6 ms·

> 2560x1440 /logical/ pixels (what apple calls points) at 27" to be the ideal amount of [MacOS] screen real estate (and physical size for [MacOS] UI elements)

> 2560x1440 /logical/ pixels (what apple calls points) at 27" to be the ideal amount of [MacOS] screen real estate (and physical size for [MacOS] UI elements) ftfy. Apple is double dealing you here. Apple developed MacOS to look best at that size/density, and forced the development of the few expensive displays are that size/density... After a decade waiting for third party displays to meet up their standard, to no avail, perhaps Apple should just modify the OS to better support other HiDPI displays available

mort96 5y ago
Nah, that's not true. Linux also looks best at roughly that scale. Everything is way too big at 1080p@1x/4k@2x at 27" -- in both macOS and Linux. I'm not too sure about Windows, but given the fact that cross-platform apps like web browsers render everything at the same logical size across the systems, and the fact that browsers don't look hilariously out of place in Windows. I'm gonna assume that it applies to Windows as well. I used to have a 27" 1080p monitor for my Linux box, now I have a 27" 1440p monitor and a 24" 1080p monitor. Everything looks less oversized now.
- skydhash 5y ago
  I don't know about 4k@27, but 1080@27 is indeed too big. The only thing I want to be big is the text - and icons maybe -, But I can't stomach big UI elements.
  - mort96 5y ago
    FWIW, 4k is 3840x2160, which is (19202)x(10802). So 4k@27 running at a 2x scale is exactly the same physical area per logical pixel as 1080p@27 running at a 1x scale.
    - skydhash 5y ago
      I have a 1440p@27 monitor. That gives me enough real estate to actually use editors and IDE and have some real estate. I could probably do 4k, but maybe @32 inches and native resolution.
ziml77 5y ago
Why are you saying this is a macOS thing? It's the same for Windows and Linux.
- canuckintime 5y ago
  Windows supports non-integer DPI scaling. The typical riposte is many (most?) third party Windows programs don't support it* BUT many third party MacOS didn't support 'Retina' scaling for some time after launch either (I have more faith in MacOS developer system to jump on board if Apple added support)
  - Tagbert 5y ago
    True, though “no supporting” mainly meant that icons and images looked a little blurry because they were scaled up from 1x. The text and app layouts were fine.
shadowfacts 5y ago
Yes, I made the reasonable assumption that anyone interested in an Apple display is using a Mac. > Apple should just modify the OS to better support other HiDPI displays available For a number of years[1][2], OS X did partially support fractional scaling. They ultimately decided the tradeoffs, as mentioned in other comments, weren't worth it and went integer-only[3]. Even if it were still supported, it wouldn't be a complete substitute for displays of appropriate pixel density for integer scaling. [1]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2005/04/macosx-10-4/20/#scalable-ui https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2005/04/macosx-10-4/20/#scal... [2]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2007/10/mac-os-x-10-5/9/#resolution-independence https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2007/10/mac-os-x-10-5/9/#res... [3]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2011/07/mac-os-x-10-7/14/#hi-dpi https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2011/07/mac-os-x-10-7/14/#hi...
BeFlatXIII 5y ago
I don't like the idea of my Mac OS being tainted by concessions to the hardware reality of the products the rest of the industry produces. Then there's no one at all to embarrass the state of the industry.

mort96 5y ago

Nah, that's not true. Linux also looks best at roughly that scale. Everything is way too big at 1080p@1x/4k@2x at 27" -- in both macOS and Linux. I'm not too sure about Windows, but given the fact that cross-platform apps like web browsers render everything at the same logical size across the systems, and the fact that browsers don't look hilariously out of place in Windows. I'm gonna assume that it applies to Windows as well. I used to have a 27" 1080p monitor for my Linux box, now I have a 27" 1440p monitor and a 24" 1080p monitor. Everything looks less oversized now.

skydhash 5y ago
I don't know about 4k@27, but 1080@27 is indeed too big. The only thing I want to be big is the text - and icons maybe -, But I can't stomach big UI elements.
- mort96 5y ago
  FWIW, 4k is 3840x2160, which is (19202)x(10802). So 4k@27 running at a 2x scale is exactly the same physical area per logical pixel as 1080p@27 running at a 1x scale.
  - skydhash 5y ago
    I have a 1440p@27 monitor. That gives me enough real estate to actually use editors and IDE and have some real estate. I could probably do 4k, but maybe @32 inches and native resolution.

ziml77 5y ago

Why are you saying this is a macOS thing? It's the same for Windows and Linux.

canuckintime 5y ago
Windows supports non-integer DPI scaling. The typical riposte is many (most?) third party Windows programs don't support it* BUT many third party MacOS didn't support 'Retina' scaling for some time after launch either (I have more faith in MacOS developer system to jump on board if Apple added support)
- Tagbert 5y ago
  True, though “no supporting” mainly meant that icons and images looked a little blurry because they were scaled up from 1x. The text and app layouts were fine.

shadowfacts 5y ago

Yes, I made the reasonable assumption that anyone interested in an Apple display is using a Mac. > Apple should just modify the OS to better support other HiDPI displays available For a number of years[1][2], OS X did partially support fractional scaling. They ultimately decided the tradeoffs, as mentioned in other comments, weren't worth it and went integer-only[3]. Even if it were still supported, it wouldn't be a complete substitute for displays of appropriate pixel density for integer scaling. [1]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2005/04/macosx-10-4/20/#scalable-ui https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2005/04/macosx-10-4/20/#scal... [2]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2007/10/mac-os-x-10-5/9/#resolution-independence https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2007/10/mac-os-x-10-5/9/#res... [3]: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2011/07/mac-os-x-10-7/14/#hi-dpi https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2011/07/mac-os-x-10-7/14/#hi...

BeFlatXIII 5y ago

I don't like the idea of my Mac OS being tainted by concessions to the hardware reality of the products the rest of the industry produces. Then there's no one at all to embarrass the state of the industry.