easy access to those things is usually more important than focusing on one application.  Clearly this is the direction Microsoft expects people to move in.

    For example, Visual Studio 2008 when set to Full Screen mode prevents my (autohid) Taskbar from coming out.  Why would I want that?  I can work with it just fine when it's pulled in from the edges a bit.

    If you're not getting enough space on your screen when using your apps in windowed mode, such that the 10% extra space you're given to work in is critical, BUY A BIGGER MONITOR.  It's not like they're all that expensive any more.

    So...  Please describe, in detail, one or more specific things that cannot be done or are more difficult with a specific application - e.g., Visual Studio - PLEASE.  In turn, I may well suggest some things that can be done instead, because I use that application quite effectively in windowed mode on an extended desktop.

    -Noel

    Sunday, May 30, 2010 3:08 PM
  • I'm not dissing spanning, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S DIFFERENT, practically speaking. 

    [...]

    If you're not getting enough space on your screen when using your apps in windowed mode, such that the 10% extra space you're given to work in is critical, BUY A BIGGER MONITOR.  It's not like they're all that expensive any more.

    So...  Please describe, in detail, one or more specific things that cannot be done or are more difficult with a specific application - e.g., Visual Studio - PLEASE.  In turn, I may well suggest some things that can be done instead, because I use that application quite effectively in windowed mode on an extended desktop.

    -Noel

     

    I'm patient. But it's ran out. So, translating that... 

    "I cannot read this thread

    bla bla bla

    Buy a bigger monitor than 1920x1200 and an additional 1024x1200 space is just 10%.

    Visual Studio is the one and only benchmark for the use of 2944x2400 and nobody does anything else more effective than you."

    Besides, I can give you an application... how about maximizing any window to two screen span? Or forcing an image to just go out through these two monitors... stitching projectors?

    Not like it's a deal breaker, but once you hit the "oh my gosh, they removed it" wall , feels like hitting Bill's face.

     

    Monday, May 31, 2010 11:56 AM
  • Hey, thanks for the slap.  Let me translate your nice response, in turn: 

    "My philosophy of life is that if it's not my way then it's no good, and I'm going to keep moaning about it rather than trying to learn to use things a different way, even though smart people assure me there are ways it can actually be used adeptly.  I really can't think of any good, solid reasons for needing this feature, so I'll write an insulting response instead.  And besides, I like finding excuses for writing things like 'hitting Bill's face'".

    You do know that exhibiting adaptability is a sign of a higher life form, right?

    You do know that Bill Gates doesn't actively set Microsoft policy any more, right?

    You do know that no one is holding a gun to your head to upgrade to a new operating system, right?

    Honestly I don't blame Microsoft for stepping away from spanning, given that 97% of the stuff can be done - sometimes even better - in a windowed app on an extended desktop.  No doubt that additional complexity in the driver model is expensive to maintain.

    Maximizing windows is so last century.  ;)

    -Noel

    Tuesday, June 1, 2010 12:07 AM
  • Hi...

    I'd like to show my support for all the people here that understand the problem and have voiced their displeasure in limited solutions at this time.  Looking forward to seeing real solutions come down the pipeline.

    Noel... I'd recommend that you discontinue posting in this thread.  Your posts are off-topic as:

    * you do not HAVE the problem

    * you do not UNDERSTAND the problem

    * you do not have a SOLUTION to the problem

    Spanning differs from Extended desktops (DualView in nVidia language), in that it provides a SINGLE DISPLAY to the Operating System and applications, regardless of the number of actual screens.

    I am a "gamer".  Many games do not have multi-monitor support.  This means that they do not manage multiple monitors and how they display on them.  They can manage a single display, often irregardless of the total resolution of this display (eg: 1280x1024 or 2560x1024) without any problem.  Yes, this is an oversight on the part of the developer of the game.  Spanning allows this game to display on any number of screens you care to use, as if it was a single display.

    However, Spanning support has been available in the Windows OS for many years, along with other modes.  In fact, this spanning support has been a standard part of display drivers, regardless of the OS, so you can often choose between Cloning, Spanning, and Extended/DualView display modes on Windows, Linux, and Mac... for many years.  There's not much need for specific software vendors to all individually provide multi-monitor support for their games, when there was already a perfectly good solution for their product to run on multiple-displays.

    With Windows 7, for whatever reason, this feature has largely been unavailable.  Some display card manufacturers are beginning to find workarounds, but this really has been quite a mess and who knows how long before it gets solved and is relatively bug-free for mass-market consumption.

    Noel... Please don't be a TROLL and keep posting nonsense about what you think is right and good in the world and that you think it's "good enough".  You are you and should just look out for yourself, as you're clearly not qualified to be helping anyone here on this topic.  You don't understand the problem, so you're just getting in the way.

    I hope this is fixed soon, as I was hoping to fly my helicopter this weekend, but had the shocker that there's no Span mode available in Windows 7.  I am not going to fly with only a single display.  You go ahead and pretend you can drag it to cover 2 screens all you want.  That's not a solution for what SPANNING mode does for applications that run "full-screen".  Forget the term "maximized", since that's just a decoy problem that does not relate to this thread.

    Thanks!

    -Zen

    Tuesday, June 1, 2010 2:24 AM
  • Hey, I'm helping to keep the thread on the top, aren't I?  :)

    I'm convinced you need spanning.  I really am.

    -Noel

    Tuesday, June 1, 2010 11:56 PM
  • Vegan Fanatic...

    You also do not understand multi-monitor modes.  Your _desktop_ will work fine with multiple monitors regardless of whether you are using Span mode or Extended/MultiView mode.  Try running a _game_ in _FULL-SCREEN_ that does not itself support multiple displays, but is then displayed across mutliple displays (hint:  YOU CAN'T... not without spending money on extra hardware or maybe 3rd party software that might not even work with Windows 7 64-bit).

    This is a problem with the Windows 7 OS and/or video drivers running on said OS.  The required software features for supporting Span mode were not implemented by Microsoft in Vista and Windows 7.  Video card manufacturers (ATI/nVidia) do not currently have a way to support the feature and say it is unsupported at this time.  It's possible that it might be supported in the future by one or both of the 2 manufacturers I mentioned.  It's also possible that it will NOT be supported, due to the missing support in the OS.

    A different card won't help, as the features are still missing in the OS.  It might be possible for the driver developers to find some way to work around this, but the odds of that are completely unknown to me.

    -Zen

    Wednesday, June 2, 2010 3:11 AM
  • Of course, you provide only a general description of what you think can be done, with no details on how it can be done.  Clearly, you do not understand the issue described in this thread.  You should also refrain from posting in this thread.  Please stick to responding about things you know, or ask the correct questions so that you can understand the problem, and you will eventually get your votes.

    You can learn more about the difference in multi-monitor modes here:  http://www.realtimesoft.com/multimon/faq.asp#MultimonModes

    Please read up and provide any help you can.  If you cannot help, please refrain from posting in this thread, and go find another topic for which you have expertise.

    -Zen

    Wednesday, June 2, 2010 6:48 AM
  • Hey, thanks for the slap.  Let me translate your nice response, in turn: 

    "My philosophy of life is that if it's not my way then it's no good, and I'm going to keep moaning about it rather than trying to learn to use things a different way, even though smart people assure me there are ways it can actually be used adeptly.  I really can't think of any good, solid reasons for needing this feature, so I'll write an insulting response instead.  And besides, I like finding excuses for writing things like 'hitting Bill's face'".

    You do know that exhibiting adaptability is a sign of a higher life form, right?

    You do know that Bill Gates doesn't actively set Microsoft policy any more, right?

    You do know that no one is holding a gun to your head to upgrade to a new operating system, right?

    Honestly I don't blame Microsoft for stepping away from spanning, given that 97% of the stuff can be done - sometimes even better - in a windowed app on an extended desktop.  No doubt that additional complexity in the driver model is expensive to maintain.

    Maximizing windows is so last century.  ;)

    -Noel

    Feels nice. Gotta write somethin' up.

    Philosophy... Yes, exactly. But... "can't think of a solid way..." as I said, you can't read.

    Adaptability... Microsoft is subject to the same rules it enforces upon us.

    Microsoft holds the gun by discontinued support to old OS.

    Anyway, nice chat. In the end, these my posts are Microsoft's fault. They made the OS, they made the changes. Too many "changes", too often, I say. There must be some radical change in the way they design new changes... a whole generation of computer savvy people is growing up, and these forums will implode, once they get to know of them.

    Wednesday, June 2, 2010 10:58 PM
  • What he means is Horizontal span, exactly as he said.
    Instead of having 2 monitors set up as dual screen both displaying say 1680x1050, he means having both monitors setup to horizontal span so the resolution is 3360x1050
    This enables full screen games to use a resolution of 3360x1050 spanning both monitors.
    The dual screen in vista was capable of allowing dual monitors running 1680x1060 but when you launched a full screen game, it turned off 1 monitor and only used your primary one.
    in XP horizontal span meant that you could use a full 3360x1050 resolution within a game with 2 monitors next to eachother.

    So far I have not been able to find horizontal span in windows 7, which means I cannot play WoW on 2 screens, So yet again we are forced to use windows XP, unless we want to waste a perfectly good 2nd monitor.

    Hi Carl

    There is a lot of misconception and misinformation about exactly what is meant by 'horizontal spanning' as opposed to the 'extended desktop'.

    Your description is articulate and spot on. This is the first time I have seen an understandable description of horizontal spanning, from anyone here.

