6 ms·
> I had a better screen resolution in 1995. It's worth pointing out that resolution is one thing, and pixel density another. We're moving towards much denser d
by elithrar 15y ago
> I had a better screen resolution in 1995.
It's worth pointing out that resolution is one thing, and pixel density another. We're moving towards much denser displays—in fact, Lion has some neat resolution independence features built-in—but we're probably another refresh off seeing them.
- 4ad 15y agoI think we're moving towards much denser displays for phones and tablets, but not yet laptops. There were various dense displays in the last 10 years, but they didn't become market standard. And I'm pretty sure I had higher pixel density on my 1995 Trinitron than in my 2011 high-resolution ThinkPad ;-).
- beagle3 15y agoI had a 15" 4x3 1600x1200 CRT screen that was perfectly sharp in 1997. And on my desktop I still have an 15" 1280x1024 LCD one from 2004; I think that in 2005, I wasn't able to get a 15" one anymore, and had to get a 17". And these days, even 17" ones with 1024 or 1080 lines are not that popular. My friend had a Sony laptop with 1900x1440 14" display, which was a little pricey for me at the time, so I didn't get it. But it was definitely not the only one available. These resolutions are even less common today. Or, in the words of kids today, WTF?
- masklinn 15y ago> We're moving towards much denser displays—in fact No, not on laptops. Colleagues had 1920x1200 15" laptops in the early 2000s. Laptop screen densities have been going down, and the 1366x768 resolution is a fucking plague these days.