4 ms·

Is it really true that Android has not been scaling interface definition as pixel density increases? It's been a while since I used my G1, but I thought that my

Is it really true that Android has not been scaling interface definition as pixel density increases? It's been a while since I used my G1, but I thought that my notification bar was taking up the same amount of physical space on that device as it does on my N1, which would make a lie of that claim. The number of icons on the home screen has not changed either even though the N1 is much higher resolution.

ergo98 16y ago
>Is it really true that Android has not been scaling interface definition as pixel density increases? Android has long been doing this (and it is hardly alone in doing this). To quote a Apple-friendly source that HN should like - http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/19/android-dips http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/19/android-dips In other words the linked blog entry is basically "my world only exists of the iPhone, therefore as it it adapts I can only assume that it is completely novel".
moultano 16y ago
Android does this. Even windows 7 has a configurable option for the size of all interface elements. (I recently got my mom a laptop with a small but very high resolution screen and was impressed with how well it handled it.) This article is a waste of space.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- coderdude 16y ago
  Since everyone seems to agree with you I find it odd that more people aren't flagging this article. I've said it many times, please stop up-voting all the Apple articles. They don't belong here and nearly every one of them is discovered to be crap or inaccurate. Even after someone points it out and gets up-voted for it the article still remains on the front page. Exercise your ability to clean up HN -- flag!
  - dcurtis 16y ago
    While I seem to have negligently exaggerated on the exclusivity of the iPhone 4's resolution independence, the spirit of the article is still there and the points are still valid. iOS's implementation of resolution independence is the best and most standardized implementation that exists.
    - coderdude 16y ago
      That's fine, but it doesn't save it from the fact that programmers and entrepreneurs don't need to be overly pre-occupied with information about Apple, its products, or its CEO all day long.
    - ergo98 16y ago
      So you start with "Sure I was wrong", but then you head on to- "iOS's implementation of resolution independence is the best and most standardized implementation that exists." How do you know that? You don't even know that alternatives even exist, and here you're passing absolute judgment on them? Sorry, but you're woefully ill-equipped to make that statement.
    - boucher 16y ago
      Not really. I don't know how much you know about how it actually works, but it's a much bigger mess than what you are describing in the article. OS X isn't really built from the ground up to be resolution independent, and linking to articles about quartz is kind of misleading, given that a lot of the graphics layer of iOS is completely different than the graphics layer of Mac OS X. It may be easier on OS X than other platforms, I don't really know, but Mac OS X, despite a lot of talk over the last 4 years or so, remains not fully resolution independent, and the new iOS approach is a pretty big departure from what has been going on in Mac OS X.
      - yoden 16y ago
        It's actually far harder on OS X than any modern Windows or Gnome system (don't know about KDE)
  - 16y ago
- dcurtis 16y ago
  Windows 7 does have some resolution independence, but it's very buggy and is very similar to desktop Mac OS X's sub-par implementation: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/e7/archive/2008/09/13/follow-up-on-high-dpi-resolution.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/e7/archive/2008/09/13/follow-up-on-h... iOS 4 is the first OS to be completely resolution-independent. Even Android's attempt at resolution independence is not widely supported well by Android apps.
  - vito 16y ago
    Android's "attempt" at resolution independence? It's been designed for it from the start, and as a result it's very very simple to work with as a developer. Stop spreading FUD. Any Android app by a competent developer will look great from one resolution to the next. Now the iPhone can do that too, just with some growing pains as developers update their apps to provide higher-definiton resources. It's great that the iPhone is progressing, but there's no need to adopt this "finally Apple gets it right!" stance and trash their opponents who have been for years doing pretty much the same things you tout as revolutionary and unprecedented.
  - boucher 16y ago
    It's really hard to say that iOS 4 is resolution independent. Right now, it pretty much just supports two fixed resolutions. And though the public information is pretty limited, what we do know about the API approach suggests that each additional resolution is going to require a fair amount of manual effort to support out of the box.
- lars512 16y ago
  You've said Windows 7 scales reasonably well, and I know from experience that Gnome does too. The real question is: why doesn't desktop OS X scale better? For the past three major releases of OS X I've been hoping for a move to resolution-independent "fixed-size" interfaces. That is, the interface will take up the same physical size on any screen (unless you choose to zoom it in or out). What's holding them back?
martythemaniak 16y ago
A lot of things only get noticed if/when Apple does them - high-density screens, multitasking etc - and then they become 'revolutionary' and 'magical'
- cesare 16y ago
  Video calls is another one.
- axod 16y ago
  We have a very exciting announcement.... We've invented Copy,.. wait for it,... and paste! YES!!! You can now copy and paste text. This will revolutionize the industry.
  - houseabsolute 16y ago
    To be fair they do have far better copy and paste than Android does.
    - cesare 16y ago
      Care to elaborate? Not to mention that without multitasking copy/paste is much less useful.
      - stcredzero 16y ago
        without multitasking copy/paste is much less useful Really? I use copy/paste all the time on both my iPhone and iPad, and iOS 4 is still in the future.
      - houseabsolute 16y ago
        Copy and paste in iPhone works even if you quit the app you're pasting from and open a new one. Copy and paste in iPhone is universal, or about as close to that as it needs to be. It works on essentially all text, and basically the same way in all places. In contrast Android copy and paste is much more selectively available. It is often hidden in menus that are different from application to application. Copy and paste is one of those things that has to be done the same way everywhere to achieve its height of usability. My Nexus One does not live up to my standards for that.