    I have one system that is set up to dual boot XPPro SP3 and Windows 7.  It has an ATI X600 video card with dual output. I have dual monitors connected to this system. Looking at the display modes, in the Adapter properties, in either XP or Windows 7 the maximum resolution in 'List all modes' is 1280x1024. The only Windows option in the Display Settings is 'Extend Desktop' which seems to work OK to extend the display across both monitors. This allows me to use custom desktop wallpapers with a size of 3200x1200 pixels and these seem to display and span both monitors, without any stretching, as long as the 'extend' option in the display settings is enabled.

    I looked in XP, Vista, and Windows 7, and there is no default 'span' options at all?


    Doing a cursory search on this subject returns a massive amount of users 'finger pointing' about responsibility for this problem, but nothing that is really authoritative from any legitimate graphics industry manufacturer or Microsoft source? The only reference to any 'horizontal span' settings are those that are associated with, and enabled in the graphics adapter software/driver settings.

    If you have any links to any authoritative source about this issue, please post this information.

    Regards,


    Thank You for testing Windows 7 Beta

    `
    Ronnie Vernon MVPI

    I think everyone here knows the difference between extended desktop and horizontal span, and there is no need for some authoritative citation or reference. This is a public forum where people discuss problems and help each other find solutions, not a academic journal. Don't pretend like you dont understand the question simply because can't admit that windows got something wrong.

    My apologies if you really dont undarstand what the words horizontal and span mean. If that is the case I will define the problem in such a way as to prevent you from saying I don't know what you mean. Horizontal span is a display setting that allows you to view to physical monitors as if there were just one. That is the start bar goes all the way accross the bottom of both, with the windows icon in the bottom left corner of the left monitor and the clock in the bottom right corner of the right monitor. In order to use this feature you need two monitors of the exact same dimensions and resolution. B

    Tuesday, June 8, 2010 9:50 PM
  • Had I noticed sooner that this post was this long, I would taken the laptop into the bathroom so I could multi-task...

    I myself was a huge fan of the NVidia display driver's spanning capability(two 1680*1050 monitors acting as one single 3360x1050 display), but I've never used this spanned setup for gaming as I am a fan of first person shooters and I'm sure this configuration would have left me with a center cursor/crosshair somewhere in the bezel wasteland.

    My use of the spanned display with the extended task bar was for exactly that; the extended taskbar. If I'm writing html/php/mysql/asp etc in the left side of the display and looking at the rendered page in IE and/or Firefox etc on the right, and have SQLYog or SQL Management Studio open, and have an FTP client open, and have some local folders open, and Outlook open, and have a media player open jamming some Yanni(*ahem* lol) the list could go on, but my point is that the taskbar on a single screen can only hold so many taskbar buttons. The extended taskbar capability provided by a spanned display setup was just a downright awesome thing as far as I was concerned.

    My Task Bar was 3360 pixels long and was three levels(rows?) high(also nice seing the date along with the clock at that point). I had what some might call an obnoxiously large Quick Launch with 29 items in it(command prompt, text editors, Outlook, PowerShell, etc) on the left next to the Start Button. I had a custom toolbar with the contents of my "My Computer" for quick access to my local and mapped drives on the right next to the SysTray. This left me an entire display's taskbar three rows in height for taskbar buttons. I rarely even ever accessed my Start Menu. I was more efficient because of it.

    Was I a little miffed about the loss of saved per-folder view options in Windows 7? Yeppers. Am I dealing with it? Yessir. I still like Win7 and have about upgraded all of my machines to it. Am I complaining about the loss of spanned displays? Nope, I'll deal with it if I have to. I'm just adding my voice to the muffled yelp that is this thread.

    Whether this capability was provided by Microsoft or made possible by graphics vendors or a combination of both, I dont care. I would just like to state that it would be nice to see display spanning come back.

     

    Sunday, June 13, 2010 3:44 AM
  • Adding true horizontal span (contrary to dual view) is easy, for both Nvidia and Ati even if they blame windows 7 for it.

     

    The Nvidia/Ati card sits between the windows 7 Operating System and the two, three or more Monitors you plan on spanning.

    Now the Nvidia/Ati driver/card could simply lie to windows7 and tell it that there is a 4800x1200 huge Monitor attached to it, rather than three monitors of a 1600x1200 resolution.

    The windows 7 OS not knowing that this is a fake Monitor, would simply send all the information to the Nvidia/Ati card needed to address this Monitor. The Nvidia/Ati driver then would simply split the buffered 4800x1200 huge picture into three 1600x1200 pictures and then send them to the three monitors.

    This is a very trivial, easy as pie process which can be done fully via the graphics card drivers.

    The Nvidia/Ati programmers could do that in a single day. They actually already have done it for the quattro cards, which are essentially a similar architechture.

    Their claim that the new windows7 WDM is getting in their way is absolute nonsense, because as i described above, if you fake a big monitor, windows7 cannot get in your way. It will just send the information needed to address that big monitor. The nvidia drivers can do whatever it wants with this information stored in the buffer, including splitting it among the 3 1600x1200 monitors.

     

    They are lying straight into the consumers face, thinking we won't notice.

     

    They simply do NOT want to give you horizontal span. It has been decided by the big cartel, of which MS, Nvidia and Ati is more likely than not part of, to remove horizontal spanning, so people are forced to buy tripple2go devices of Matrox which are also part of the big cartel more likely than not. The result is, polluting our planet and wasting it's resources on hardware which can be done MUCH better via software, straight in the drivers.

    I say that, because as you can now see how easy it would have been to add this horizontal span, both Ati and Nvidia AND MS have taken steps to remove it almost in sync.  The process to add it was so simple that if there was true competition, both Ati and Nvidia would have hasted to implement this BEFORE win7 was released. The beta was several months...

     

    If they made their drivers open source, a hobby coder could get horizontal span done in a matter of a week or less by the process i described above.

     

    The industry has become a bunch of greedy devils castrating their hardware artificially via firmware. The newest gtx 465 card by nvidia is just another example. It is basically a gtx 470 with slightly less RAM and with some stream processors disabled, NOT because they are damaged (in most cases), but because they can reach a lower price segment this way.

    There is countless examples of where the industry castrates it s hardware, this just being the most recent one i am aware of.

     

    If you think this out however, you will soon realize that this way of castrating your hardware can work ONLY if there is no true competition out there. If there was true competition, those NOT castrating their products would destroy the competition. This a bit about this...

    The result is, wasting resources of our planet and energy to create a product which you castrate after, basically spitting in the face of nature and consumers. It's like killing a cow and then eating only half the meat, throw away the rest.

     

    regards

    pZombie

     

     

    Tuesday, June 15, 2010 9:41 AM
  • So having to drag the corner of a window across two monitors, instead of pressing a Maximize button, is enough to make you continue to use an outdated operating system?  Am I reading you correctly?

    -Noel


    Yes - unfortunatley I bought Vista before discovering this and then had to delete and reload XP.  There is no way I will be purchasing Windows 7 until it supports span mode.

    Sunday, June 20, 2010 11:37 AM
  • This could be true, the action is simple for me as I havnt purchased Windows 7 yet :D

    No span mode, no windows 7.

    Sunday, June 20, 2010 11:39 AM
  • wow, long thread. Sorry to add to it, but wanted to throw in my support for getting spanning back into windows. Hopefully in doing so I can also provide Noel with a real application where this feature is needed.

     

    I work for a company that provides custom hardware and software installations. We have a number of clients who want large displays made up of a number of projectors, that need to be stitched together in windows. Now, normally as you describe this would be easy, word and the likes can already be stretched across both monitors. The DirectX context though can not. It finds out the screen resolution from windows for the main screen, and renders at that size. So we'd most likely just go back to XP, but these particular clients want some of the extra features provided by Win7, the most prominent is the ability to read the Application Thumbnails (hover your mouse over an icon on the task bar and see the live preview, we want that). 

     

    Now of course, we could build these machines using ATI cards, and the EyeFinity. But essentially this is a step backwards. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a MS hater, in fact I'm really enjoying 7, XP was king and 98 had my babies (ok, so they had a few bad ones but I forgive them that). Removing features though is a sure fire way to upset the people who spend money on the product. As long as I can remember gamers have ran span mode, cad users and myself on custom applications. To remove that feature is just stupid.

     

    I realise a lot of people on this thread haven't given you a concise answer, so hoping this one clarifies it slightly. My main concern isn't for standard applications that can be resized, but for naturally full screen apps (directX / OpenGL) that are rendered without a window and are not resizeable in the standard manner.

     

    pZombie. How can you possibly think that castrating hardware is bad for the consumer? I remember the old "locked" AMD 2500+ that were essentially a 3200+ chip with the multiplier locked. Short out the pins and bang, a 3200+ for the price of a 2500+. Or the tri core chips that are actually quad cores with one core disabled, easy unlock, cheap quad core processor. Castrating hardware isn't done due to some outrageous pricing policy, it would make no sense. Why should a company produce a more expensive item then deliberately castrate it just to sell it cheaper. That would be an outrageous business plan. Castrations are done on an entire batch when a number of them fail the testing process. You don't test EVERY item, you select proportional representation. If some of those are faulty, you castrate the entire batch, its more financially viable than testing every individual item.

    Monday, June 21, 2010 11:37 AM
  • pZombie. How can you possibly think that castrating hardware is bad for the consumer? I remember the old "locked" AMD 2500+ that were essentially a 3200+ chip with the multiplier locked. Short out the pins and bang, a 3200+ for the price of a 2500+. Or the tri core chips that are actually quad cores with one core disabled, easy unlock, cheap quad core processor. Castrating hardware isn't done due to some outrageous pricing policy, it would make no sense. Why should a company produce a more expensive item then deliberately castrate it just to sell it cheaper. That would be an outrageous business plan. Castrations are done on an entire batch when a number of them fail the testing process. You don't test EVERY item, you select proportional representation. If some of those are faulty, you castrate the entire batch, its more financially viable than testing every individual item.


