6 ms·
1600x900 [...] only 13.3" That works out to a horizontal PPI of 138.03. http://members.ping.de/~sven/dpi.html http://members.ping.de/~sven/dpi.html If subpixel
by gravitycop 18y ago
1600x900 [...] only 13.3"
That works out to a horizontal PPI of 138.03. http://members.ping.de/~sven/dpi.html http://members.ping.de/~sven/dpi.html If subpixel rendering is being used (e.g. ClearType on Windows), then the horizontal PPI [EDIT: when displaying text] is 3x that, or 414.09. Don't you think some of those subpixels might be wasted on such a small screen? What is your typical viewing distance?
- tsuraan 18y agoIf subpixel rendering is being used (e.g. ClearType on Windows), then the horizontal PPI is 3x that, or 414.09. Don't you think some of those subpixels might be wasted on such a small screen? The text on my laptop very crisp and clean looking; I don't think I have any sort of subpixel stuff enabled though; I'm running Linux, and have no idea if X even supports that sort of thing. The typical resolution for a small laptop is 1440 pixels wide, which requires some really small fonts or terminals <80 columns to fit three across on a screen. With 1600 pixels, it's really easy to fit 3 terminals with reasonable fonts. I don't know anything technical about it, but I know it looks nice and is easy to read. What is your typical viewing distance? Well, it's a laptop, so the distance from my eyes to my lap, or closer on an airplane. I'd say I'm rarely using the laptop when it's more than about 3' away from me.