|
|
|
|
|
by sho_hn
1025 days ago
|
|
Good question indeed. One thing I could imagine is that Linux is giving preference to using the values in the DisplayID block as it's the newer standard, and since EDID/DisplayID compliance has improved over time the logic may be "the newer one is more likely to be correct". In the meantime perhaps Win/Mac continue to look at the classic EDID data, and if they do, it likely gets less test coverage from manufacturers. Pure speculation. Edit: From https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/co... > Windows does not support DisplayID 1.x blocks, and always ignores them. No explanation is given. The LG display sends a DisplayID 1.2 block. |
|
Another oddity is that when I run edid-decode on the DisplayID 1.3 file created by CRU, edid-decode reports the block as "Version: 1.2" instead. Wonder what's up with that.