    I described to you the process of adding horizontal span by faking a big monitor of 4800x1200 resolution. This is a very easy process considering the graphic cards sit between the monitor and the OS. If the graphic card and the graphic card driver does not want the OS to see the monitor, then it won t.

    You get Nvidia and Ati blaming the windows7 WDM and M$ acting as if there was a reason they did not re- introduce horizontal spanning into their new OS. At the same time, Matrox comes out with tripple2go devices. Well, i clearly see a conspiracy here and glady will put on my watercooled tinfoil hat to out myself.

    Or how do you explain that when LCD monitors were expensive, going over $1000 ea, they had horizontal span available for the consumers, knowing that noone can afford two or even three monitors, yet when LCDs became dirt cheap going down to $100-150 for ok quality, they decide to remove true horizontal spanning?

    Are you sooooo stupid to think THEY are soooo stupid to not have thought about this? Multimillion dollar industry which fails to see this being an important feature the consumers would like to have and they should NOT remove deliberately?

     

    just a few more examples if you are not bored reading yet...

     

    Why is the industry bringing out 50" LCD TVs at 1920x1080 resolution, which is essentially a big monitor with a tv tuner and some picture degrading filters built in, and makes sure that you won't be able to connect this monitor to your PC 1:1 mapped in native resolution and without the signal running through all kind of input lag introducing filters?

    You think the industry is too stupid to know that many of their potential customers would like to connect and game via their PC to such big screens?

    No, they are not, and building a 1920x1080 50" screen with direct 1:1 mapping and close to zero input lag, is actually easier than building one which has to upscale the picture and runs the signal through 1093190290 filters before it reaches the crystals on your LCD TV.

     

    If there was true competition, the industry would haste to produce such TVs, and brag with their low input lag and 1:1 mapping. Yet you find forums filled with people trying to figure out which LCD TVs allow for 1:1 mapping and have low input lag on top.

    If you try to communicate with various brand names via mail, live chat, or phone asking them about their input lag, they generally avoid giving info, as if this was a top secret thing to ask, which if in the wrong hands, would blow up the world.

     

    The so called expensive audiophile CD players are supposed to have the better DACs, forgetting to mention that passing the audio data in digital form would be absolutely lossless and way better. Any $20 computer DVD rom can read audio data 1:1 and pass it digitally, yet people dish out $2000 and more for "audiophile" CD players which on top loose quality when the data has to travel in analogue form through the cables into the receiver.

    There should be only one digital to analogue converter in the whole audio system, which is when the signal leaves the receiver and goes to the speakers which require an analogue signal to work. This is the only converter required to be of good quality.

    It angers me how much money those wicked make because people are naive in this regard and the industry manufactures their goods in a way which is not to deliver the best result, but to maximize their profits and keep people wanting by never delivering the best solution.

    It would not be as disturbing if this would not also pollute and waste resources of our planet as it does now by keeping people consuming.

     

    Remember the light edition controllers on certain motherboards? All it took to turn them into full raid controllers was using different firmware. Were those bad batches too? ....

     

    Remember when you could turn a geforce card into a quattro simply via firmware, till they started added obsolete hardware to their cards preventing this? Were the geforce cards all bad batches?

    How is it possible when there is true competition out there, for them being able to castrate a their products that much? Would you prefer a quattro which gives you the potential to use it professional later on over a geforce? I am sure you would.

    Obviously the manufacturing cost is the same for both.

    If there was true competition, they would sell quattros at a certain price which equals that of a geforce gaming card and just sell quattros with multi GPUs to reach a higher price segment for those which can afford it. If they didn t, the competition would, and they would shortly die out soon.

     

    I could fill a whole book of how the industry is castrating products and holding back features EVEN if they have to actually add to the manufacturing cost to achieve that but i think scratching a few examples is good enough for now...

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Monday, June 21, 2010 8:42 PM
  • Wow, you clearly have a major issue with manufacturers, and if you want to believe that the whole world is full of evil men then fine. I won't argue with you.

     

    On the issue at hand though, this isn't quite the same thing. Spanning WAS available in windows XP, and now in Windows 7 it is not. This isn't about hardware manufactures castrating their product, this is about Microsoft removing a feature they had previously implemented. A step back. ATI have took the lead and create EyeFinity that solves the problem, but that still doesn't make me forget the fact windows failed to implement the feature. It seems that you're easily willing to forgive MS for not KEEPING span mode, and yet you curse at the hardware manufacturers for not instantly jumping on board and solving the problem.

     

    I don't want to get too off topic here, but don't MS themselves have a history of releasing "not quite finished" software? Companies want to make money in the world, that's just how it works. If you're so concerned about hardware manufacturers and the likes raising prices, dumping resources and the likes, then stop using computers. Go live on a farm and remove technology from your life. But this topic isn't about that, its just about people who would like the Spanning mode feature kept in the windows system, so that we could have upgraded and found that features we had previously that performed tasks we NEEDED, were kept. If I upgraded the engine in my car, and while doing it they took my cup holder away, I'd be angry.

    Tuesday, June 22, 2010 12:46 PM
  • Well, i think i offered enough arguments, and i don't think i have to repeat all again. If you choose to believe in the theater  both, the hardware and software industry play for you, acting as if they are competing against each other, yet are one big family behind the scenes, with the occasional brand going bankrupt to keep the show real, then re- emerging as a new brand with the same old players behind the scene, then we seem to live in different worlds.

    What i see is hardware and software not being used to it's max potential which is what true competition would suggest.

     

    Who knows, maybe i am delusional, or maybe it s you trying to look away.

     

     

    Wednesday, June 23, 2010 1:28 AM
  • Can't agree more to pZombie. It's pretty much common practice amongst big industries, to plot schemes against absolute competition, as it would mean one of them must die. If that doesn't happen, well, market was manipulated. Though, hard to prove these things. Just like the financial crisis hit, and voila, turns out they plotted it all the way.

    Also, if you can't understand the necessity of features in special occasions and how much that's a pain in the ____, when all of them add up being removed/added/changed sporadically, then skip this thread.

    Wednesday, June 23, 2010 9:41 PM
  • So, I am a gamer and play LockOn, Flaming Cliffs and Black Shark. Flying games. The game can use windowed mode but cannot be resized. In full screen mode, it uses only the primary monitor. In Full screen mode, the software has an easier time rendering the "b illions" of things to make this combat flight sim realistic. The Black Shark has the outside world seen from inside the cockpit plus the inside of the cockpit (a gazillion switches to be used by mouse click) The map monitor and the missile monitor are two screens inside the cockpit but, on one screen, are very small. If the game paints all three scenes (the cockpit with all its switches and outside views, the map monitor, and the missile monitor) on one large picture across two or three real monitors, then you get an awesome view and it is easier to shoot bad, evil targets, etc. In XP, I could do this with three monitors spanned. Again, LockOn and BS cannot resize the window so, if the game is played full screen, then all three images are painted on one small screen, all squished together. If I cannot get spanned mode going, then my $5,000 machine is useless with Windows 7. Plane :( and simple as that. I need to span my monitors. I would never say I'd get a cracked version of Windows 7 but why would I anyway? XP has its issues but I just might have to reinstall my XP just to get the span back.

     

    My question, after all this, is there ANY WAY to span multiple monitors in full screen with Win 7? I want 5760x1200 but my GTX 295 won't let me. Do I have to go back to XP?

    Sunday, August 1, 2010 5:57 PM
  • I'm not a gamer (well, not on the PC anyway)

    I'm a software developer with side-by-side 1280x1024 monitors.

    I regularly (several times per hour) switch between:

    Visual Studio (c++)

    Eclipse (Java)

    VMC (remote linux desktop)

    which I use maximized.

    On XP I had my NVIDIA set up to span monitors, with an overlap of 16 pixels or so.

    This meant that I could:

     * Maximize the window I was working on - Would fill both screens

     * If a page of code spanned 2 pages it looked like this:

     

    Here is my li|||||||||||||||y line of code
    It is now eas||||||||||||||| easy to read
    

     

    instead of

     

    Here is my li|||||||||||||||ne of code
    It is not eas|||||||||||||||y to read
    

     

    (the bit in the middle is the join between the monitors)

    I had to go to Win7 for good reasons, and now I've lost the ability to span monitors.

    I do the screen resizing thing, but it it extremely tedious.

    Along with the majority of posters in this thread I'd like it back please. 

     

    Thanks

     

    Friday, September 24, 2010 11:18 AM
  • Hi Spangen

    The subject of horizontal spanning is no longer an issue.

    Previously, the spanning issue was always being driven by technological advances in the Graphics industry.

     

    The operating system just provides the extensibility that supports advances in the graphics technology.

    Both of the major graphics hardware makers have solved this problem with newer hardware and drivers that provide true span mode in Windows 7.

     

    ATI Calls it EyeFinity, which is available in most of their latest cards and I believe nVidia calls it SLI or 3D Vision configuration which is available in most newer cards that use their graphic chips.

     

    ATI Eyefinity Technology

     

    Information and Answer from nVidia 

    Hope this helps.

    Thank You for using Windows 7


    Ronnie Vernon MVP
    Friday, September 24, 2010 4:20 PM
  • "The subject of horizontal spanning is no longer an issue"

     

    Those links don't address our issue at all. It just states what's already known to most people. I didn't look at the ATI link but all the nVidia link says is:

    "Presently, all of our current Geforce and Quardro family of GPU's (Graphics Processing Unit) supports dual monitors. However, order to support dual monitors, must include two ports to allow two monitors to be connected...."

     

    Uh.. No kidding nVidia. Thanks for that incredibly insightful guidance.

