3 ms·
Given that there isn't any objective basis for the default scaling factor of a monitor being what we call 1x, I would argue that 2x scaling isn't any less nativ
by clhodapp 9mo ago
Given that there isn't any objective basis for the default scaling factor of a monitor being what we call 1x, I would argue that 2x scaling isn't any less native than 1x
- glitchc 9mo agoThe 2x scaling refers to the OS UI being set to 200%. That means each UI pixel is rendered by 2x2 physical pixels of the monitor. It has a very clear and objective definition. Did you mean something else?
- clhodapp 9mo agoI think it's definitely a clear definition of what you're doing, but I still take some issue with the framing of "UI pixels". I would argue that it's more like abstract "UI distance units." Most UI's are designed to be "right-sized" for humans with a "distance unit" being about 1/96th of an inch (when the display is the designer-expected distance from the user). If you deviate too far from this, things end up being really big or really small and the display is harder to use. What you're effectively doing when you enable "2x scaling" is setting the "abstract distance unit" that gets applied to UIs to be the size of two display pixels, rather than one display pixel. Whether this is a good thing to do and is more or less "native", IMO, depends on the DPI of the display.