ergo98 16y ago

>Is it really true that Android has not been scaling interface definition as pixel density increases? Android has long been doing this (and it is hardly alone in doing this). To quote a Apple-friendly source that HN should like - http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/19/android-dips http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/04/19/android-dips In other words the linked blog entry is basically "my world only exists of the iPhone, therefore as it it adapts I can only assume that it is completely novel".

moultano 16y ago

Android does this. Even windows 7 has a configurable option for the size of all interface elements. (I recently got my mom a laptop with a small but very high resolution screen and was impressed with how well it handled it.) This article is a waste of space.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
coderdude 16y ago
Since everyone seems to agree with you I find it odd that more people aren't flagging this article. I've said it many times, please stop up-voting all the Apple articles. They don't belong here and nearly every one of them is discovered to be crap or inaccurate. Even after someone points it out and gets up-voted for it the article still remains on the front page. Exercise your ability to clean up HN -- flag!
- dcurtis 16y ago
  While I seem to have negligently exaggerated on the exclusivity of the iPhone 4's resolution independence, the spirit of the article is still there and the points are still valid. iOS's implementation of resolution independence is the best and most standardized implementation that exists.
  - coderdude 16y ago
    That's fine, but it doesn't save it from the fact that programmers and entrepreneurs don't need to be overly pre-occupied with information about Apple, its products, or its CEO all day long.
  - ergo98 16y ago
    So you start with "Sure I was wrong", but then you head on to- "iOS's implementation of resolution independence is the best and most standardized implementation that exists." How do you know that? You don't even know that alternatives even exist, and here you're passing absolute judgment on them? Sorry, but you're woefully ill-equipped to make that statement.
  - boucher 16y ago
    Not really. I don't know how much you know about how it actually works, but it's a much bigger mess than what you are describing in the article. OS X isn't really built from the ground up to be resolution independent, and linking to articles about quartz is kind of misleading, given that a lot of the graphics layer of iOS is completely different than the graphics layer of Mac OS X. It may be easier on OS X than other platforms, I don't really know, but Mac OS X, despite a lot of talk over the last 4 years or so, remains not fully resolution independent, and the new iOS approach is a pretty big departure from what has been going on in Mac OS X.
    - yoden 16y ago
      It's actually far harder on OS X than any modern Windows or Gnome system (don't know about KDE)
- 16y ago
dcurtis 16y ago
Windows 7 does have some resolution independence, but it's very buggy and is very similar to desktop Mac OS X's sub-par implementation: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/e7/archive/2008/09/13/follow-up-on-high-dpi-resolution.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/b/e7/archive/2008/09/13/follow-up-on-h... iOS 4 is the first OS to be completely resolution-independent. Even Android's attempt at resolution independence is not widely supported well by Android apps.
- vito 16y ago
  Android's "attempt" at resolution independence? It's been designed for it from the start, and as a result it's very very simple to work with as a developer. Stop spreading FUD. Any Android app by a competent developer will look great from one resolution to the next. Now the iPhone can do that too, just with some growing pains as developers update their apps to provide higher-definiton resources. It's great that the iPhone is progressing, but there's no need to adopt this "finally Apple gets it right!" stance and trash their opponents who have been for years doing pretty much the same things you tout as revolutionary and unprecedented.
- boucher 16y ago
  It's really hard to say that iOS 4 is resolution independent. Right now, it pretty much just supports two fixed resolutions. And though the public information is pretty limited, what we do know about the API approach suggests that each additional resolution is going to require a fair amount of manual effort to support out of the box.
lars512 16y ago
You've said Windows 7 scales reasonably well, and I know from experience that Gnome does too. The real question is: why doesn't desktop OS X scale better? For the past three major releases of OS X I've been hoping for a move to resolution-independent "fixed-size" interfaces. That is, the interface will take up the same physical size on any screen (unless you choose to zoom it in or out). What's holding them back?

martythemaniak 16y ago

A lot of things only get noticed if/when Apple does them - high-density screens, multitasking etc - and then they become 'revolutionary' and 'magical'

cesare 16y ago
Video calls is another one.
axod 16y ago
We have a very exciting announcement.... We've invented Copy,.. wait for it,... and paste! YES!!! You can now copy and paste text. This will revolutionize the industry.
- houseabsolute 16y ago
  To be fair they do have far better copy and paste than Android does.
  - cesare 16y ago
    Care to elaborate? Not to mention that without multitasking copy/paste is much less useful.
    - stcredzero 16y ago
      without multitasking copy/paste is much less useful Really? I use copy/paste all the time on both my iPhone and iPad, and iOS 4 is still in the future.
    - houseabsolute 16y ago
      Copy and paste in iPhone works even if you quit the app you're pasting from and open a new one. Copy and paste in iPhone is universal, or about as close to that as it needs to be. It works on essentially all text, and basically the same way in all places. In contrast Android copy and paste is much more selectively available. It is often hidden in menus that are different from application to application. Copy and paste is one of those things that has to be done the same way everywhere to achieve its height of usability. My Nexus One does not live up to my standards for that.