     

    The bottom line is this is an OS issue. The even bolder bottom line is,

    Yes, the subject of horizontal spanning is still VERY much an issue with most of us.

    Saturday, September 25, 2010 3:34 AM
  • Hi Demious

    You can choose to ignore the facts, if you wish, but true spanning has always been a function of the graphics hardware/driver.

    Even in XP, you could not use this function unless the installed graphics card with the proper driver supported it.

    Regards,

    Thank You for using Windows 7


    Ronnie Vernon MVP
    Saturday, September 25, 2010 3:48 PM
  • Something I found today was the "/span" option of Remote Desktop. I was able to have a 4096x1680 desktop, horizontally spanned across 4 local monitors. My monitors are each 1050x1680 (rotated) and I'm using 2 video cards (NVIDEA). So somehow, Windows 7 supports spanning across monitors, across video cards, if you are using Remote Desktop. But not on the local desktop.

    I agree with Demious, this seems like an OS issue, not a video driver issue.

    Ronnie, Remote Desktop spanning is definitely NOT "a function of the graphics hardware/driver".

    Why oh why does Windows 7 support spanning with Remote Desktop but not local desktop?

    Tuesday, October 12, 2010 12:17 AM
  • Noel,

    I use Dual View Monitor settings for AutoCAD, Inventor, and Tekla Structures. Now, to be specific, the Extended Monitor in Win 7, does not afford me the ability to open Tekla Structures Application across BOTH monitors, then within the Application, I need to be able to open two Different Windows of the same model. This is also necessary for most 3-D Modeling Applications. (AutoCAD, Inventor, Pro Engineering)

    In XP I can easily do this; it is called Child Window Spanning, and with NVIDIA or ATI GPU's using XP; I could turn this feature off or on. When it is turned on, the "child Window" Will "span" both monitors. With it turned off the Child Windows will open or snap on the last monitor that they were closed on. So, to review, I have one Application open with 2 Windows open and “Snapped” to two different Monitors.

     

    I cannot do this in Windows 7 because of the Stupid Extended Desktop. I am an IT Professional, I do not nor do I need Microsoft configuring my display settings for me. It does not help me, nor does it make my 20 Engineer's who need the "child Window Spanning" TURNED OFF! We are stuck on XP 64 because of this flaw. I can see how non-professional users would think Extended Desktop is cool, and helpful, but for those of us who have used Dual View, and Horizontal/Vertical Spanning for the last 10 years, are  very frustrated with Microsoft. They should let the Display GPU settings up to the GPU Professionals and stick to supplying the basic format for the GPU to ride on. $2000.00 For a NVidia Quadro FX 5800, and guess what? Useless in Windows 7 Professional. Shameful…  

    Tuesday, November 23, 2010 4:55 PM
  • I agree. Our clients in oil industry at my work, uses span mode at their computers for drilling. My work is to do service on these, and we also use VPN and Remote Desktop for this. For some reson, I had to recently upgrade my workstation from XP to Windows 7. I discovered then that horizontal span mode was not possible. This means that Remote Desktop just shows half of the desktop of the clients  computer. So you see, it is NOT just gamers that this is a problem, as many other have tried call attention to, and I hope Microsoft fixes this soon!
    Thursday, December 23, 2010 9:33 AM
  • I've been reading this forum section since it's inception hoping that someone would get the clue as to whats missing.  Instead all

    I and everyone else with this very annoying problem is this:

    "Well Windows 7 does it like this."

    "Well this new graphics card can do it like this."


    What the powers that be in the Microsoft community are failing to realize that in Windows XP, spanning worked, we upgraded then suddenly it didn't.  Yes we have 'extended desktop' yes we have Ultramon that gives the 'smart task bar'

    What we don't have is the ability to span the primary display, the primary desktop to two Monitors which in Windows XP we could do with no new hardware, and existing software setups.

    By Span, we mean we had the ability to take 2 displays that where capable of 1680 x 1050 , and turn it into 1 display that was capable of 1680 x 2100.

    We don't want extended desktop with 1680 x 1050 (x2) we want the 1680 x 2100.

    It should not require new hardware, in order to facilitate this option because it was pre-existing on Windows XP.   I can run the same exact hardware I'm running in Windows 7, and it won't have the option, I can format, reinstall Windows XP Pro and it WILL have the option.

    Someone posted a year or so ago saying 'Massive amounts of users 'finger pointing' about responsibility for this problem but nothing is really that is really authoritative from any legitimate graphics industry manufacturer or Microsoft source.


    http://us.download.nvidia.com/Windows/177.41/177.41_WinVista_GeForce_Release_Notes.pdf

    It took some digging but the above is your legitimate graphics industry manufacturer or Microsoft Source.  The link is to nvidia, (a legitimate graphics industry manufacturer.) If you look under the section titled "Unsupported Features " with a byline that states "The following are features and functionality that were available in driver releases supporting Windows XP, but are not–and will not be–available in driver releases for Windows Vista: " On page 10 with a page header that says, "Not nvidia Issues."  it says the following,

    nView Horizontal and Vertical Span Modes
    Due to architectural changes in the new Windows Vista Window Display Driver
    Model (WDDM), span mode cannot be supported in NVIDIA graphics drivers.
    NVIDIA recommends using the built‐in Windows Vista multi‐display modes.



    Now with that being said, a legitimate graphics industry manufacturer clearly says "DUE TO ARCHITECTURAL CHANGES IN THE NEW WINDOWS VISTA WINDOW DISPLAY DRIVER MODEL (WDDM) " it can't be supported.

    Previous posts are correct that said, 'it's the graphics venders software that was able to initiate that display mode.' and that's fine. It's true, those of us with nVidia hardware did use nview in order to accomplish this task, but due to whatever ARCHITECTURAL CHANGE done in the WINDOW DISPLAY DRIVER MODEL has broken the vender's ability to provide that software functionality to us, and that is why we complain.

    We shouldn't have to buy new hardware or come up with a gimmick/workaround in order to use functionality that was available on a previous version of Windows.  Most of us keep our hardware up to date, Most of us even upgrade said hardware to a reasonable fashion before a new Windows release, some of us don't have to upgrade anything because we over build our machines with hardware that will stay somewhat current more than six months to a year, and we pay a lot financially for that little added bonus.

    For those of you who read and respond with current Native Windows Vista and Windows 7 display settings, it isn't working for us.   Extended desktop may work great with you, it may be a livable yet annoying work around for those of us who NEED the Horizontal and Vertical Span Modes , but it does NOT fix OUR ISSUE. So please stop trying to 'help' with the current native settings because it's NOT what we WANT.

    What we WANT is a Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) that allows legitimate graphics industry manufacturers  to re-enable the software support that older driver versions for Microsoft XP and it's Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM)


    WHY do we WANT or NEED this so BAD?


    One recent post replied clients in the oil industry uses span mode at their computers for drilling.

    Another mentioned high resolution imaging applications particularly those used to track weather maps

    I can think of the Airline Industry , inside the dispatch offices that have multiple display setups to monitor current weather conditions around the world, other displays current maps that are tracking airborne aircraft.

    Network Operations Centers (NOC) uses Horizontal and Vertical spanning for Network monitoring, weather conditions, alert systems, and server monitoring.

    And let's not forget the gamers who want to be able to run their video games in FULL SCREEN MODE and it HORIZONTALLY SPANS across BOTH monitors.

    I like to use Flight Simulator both 2004 and FSX, both of which are Microsoft Products, I can no longer use Virtual Cockpit mode to span across two displays like I used too without buying expensive hardware available to the Flight Sim Community.

    We've already bought our hardware, and it worked efficiently and for the task in which it was designed.  Solutions offered by ATI are not native to the WDDM and could have adverse performance , nVidia seems to be waiting, and maybe praying that Microsoft re includes whatever missing architecture back into WDDM.

    It's not the fault of those who are currently out of luck on this issue, we didn't remove the functionality, and the 'replacement' functionality put in place doesn't suit our needs at all.  It may be fine for some people, but it's not going to work in the long term for us.

    Many computers are going to remain on the Windows XP platform simply because of this issue due to what the computer itself does.  Some of these systems do tasks I mentioned above and can not be upgraded which is lost revenue for Microsoft.  It would be in everyones best interest if the architecture was put back into place so those of us who want it and more importantly those of us WHO HAVE TO HAVE IT, can gracefully upgrade our Operating systems without being faced by this smmall but yet very big limitation.


    Ronnie Vernon posted on September 25th, 2010 3:48pm stating:

    Hi Demious

    You can choose to ignore the facts, if you wish, but true spanning has always been a function of the graphics hardware/driver.
    Even in XP, you could not use this function unless the installed graphics card with the proper driver supported it.



    Here is something for you Ronnie.  My graphics card does support it, and when on Windows XP with drivers for the card and the OS, it's supported.  Now do the same thing, Windows 7 with updated drivers for that OS, and it's unsupported.   So you are right, it does take a graphics hardware/driver both that support it in order for it to work.  Windows 7 drivers do not support it because of WDDM.

    If there is no foundation there is no option.

    This is a Windows Driver Display Model issue, therefore it's a Microsoft issue, and people can say whatever they want to the contrary, so unless nVidia is blatantly lying about what it said in those release notes it's the truth.

    Wednesday, December 29, 2010 3:54 AM
  • I've been reading this forum section since it's inception hoping that someone would get the clue as to whats missing.  Instead all

    I and everyone else with this very annoying problem is this:

    "Well Windows 7 does it like this."

    "Well this new graphics card can do it like this."


    What the powers that be in the Microsoft community are failing to realize that in Windows XP, spanning worked, we upgraded then suddenly it didn't.  Yes we have 'extended desktop' yes we have Ultramon that gives the 'smart task bar'

    What we don't have is the ability to span the primary display, the primary desktop to two Monitors which in Windows XP we could do with no new hardware, and existing software setups.

    By Span, we mean we had the ability to take 2 displays that where capable of 1680 x 1050 , and turn it into 1 display that was capable of 1680 x 2100.

    We don't want extended desktop with 1680 x 1050 (x2) we want the 1680 x 2100.

    It should not require new hardware, in order to facilitate this option because it was pre-existing on Windows XP.   I can run the same exact hardware I'm running in Windows 7, and it won't have the option, I can format, reinstall Windows XP Pro and it WILL have the option.

    Someone posted a year or so ago saying 'Massive amounts of users 'finger pointing' about responsibility for this problem but nothing is really that is really authoritative from any legitimate graphics industry manufacturer or Microsoft source.


    http://us.download.nvidia.com/Windows/177.41/177.41_WinVista_GeForce_Release_Notes.pdf

    It took some digging but the above is your legitimate graphics industry manufacturer or Microsoft Source.  The link is to nvidia, (a legitimate graphics industry manufacturer.) If you look under the section titled "Unsupported Features " with a byline that states "The following are features and functionality that were available in driver releases supporting Windows XP, but are not–and will not be–available in driver releases for Windows Vista: " On page 10 with a page header that says, "Not nvidia Issues."  it says the following,

    nView Horizontal and Vertical Span Modes
    Due to architectural changes in the new Windows Vista Window Display Driver
    Model (WDDM), span mode cannot be supported in NVIDIA graphics drivers.
    NVIDIA recommends using the built‐in Windows Vista multi‐display modes.



    Now with that being said, a legitimate graphics industry manufacturer clearly says "DUE TO ARCHITECTURAL CHANGES IN THE NEW WINDOWS VISTA WINDOW DISPLAY DRIVER MODEL (WDDM) " it can't be supported.

    Previous posts are correct that said, 'it's the graphics venders software that was able to initiate that display mode.' and that's fine. It's true, those of us with nVidia hardware did use nview in order to accomplish this task, but due to whatever ARCHITECTURAL CHANGE done in the WINDOW DISPLAY DRIVER MODEL has broken the vender's ability to provide that software functionality to us, and that is why we complain.

    We shouldn't have to buy new hardware or come up with a gimmick/workaround in order to use functionality that was available on a previous version of Windows.  Most of us keep our hardware up to date, Most of us even upgrade said hardware to a reasonable fashion before a new Windows release, some of us don't have to upgrade anything because we over build our machines with hardware that will stay somewhat current more than six months to a year, and we pay a lot financially for that little added bonus.

    For those of you who read and respond with current Native Windows Vista and Windows 7 display settings, it isn't working for us.   Extended desktop may work great with you, it may be a livable yet annoying work around for those of us who NEED the Horizontal and Vertical Span Modes , but it does NOT fix OUR ISSUE. So please stop trying to 'help' with the current native settings because it's NOT what we WANT.

    What we WANT is a Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) that allows legitimate graphics industry manufacturers  to re-enable the software support that older driver versions for Microsoft XP and it's Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM)


    WHY do we WANT or NEED this so BAD?


    One recent post replied clients in the oil industry uses span mode at their computers for drilling.

    Another mentioned high resolution imaging applications particularly those used to track weather maps

    I can think of the Airline Industry , inside the dispatch offices that have multiple display setups to monitor current weather conditions around the world, other displays current maps that are tracking airborne aircraft.

    Network Operations Centers (NOC) uses Horizontal and Vertical spanning for Network monitoring, weather conditions, alert systems, and server monitoring.

    And let's not forget the gamers who want to be able to run their video games in FULL SCREEN MODE and it HORIZONTALLY SPANS across BOTH monitors.

    I like to use Flight Simulator both 2004 and FSX, both of which are Microsoft Products, I can no longer use Virtual Cockpit mode to span across two displays like I used too without buying expensive hardware available to the Flight Sim Community.

    We've already bought our hardware, and it worked efficiently and for the task in which it was designed.  Solutions offered by ATI are not native to the WDDM and could have adverse performance , nVidia seems to be waiting, and maybe praying that Microsoft re includes whatever missing architecture back into WDDM.

    It's not the fault of those who are currently out of luck on this issue, we didn't remove the functionality, and the 'replacement' functionality put in place doesn't suit our needs at all.  It may be fine for some people, but it's not going to work in the long term for us.

    Many computers are going to remain on the Windows XP platform simply because of this issue due to what the computer itself does.  Some of these systems do tasks I mentioned above and can not be upgraded which is lost revenue for Microsoft.  It would be in everyones best interest if the architecture was put back into place so those of us who want it and more importantly those of us WHO HAVE TO HAVE IT, can gracefully upgrade our Operating systems without being faced by this smmall but yet very big limitation.


    Ronnie Vernon posted on September 25th, 2010 3:48pm stating:

    Hi Demious

    You can choose to ignore the facts, if you wish, but true spanning has always been a function of the graphics hardware/driver.
    Even in XP, you could not use this function unless the installed graphics card with the proper driver supported it.



    Here is something for you Ronnie.  My graphics card does support it, and when on Windows XP with drivers for the card and the OS, it's supported.  Now do the same thing, Windows 7 with updated drivers for that OS, and it's unsupported.   So you are right, it does take a graphics hardware/driver both that support it in order for it to work.  Windows 7 drivers do not support it because of WDDM.

    If there is no foundation there is no option.

    This is a Windows Driver Display Model issue, therefore it's a Microsoft issue, and people can say whatever they want to the contrary, so unless nVidia is blatantly lying about what it said in those release notes it's the truth.


    BRAVO BRAVO BRAVO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WE NEED THE SPANNING MODE, ELSE NO BUYING of Windows 7 TO ANY OF OUR CUSTOMERS.

     

    Thursday, January 13, 2011 1:58 PM
  • Treyvan has articulated very well all of the crucial points with regard to the disappearance of certain features in the Vista/Windows 7 WDDM - especially spanning (and edge blending!) - so I think it is now incumbent on Windows to address this issue or to address us, its customers. To close I will re-post from another forum the particulars of my situation at the University of Maryland in the hopes that one more drop in the bucket may provide the specific gravity for action.

     

    All best,

    Quint Gregory

     

    From another forum (just recently posted):

     

    Jack-

    I realize that this nodal input on this particular thread comes many, many, many months after your answer above; sorry to be so late to the game but this problem is one that I have only discovered when attempting to upgrade to Windows 7 two weeks ago, before the University of Maryland shut down for a holiday break. The system that I run at the university and which I designed, based on extensive research and the input of professionals in the AV industry and representatives from NVIDIA, has the following characteristic that makes a satisfactory resolution of the missing of horizontal spanning (and edge blending/overlap!) of vital interest to me: on a curved projection surface 22 feet by 9 feet (7 1/2 feet of projection surface) are two projected desktops, each 1900 x 1200. Yet they overlap in the center (by design and by standard practice) 10%, making one desktop that measures in total 3648 x 1200 pixels. For a year Windows XP 64bit has served us well (running on a Dell T7400 with a NVIDIA Quadroplex D2200), but the outer limits of XP 64bit's support were manifesting themselves in increasingly louder ways (Cannot install Office 2010, and Quicktime, iTunes, Flash either cannot be installed or will not work at their greatest potential) that suggested to me and a colleague in the College's IT support that the time had come to upgrade to Windows 7.

    Well, our joy at Windows 7's speed and improved performance was short-lived on the Tuesday before Christmas when it became apparent that the very essential features around which this entire system was built (horizontal spanning and edge blending) were no longer available to create a seamless and continuous desktop/visualization palette. Our next day, that Wednesday, was a mad dash just to try and get back to the system we had before our efforts of the day before. I am happy to report that, for the most part, I have recovered all that I had lost. However, going forward this system, so impressive to those who see it and so dynamic in its possibilities, remains tethered to Windows XP 64bit and, with the passage of time, less and less able to keep up with the new for which it was conceived.

    Is there any possibility that Microsoft's software engineers are working on restoring what strikes me as basic features and functionality in version 2.0 of WDDM? And if so, when? I have read with great sympathy the postings of many other disaffected consumers on this and other posts and I can only add my voice in the strongest of terms. I do not imagine that any of the workarounds proposed will work in my situation (to my knowledge none of the respondents has signaled the need to overlap edges), so I depend upon Microsoft resolving this issue.

    With thanks for your kind attention.

    Quint Gregory
    Associate Director
    Michelle Smith Collaboratory for Visual Culture
    Department of Art History and Archaeology
    University of Maryland

     

     

    Monday, January 17, 2011 3:22 AM
  • I've been reading this forum section since it's inception hoping that someone would get the clue as to whats missing.  Instead all

    I and everyone else with this very annoying problem is this:

    "Well Windows 7 does it like this."

    "Well this new graphics card can do it like this."


    What the powers that be in the Microsoft community are failing to realize that in Windows XP, spanning worked, we upgraded then suddenly it didn't.  Yes we have 'extended desktop' yes we have Ultramon that gives the 'smart task bar'

    What we don't have is the ability to span the primary display, the primary desktop to two Monitors which in Windows XP we could do with no new hardware, and existing software setups.

    By Span, we mean we had the ability to take 2 displays that where capable of 1680 x 1050 , and turn it into 1 display that was capable of 1680 x 2100.

    We don't want extended desktop with 1680 x 1050 (x2) we want the 1680 x 2100.

    It should not require new hardware, in order to facilitate this option because it was pre-existing on Windows XP.   I can run the same exact hardware I'm running in Windows 7, and it won't have the option, I can format, reinstall Windows XP Pro and it WILL have the option.

    Someone posted a year or so ago saying 'Massive amounts of users 'finger pointing' about responsibility for this problem but nothing is really that is really authoritative from any legitimate graphics industry manufacturer or Microsoft source.


    http://us.download.nvidia.com/Windows/177.41/177.41_WinVista_GeForce_Release_Notes.pdf

    It took some digging but the above is your legitimate graphics industry manufacturer or Microsoft Source.  The link is to nvidia, (a legitimate graphics industry manufacturer.) If you look under the section titled "Unsupported Features " with a byline that states "The following are features and functionality that were available in driver releases supporting Windows XP, but are not–and will not be–available in driver releases for Windows Vista: " On page 10 with a page header that says, "Not nvidia Issues."  it says the following,

    nView Horizontal and Vertical Span Modes
    Due to architectural changes in the new Windows Vista Window Display Driver
    Model (WDDM), span mode cannot be supported in NVIDIA graphics drivers.
    NVIDIA recommends using the built‐in Windows Vista multi‐display modes.



    Now with that being said, a legitimate graphics industry manufacturer clearly says "DUE TO ARCHITECTURAL CHANGES IN THE NEW WINDOWS VISTA WINDOW DISPLAY DRIVER MODEL (WDDM) " it can't be supported.

    Previous posts are correct that said, 'it's the graphics venders software that was able to initiate that display mode.' and that's fine. It's true, those of us with nVidia hardware did use nview in order to accomplish this task, but due to whatever ARCHITECTURAL CHANGE done in the WINDOW DISPLAY DRIVER MODEL has broken the vender's ability to provide that software functionality to us, and that is why we complain.

    We shouldn't have to buy new hardware or come up with a gimmick/workaround in order to use functionality that was available on a previous version of Windows.  Most of us keep our hardware up to date, Most of us even upgrade said hardware to a reasonable fashion before a new Windows release, some of us don't have to upgrade anything because we over build our machines with hardware that will stay somewhat current more than six months to a year, and we pay a lot financially for that little added bonus.

    For those of you who read and respond with current Native Windows Vista and Windows 7 display settings, it isn't working for us.   Extended desktop may work great with you, it may be a livable yet annoying work around for those of us who NEED the Horizontal and Vertical Span Modes , but it does NOT fix OUR ISSUE. So please stop trying to 'help' with the current native settings because it's NOT what we WANT.

    What we WANT is a Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM) that allows legitimate graphics industry manufacturers  to re-enable the software support that older driver versions for Microsoft XP and it's Windows Display Driver Model (WDDM)


    WHY do we WANT or NEED this so BAD?


    One recent post replied clients in the oil industry uses span mode at their computers for drilling.

    Another mentioned high resolution imaging applications particularly those used to track weather maps

    I can think of the Airline Industry , inside the dispatch offices that have multiple display setups to monitor current weather conditions around the world, other displays current maps that are tracking airborne aircraft.

    Network Operations Centers (NOC) uses Horizontal and Vertical spanning for Network monitoring, weather conditions, alert systems, and server monitoring.

    And let's not forget the gamers who want to be able to run their video games in FULL SCREEN MODE and it HORIZONTALLY SPANS across BOTH monitors.

    I like to use Flight Simulator both 2004 and FSX, both of which are Microsoft Products, I can no longer use Virtual Cockpit mode to span across two displays like I used too without buying expensive hardware available to the Flight Sim Community.

    We've already bought our hardware, and it worked efficiently and for the task in which it was designed.  Solutions offered by ATI are not native to the WDDM and could have adverse performance , nVidia seems to be waiting, and maybe praying that Microsoft re includes whatever missing architecture back into WDDM.

    It's not the fault of those who are currently out of luck on this issue, we didn't remove the functionality, and the 'replacement' functionality put in place doesn't suit our needs at all.  It may be fine for some people, but it's not going to work in the long term for us.

    Many computers are going to remain on the Windows XP platform simply because of this issue due to what the computer itself does.  Some of these systems do tasks I mentioned above and can not be upgraded which is lost revenue for Microsoft.  It would be in everyones best interest if the architecture was put back into place so those of us who want it and more importantly those of us WHO HAVE TO HAVE IT, can gracefully upgrade our Operating systems without being faced by this smmall but yet very big limitation.


    Ronnie Vernon posted on September 25th, 2010 3:48pm stating:

    Hi Demious

    You can choose to ignore the facts, if you wish, but true spanning has always been a function of the graphics hardware/driver.
    Even in XP, you could not use this function unless the installed graphics card with the proper driver supported it.



    Here is something for you Ronnie.  My graphics card does support it, and when on Windows XP with drivers for the card and the OS, it's supported.  Now do the same thing, Windows 7 with updated drivers for that OS, and it's unsupported.   So you are right, it does take a graphics hardware/driver both that support it in order for it to work.  Windows 7 drivers do not support it because of WDDM.

    If there is no foundation there is no option.

    This is a Windows Driver Display Model issue, therefore it's a Microsoft issue, and people can say whatever they want to the contrary, so unless nVidia is blatantly lying about what it said in those release notes it's the truth.


    This is a MUST FOR US!!!! When will Spanning be "back" in Windows, ie Windows 7?????

     

    Monday, January 17, 2011 10:44 PM
  • First, Treyvan, I don't know if you want a very tall screen, or if you meant to say 2100 x 1680.  The X dimension is listed first, X x Y  1280 x 1024, Width x Height.

     

    I'll say this first, NVIDIA has a program called nView Desktop Manager which allows for a Spanning desktop, albeit in a horribly crude and ugly way.

     

    We have about 100 workstations with Quadro cards running Windows 7, and only one machine with XP 64 Pro because of the Spanning issue.  This is a Business, not a gaming arena, so Noel, if you still follow this thread and want a legitimate reason for spanning, please read along.

     

    We have a large conference room that uses 2 separate projectors to create one large, and very wide display.  This is perfect for all of the Excel sheets that get projected during the business plan meetings.  XP Spanning is simple, easy, and without additional configuration for each user, just works.

     

    To have "similar" features in Windows 7, you have to install nView manager, which is part of the latest driver release for the Quadro cards, configure Window Control to "Allow taskbar to span multiple displays," "Enable Window Spanning across multiple displays," and "Enable child window spanning across multiple displays."  Additionally to that, you have to add a new UI button to the Title bar for "Full-desktop maximize."

     

    Oh, and without some serious registry hacks, you'll need to do this for every user profile that wants to use the machine.  Not a viable solution when there are 80-100 people that will log into that machine over the course of the year.

     

    So yes, tl;dr  Windows 7 can do it, NVIDIA can do it, but it's ugly.

    Tuesday, January 18, 2011 8:35 PM
  • The change from the long established "horizontal span" to "extended desktop" wrecked all of my stereoscopic players.  This took away a very valuable legacy tool that quite a number of production tools depend upon.  As the saying goes, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

    I'm sure that who ever made the decision to change from horizontal-span to extended-desktop was ignornant of the consequences to users who depend upon it.   The sad part is that MS doesn't want to fix their mistake.  It was probably the same person who took long standing OS administrative tools and hid them about the system painted up like Easter Eggs while renaming them.  After all, everyone loves a good Easter Egg hunt!

     

     

     

     

    Friday, January 21, 2011 6:51 PM
  • I still do duck in here and read posts in this thread occasionally, and I do appreciate the various posters keeping me in mind.  :)

    It seems to me to boil down to this:

    1.  Some apps made good use of spanning when it was available.

    2.  Those apps don't provide a suitable solution when spanning is unavailable, but extended desktop is available.

    3.  Microsoft doesn't seem to be in a hurry to reinstate spanning.  Perhaps they feel strongly that extended desktop is the way of the future.

    4.  The apps will therefore have to be updated to provide a suitable solution using extended desktop.

    When will #4 happen?  No doubt just about the time when XP becomes unspported and thus no viable OS provides extended desktop.

    There is a precedent:  When Microsoft suddenly stopped making it possible to run the 32 bit Explorer in Windows 7 x64 at RTM time, did you notice how many apps came out right away with 64 bit shell extensions?

    Perhaps you should be petitioning your suppliers of these essential apps to embrace the WDDM and get their apps working in the modern environment.

    -Noel

    Sunday, January 23, 2011 11:59 PM
  • So you're saying nVidia has reintroduced spanning in their recent drivers?  When you maximize a window, does it cover both screens?

    Outside of having to possibly upgrade a video card to current technology, is this even an issue any more then?

    -Noel

    Tuesday, January 25, 2011 2:21 PM
  • Ka-50 Blackshark by Digital Combat Simulators supports tri-monitor display, but windows 7 dosn't for apps. Neither dose the RADEON Graphics - Catalyst Control Center - HydraVision.  The Hydra grid is maximum limited to 1 grid per screen, not < 1/n grid(s) per n >.[n=monitor.]

    I haven't found a solution to this yet, dose anyone know of one.

    Saturday, February 5, 2011 9:16 PM
  • Noel... Stop showing your ignorance and please don't post anymore.

    For the ones who don't know what SPANNING REALLY means... just don't try to answer, we're professinal here... (noel you get that?)

    And yes, we're ASKING OUR SUPPLIER (IE MICROSOFT!!!!) TO FIX THEIR MISTAKE so we can GIVE THEM MORE MONEY!!!

    NOEL, Do you get that?? really?  REMOVING FUNCTIONNALITY is WDDM is not what I call a BETTER system but a LIMITED one... WINDOWS 7 IS LIMITING ME!    ME, the one PAYING $$$$$$$$  Do you get this?  I'm not a keyboard propreller head spending my day on facebook but an ACTUAL BUSINESS USER MAKING A LEAVING by "USING" computers and not "BECAUSE OF"... Get that, Noel, you're still there? following me?  The worst part is that you think so.... oh my god...

    Stop the Selling / Microsoft Protective speach... Why doing that????  Is that a RELIGION??  I've been using Microsoft products since DOS 1.0 and doing assembler on the 6505, 6809, 8080, z80, 80186/286/386... and this and that... BUT WHO CARES??? 

    We have BUSINESSES TO RUN AND PLEASE LISTEN TO THE CUSTOMER...  WE'RE THE ONES WITH FULL RIGHTS TO ARGUE, AND THE ONLY ONES... WE PAY!!!!!  wondering why I'm trying to help Microsoft doing more money... treated like this...

    I'm out of here...  Where's the Apple store?

     

    Wednesday, February 9, 2011 4:07 AM
  • Yes Jasper,

    there is a solution available and I'm using it.

    Configuration: Windows 7, ASUS 5870 Eyefinity 6/GDDR5/2Gbyte, 3 Displays: Samsung SyncMaster PX2370 LED each connected via active MiniDisplayPort to DVI Adapter (Accell, ATI certified).

    The ASUS graphic module is an ATI/AMD developement  HD5870 Eyefinity 6 available in USA and Europe. Here in South Afrika was only ASUS available on the market.

    Both products are equal with minor differences in the software (I think) because the Catalyst Driver software shows incompatibilities between both products. So it is advisable to use the driver each designed for the product. The driver for the ASUS module is developed by ATI.

    The configuration works ONLY with Vista and Windows 7 to setup a multi-screen environment of more than 2 displays. Up to 6 displays are possible, yet ONLY with active adapters.

    ATI as well as ASUS provide modules for a setup of max 3 displays: HD5870 Eyefinity (ATI) and EAH5870 (ASUS).

    Above configuration runs on a PC:

    Motherboard: GIGABYTE H67MA-UD2H  Processor: Intel i7-2600 3.4GHz (@3.7GHz)  RAM: CORSAIR XMS3 4Gbyte  Power: 1000W CoolerMaster (for additional Hardware supply)

    Prity expencive solution just to run FSX.

    Lutz

    Monday, February 21, 2011 10:46 PM
  • I was going crazy waiting for Horizontal span to be supported, however I recently updated my nvidia driver to find a few new options like stereo 3d and Mosaic. Mosaic allows H-span and V-span.

    I don't use it for gaming so much but for video editing where the program only full screens to one monitor or the other, having H-Span really gives you a greater view of the timeline. 3D applications like Softimage XSI 5.0 allowed you to span two monitors without Hspan, so I was pleased the programmers took the time to add in that functionality. On the other hand Photoshop CS allows you to place some objects outside the application window as does Autodesk Maya 2009 but both restrict some of the windows to the application only. Now I like to draw/paint rather large horizontal images from time to time to use as video mattes and having H-span lets me see more of the widescreen image then if I was restricted to one monitor.

    I remember a time long ago where as an admin I wanted my forum window to vertical span across two monitors to see more of the posts in a thread, I though that would have been helpful in skiming though the posts looking out for trolls, spam, and what not. Then I thought that it should just be an option in IE or Firefox to be able to do those things if Softimage was able to do it.

    In general having an application maximized in H-span or even on one monitor reduces the chances of accidentally clicking off the app window and shifting focus, which is something I dislike when using a pen tablet on an application that isn't maximized.

     

    Current desktop and shot of Nvidia option screen.

    http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b351/Wendy_girl/mosaic-SS.jpg
    http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b351/Wendy_girl/Mosaic.png




    .
    Saturday, March 19, 2011 11:42 PM
  • I was very glad to find this forum as I recently upgraded my system to include Windows 7.  Upon re-install of Flight Simulator X and preparing to bask in my upgraded video cards ability to display my cockpit even more beautifully than ever across my dual monitors.  I have been pulling my hair out trying to figure out how to change my video settings to "span".  Now I know that its Windows 7 killing my dream not me!!  Thanks to you all out there keeping the hope alive that one Day Microsoft will listen and fix this issue!!   Once the point in having a $400.00 video card if you can't use it?

    Wednesday, March 23, 2011 8:49 PM
  • My $140 video card can be set up to create a group across which to span the desktop, via the Catalyst Control Center.  You sure you can't get that ability on your $400 video card with the control panel made by the card manufacturer?

    -Noel

    Thursday, March 24, 2011 3:59 AM
  • I was very glad to find this forum as I recently upgraded my system to include Windows 7.  Upon re-install of Flight Simulator X and preparing to bask in my upgraded video cards ability to display my cockpit even more beautifully than ever across my dual monitors.  I have been pulling my hair out trying to figure out how to change my video settings to "span".  Now I know that its Windows 7 killing my dream not me!!  Thanks to you all out there keeping the hope alive that one Day Microsoft will listen and fix this issue!!   Once the point in having a $400.00 video card if you can't use it?

    Hi

    What type of video card do you have installed?

    Both of the major graphics chip makers have resolved this problem with newer hardware and drivers that provide true horizontal span mode in Windows 7.

     

    ATI Calls it EyeFinity, which is available in most of their latest cards.

     

    ATI Eyefinity Technology

     

    ATI Catalyst Eyefinity Setup screenshot:

    http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa86/rvmv/Eyefinity_setup.jpg

     

    NVIDIA calls it Mosaic Technology.

     

     

    NVIDIA Mosaic Technology

     

    NVIDIA Control Panel Mosaic Setup screenshot:

    http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa86/rvmv/NVIDIAControlPanel_MosaicSettings.png

    Hope this helps.


    Ronnie Vernon MVP – Windows Desktop Experience

    Thursday, March 24, 2011 10:24 AM
  • Hi Dkuehner,

    Can you list a specific example of where spanning provides you a different experience than extending the desktop across two monitors?

    As a dual monitor (extended desktop) user myself for a long time, I've not felt that I'm missing any functionality, and I'm really curious about what it is you and others who want spanning support are actually doing (and clearly that I'm not able to do) that improves your user experience... 

    Making that very clear in a forum like this will no doubt increase your chances that someone at Microsoft will take your request seriously.

    I have, for example, a comparison tool (Beyond Compare by Scooter Software) that I run across both monitors, so I can get a comparison of two sources each of which has long lines side by side.  The tool happily "spans" both monitors, remembers its position, and comes up that way next time.  Here's a screen capture:



    Are there applications that simply won't come up on more than one monitor?  If so, which ones?

    As far as I can see, Word (I'm using 2003), Excel, and Visual Studio happily open at whatever location they're left at, including running across both monitors.

    Personally, I find the bezel space between the monitors causes such a discontinuity that for other than applications that naturally break in the middle (such as the above comparison tool) that I wouldn't want them to cross that boundary.

    Please don't take this as a criticism; I'm genuinely curious about what I may be missing.

    The *one* thing I can think of is that I virtually never use an application in maximized mode.  I can only think of one exception, and that is RDP, which I maximize to the right monitor.

    Is this mostly an issue with maximizing windows?

    -Noel

    Here is a list:

    Any game under the sun... 

    Saturday, April 23, 2011 6:10 AM
  • Oh THANK YOU, Eli, for your value-adding post - I shall forever be in your debt.

    And a special thanks for avoiding reading the rest of the thread before adding your 0.000000002 cents worth. 

    -Noel

    Saturday, April 23, 2011 6:33 PM
  • I think Eli Pharaoh is right. You are posting useless answers (and questions) in a thread which was the number one result on my google search.

    Just look at the post you made Wednesday, July 01, 2009 10:32 PM. People here try to solve a problem and you blame the fullscreen-mode? Thats like people trying to fix a bug in the systemclock and you ask why not simply disabling it.

    Please take this as a criticism.

    And btw: If you don't play games on your PC I advice you to install a Linux-System.

    Friday, April 29, 2011 12:25 AM
  • I think Eli Pharaoh is right. You are posting useless answers (and questions) in a thread which was the number one result on my google search.

    Just look at the post you made Wednesday, July 01, 2009 10:32 PM. People here try to solve a problem and you blame the fullscreen-mode? Thats like people trying to fix a bug in the systemclock and you ask why not simply disabling it.

    Please take this as a criticism.

    And btw: If you don't play games on your PC I advice you to install a Linux-System.

    totally agree, I am another injured. Yesterday I tried to run back to my Xplane in 2 monitors and now was a disappointment ... win7

    Friday, June 17, 2011 4:40 AM
  • If you just can't live without your precious multi-screen video games, just buy any modern video card.  ATI and nVidia have long since solved this issue with features (e.g., Eyefinity) in their drivers.  You want to play, you have to pay.

    And you can keep your Linux system, Zetack, thank you.  I prefer a serious operating system that runs modern software, not some fringe toy only a nonconformist geek could love.

    -Noel

    Saturday, June 18, 2011 12:42 AM
  • A funny note to add. I use software developed by MS that REQUIRES H-span. So I am stuck using Win2k or XP...

     

    MS PLEASE bring back spanning.

     

    -none

    Saturday, June 18, 2011 8:57 AM
  • Hi, so yeah I was reading this entire forum post, hoping to find an awnser.....too bad I didn't

    We have here at work someone who needs spanning as well, he is visually impaired, he needs to zoom like to 1000% to see correctly.

    Now in Windows XP, this wasn't a problem, there was a software program that didi it for him, the only thing was, that spanning had to be enabled.

    It does NOT work with Extended desktop, because it will only see one monitor.

    He uses 2 screens 1680x1024 and we need to go up to 3360x1024 seen in windows as 1 screen.

    I guess the only way is to go to matrox or an expensive ATI card? Sjees thanx microsoft......NOT cool!

     

    Monday, July 4, 2011 2:29 PM
  • Hi, so yeah I was reading this entire forum post, hoping to find an awnser.....too bad I didn't

    We have here at work someone who needs spanning as well, he is visually impaired, he needs to zoom like to 1000% to see correctly.

    Now in Windows XP, this wasn't a problem, there was a software program that didi it for him, the only thing was, that spanning had to be enabled.

    It does NOT work with Extended desktop, because it will only see one monitor.

    He uses 2 screens 1680x1024 and we need to go up to 3360x1024 seen in windows as 1 screen.

    I guess the only way is to go to matrox or an expensive ATI card? Sjees thanx microsoft......NOT cool!

    Hi NLSwitcher

    You're visually impaired friend can use the included Magnifier in the Ease of Access Center to zoom in on a window. If he is using dual monitors with the Extended Desktop enabled, the magnifier will automatically use both screens as the magnification is increased.

    Here is a screenshot:  http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa86/rvmv/Magnifier_1000pct.png

    Both of my monitors are set at 1600x900. I use wallpaper images that are 3200x900 and they have no problem covering both monitors.

    Screenshot: http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa86/rvmv/DualMonitorWallpaper.png

    I also regularly use programs, such as Excel and Access. I resize the windows to cover both screens.

    Screenshot:  http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa86/rvmv/Excel_3200x900.png

    When true spanning is needed, such as when gaming, the major graphics card manufacturers have already solved this problem. I recently purchased a Dell system for an associate and upgrading the ATI graphics card to a model that supports ATI Eyefinity only added 60 USD to the price. My associate is happily gaming using a 3 monitor setup.

    Regards

     


    Ronnie Vernon MVP – Windows Desktop Experience
    Monday, July 4, 2011 11:40 PM
  • I guess the only way is to go to matrox or an expensive ATI card? Sjees thanx microsoft......NOT cool! 


    Ignorance of reality is in fact what's NOT cool.

    What is your definition of expensive?  ATI cards for well under a hundred bucks can do it.  The Radeon HD 5670 for example.

    Ronnie is right on target.

    -Noel

    Tuesday, July 5, 2011 10:20 PM
  • You dont need to understand why we want it. The fact that so many of us do make it relevant.

    To ignore Noel is the simple answer, he is trolling.

     

    "http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=trolling"

     

     

    The answers are found here.





    Tuesday, July 19, 2011 4:31 AM
  • No, Noel is trying to help you understand that what was an issue when this thread was started is no longer an issue.  The video card vendors have responded.

    You can't run anything good on an old, lame video card anyway.  Get a new video card for like $60 and you'll have your spanning back.

    -Noel

    Tuesday, July 19, 2011 1:42 PM
  • Hi, so yeah I was reading this entire forum post, hoping to find an awnser.....too bad I didn't

    We have here at work someone who needs spanning as well, he is visually impaired, he needs to zoom like to 1000% to see correctly.

    Now in Windows XP, this wasn't a problem, there was a software program that didi it for him, the only thing was, that spanning had to be enabled.

    It does NOT work with Extended desktop, because it will only see one monitor.

    He uses 2 screens 1680x1024 and we need to go up to 3360x1024 seen in windows as 1 screen.

    I guess the only way is to go to matrox or an expensive ATI card? Sjees thanx microsoft......NOT cool!

    Hi NLSwitcher

    You're visually impaired friend can use the included Magnifier in the Ease of Access Center to zoom in on a window. If he is using dual monitors with the Extended Desktop enabled, the magnifier will automatically use both screens as the magnification is increased.

    Here is a screenshot:  http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa86/rvmv/Magnifier_1000pct.png

    Both of my monitors are set at 1600x900. I use wallpaper images that are 3200x900 and they have no problem covering both monitors.

    Screenshot: http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa86/rvmv/DualMonitorWallpaper.png

    I also regularly use programs, such as Excel and Access. I resize the windows to cover both screens.

    Screenshot:  http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa86/rvmv/Excel_3200x900.png

    When true spanning is needed, such as when gaming, the major graphics card manufacturers have already solved this problem. I recently purchased a Dell system for an associate and upgrading the ATI graphics card to a model that supports ATI Eyefinity only added 60 USD to the price. My associate is happily gaming using a 3 monitor setup.

    Regards

     


    Ronnie Vernon MVP – Windows Desktop Experience


    This is the answer right here.... EyeFinity

     

    Thanks Ronnie! You Da' Man!

     

    Wednesday, August 3, 2011 4:29 PM
  • Remote Desktop Connection.  Not a game.  Microsoft software.  Most people would use it maximized, to use BOTH displays.  Impossible in Windows 7, because it does not support spanning.
    Friday, August 12, 2011 10:15 AM
  • Just go buy a decent ATI card that supports EyeFinity.  They're under a hundred bucks.

    I just tried it - works just fine allowing Remote Desktop to cover both displays.

    Frankly, I've never wanted a remote session to cover both displays though; it's handy to retain one monitor for local operations and use one for RDP

    -Noel

    Friday, August 12, 2011 10:29 PM
  • Just go buy a decent ATI card that supports EyeFinity.  They're under a hundred bucks.

    I just tried it - works just fine allowing Remote Desktop to cover both displays.

    Frankly, I've never wanted a remote session to cover both displays though; it's handy to retain one monitor for local operations and use one for RDP

    -Noel


    It is absolutely staggering that someone can be so profoundly ignorant of the basic issue at hand, and yet continue to post over a span of two years in a topic that has no direct relevance to him. At this point you've obviously shown your true colors as nothing more than a troll. Congratulations on polluting yet another thread on the internet.
    Saturday, August 13, 2011 7:49 PM
  • It is absolutely staggering that someone can be so profoundly ignorant of the basic issue at hand, and yet continue to post over a span of two years in a topic that has no direct relevance to him. At this point you've obviously shown your true colors as nothing more than a troll. Congratulations on polluting yet another thread on the internet.


    LOL, like you added a whole lot of value here, while I proposed a solution that I personally verified works.

    I forgot more about computing since opening this thread just now than you'll ever know about computers.

    The credibility of a person who would choose an alias like "HamsterHuey" is somewhere between "nonexistent" and "negligible", by the way.

    -Noel




    Saturday, August 13, 2011 11:04 PM
  • This is a video card problem.  You are probably using nvidia.  nvidia only lets you have span mode if you are using 3 montiors (all monitors have to be same company and model)

     

    However, span mode with 2 monitors does work with ATI.  I have a friend with ATI who spans games such as crysis in fullscreen over 2 monitors.  Give ATI a shot.

    Sunday, August 14, 2011 7:54 PM
  • what every happened to VER_7 the original poster?

     


    Windows MVP, XP, Vista, 7. Expanding into Windows Server 2008 R2, SQL Server, SharePoint etc.

    My page on Video Card Problems is now my most popular landing page. My Page on SSD is now #2. See my gaming site for game reviews etc.

    Developer | Windows IT | Chess | Economics | Hardcore Games | Vegan Advocate | PC Reviews

    Hi

    I think he graduated college, enjoyed a successful career in politics and retired to the Bahamas recently. :))

    Regards


    Ronnie Vernon MVP – Windows Desktop Experience
    Wednesday, August 17, 2011 11:05 PM
  • I've read through this thread and it appears to me there are a lot of people that would like this feature to be implemented. I agree it is disappointing that a feature that once was supported and worked in Windows XP no longer is an option in a operating system 10 years later. Dual monitors have become far more popular since the days Windows XP which is why the poor dual monitor support in Windows 7 is even more baffling. I know Mac OSX has far greater support for dual monitor options including horizontal spanning across a single resolution.

    My hope is that Microsoft will eventually get their shit together and support a feature that is obviously still very well needed.

    Tuesday, September 6, 2011 11:58 PM
  • Notice how your desktop image repeats itself?   the only way in windows 7 to have the desktop image fill both screens is to find one the right size and "tile" it... to display the way the others are speaking about.. you would be able to tell it to "stretch" and it would stretch one image to the outside edges of both screens as if they were one screen... there is no workaround without buying additional softwear.. even though it has been an option in the past.. 
    Saturday, September 10, 2011 2:26 AM
  • how about the desktop image?  Seems that's a pretty basic thing. and it would be nice to be able to stretch the whole image across both screens without having to "tile" it
    Saturday, September 10, 2011 2:27 AM
  • we need it because it was a feature in a 10 year old operating system... a fundamental feature.... that had no warning of it being lost on the box. So people shell out $100's of dollars for an operating system that can't even offer the same WALLPAPER options that were offered 10 years ago. My specific needs are for movies and games,  and seeing as how the gamer generation are now in their 30's... we are now the main consumers.. even if the product isn't based around gaming.    the task bar already has screen edge recognition no matter what display mode you are in... and it's not that the feature was incompatable with windows 7 / vista... it's that it was simply omited..    and as consumers we feel ripped off when we are missing basic features that have been there  for 10 years...    that's like apple releasing an Iphone that can't play music without having a warning on the box..   then you saying  "well, it's a phone.. not an mp3 player"
    Saturday, September 10, 2011 2:38 AM
  • Josh, you seem to have missed a few things...

    Of course you can have a desktop image that crosses multiple monitors, even in extended desktop mode.  Just choose Picture Position: Tile

    There are many tools provided by Microsoft and free for download that allow you to prepare an image to be the exact size of your extended desktop.  Look up IrfanView for example, as a good piece of freeware for doing this.

    Regarding spanning being unavailable...  The video card driver writers have long since resolved the problem of spanning.  It turns out it wasn't a Microsoft problem per se, but just that they did not hand "spanning" to the video card makers on a silver platter in the new Windows Display Driver Model template.  But you'd have noticed, if you had bothered to read the latter parts of this thread, that both nVidia and ATI now provide support for a "spanned" desktop.

    -Noel

    Saturday, September 10, 2011 4:16 PM