5 ms·

Did they specify the dot pitch on the 27" screen? I recall testing the 17" MBP @ 1920X1200, but the text felt a bit small. Considering the old 24" was only 19

by neovive 17y ago

Did they specify the dot pitch on the 27" screen? I recall testing the 17" MBP @ 1920X1200, but the text felt a bit small. Considering the old 24" was only 1920 pixels wide, packing 2560 pixels across into 27" seems tight.

blackguardx 17y ago
Smaller dot pitch is better. If the text is too small, increase the font size.
- there 17y ago
  not a good idea for designers and people that need to ensure what they see on their screen is what everyone else sees.
  - zokier 17y ago
    Thats why we have PDF. 1 inch on a PDF is on 1 inch on my screen. And it will be 1 inch on all properly configured readers. And as a bonus point it will still be 1 inch when I print it out. Yes, techically HTML/CSS should be as scalable when used in a scalable way, but I'm not sure of current web browser situation. If someone has better info please reply.
    - blasdel 17y ago
      1 inch on a PDF is on 1 inch on my screen. And it will be 1 inch on all properly configured readers. Not on your life. Despite pretensions to the contrary, DPI has been completely meaningless on the screen for several decades. If you're writing an application, never pay attention to DPI metadata unless you're placing the item on a printed page, and never add DPI metadata to files unless they came from a scanner. it will still be 1 inch when I print it out This is true in an ideal setting. Unfortunately, there's a lot of shitheads out there that think '72 DPI' or '96 DPI' on files is meaningful because that's what the platform uses. I hope their heads fall off.
      - zokier 17y ago
        Are you familiar at all with the PDF format? Its specifically engineered so that it looks equal everywhere. It doesn't embed "DPI metadata" on files, but uses real-world units (millimeters, points) in most, if not all, measurements instead of pixels. And Adobe Reader (almost defacto reader for PDF) has the option specify custom PPI value, or use the value operating system supplies. Therefore my original claim that 1 inch is 1 inch on all properly configured readers still holds true, as all properly configured readers have correct PPI setting set either by OS or by user. And if current operating systems wouldn't be so crappy at scaling stuff, PPI could be set system-wide at installation, and we wouldn't be having this discussion. It's actually quite baffling that there isn't more noise about the insanity that 1 inch rarely (in other software than PDF) is 1 inch
        blasdel 17y ago
        Are you familiar at all with the PDF format? ...uses real-world units (millimeters, points) ...and has an obnoxious dimensional limit of 5.08 meters on each side. It would have been so much better to be based on no units at all, just ratios or floats. Besides, the PDF viewer generally has no fucking idea what size your screen is. Therefore my original claim that 1 inch is 1 inch on all properly configured readers still holds true You're begging the question in the classical sense. Your original claim holds true given that you assume that it's true. Nobody has their display resolution configured correctly in Acrobat except by accident or anal-retentiveness. I'd bet you $5 that it's not correctly set on your computer -- go ahead, zoom to "actual size" and hold a matching piece of paper up to the screen. It's actually quite baffling that there isn't more noise about the insanity that 1 inch rarely is 1 inch It's not 1984 anymore, noone gives a shit. Users rightly care more about being able to see what they're looking at than some hypothetical WYSIWYG benefit.
- zokier 17y ago
  You shouldn't need to increase font size. If there is 12pt text, it should be 12pt on screen, regardless of the resolution you are running. Actually if you set larger font to compensate screen resolution, it could wreck the hinting/scaling system in fonts, as the designer assumes that the characters are certain size. The letters are usually differently shaped at different sizes, and with highres screen you actually want those small-size shapes because they are optimized for small sizes. edit: just to say, yes I fully agree that higher pixel pitch is definitely a good thing. I feel like displays are one of the most slowly advancing part of computers. Yes, they are getting bigger and bigger, but we are stuck on the same <100 PPI pixel pitch for large part of desktop LCD monitor history. At the same time mobile devices are having 300 PPI displays, and even laptops have higher pitched screens than desktops. Its just not fair!
  - zargon 17y ago
    I refuse to buy a desktop LCD until I can get an even mildly decent PPI. At least 125. 300 would be fantastic. Till then, I have 3 backup FW900s.
- raquo 17y ago
  How to increase font size in OS X?
  - wenbert 17y ago
    I use a 17" Macbook Pro. Generally the OS's font is okay. But when you are used to coding with fontsize 12, it becomes really small on my macbook. I use fontsize 13-14. It's big and looks really smooth.
    - raquo 17y ago
      While many apps provide zoom for content they present, I am yet to find an app that allows increasing font size in its UI elements (Though I think OSX should solve this problem in some standard way, not individual apps). Regarding screen size - the fonts are OK on my MBP too, but 27" is another story - you have to sit farther from such a huge screen. iCal and many other apps on my parents' iMac 24" are pretty much unusable because of tiny font sizes.
      - edd 17y ago
        Resolution independence is coming with OS 10.5...
      - wenbert 17y ago
        You are right to point out that on a 27" screen, you would have to sit farther away. I am still on 10.4 though. One thing that bugs me is the size of the mouse cursor. It is too small for me -- I increase it and it all becomes jagged and ugly.
masklinn 17y ago
It's as wide as the old 30" Cinema Display, FWIW.
riobard 17y ago
The DPI of the 27" iMac display is 108 vs 133 on the 17" MBP. It's closer to the 110 DPI on 15" MBP. I use a 13" with 113 DPI and feel the text size is not that bad.

by neovive 17y ago

blackguardx 17y ago

Smaller dot pitch is better. If the text is too small, increase the font size.

there 17y ago
not a good idea for designers and people that need to ensure what they see on their screen is what everyone else sees.
- zokier 17y ago
  Thats why we have PDF. 1 inch on a PDF is on 1 inch on my screen. And it will be 1 inch on all properly configured readers. And as a bonus point it will still be 1 inch when I print it out. Yes, techically HTML/CSS should be as scalable when used in a scalable way, but I'm not sure of current web browser situation. If someone has better info please reply.
  - blasdel 17y ago
    1 inch on a PDF is on 1 inch on my screen. And it will be 1 inch on all properly configured readers. Not on your life. Despite pretensions to the contrary, DPI has been completely meaningless on the screen for several decades. If you're writing an application, never pay attention to DPI metadata unless you're placing the item on a printed page, and never add DPI metadata to files unless they came from a scanner. it will still be 1 inch when I print it out This is true in an ideal setting. Unfortunately, there's a lot of shitheads out there that think '72 DPI' or '96 DPI' on files is meaningful because that's what the platform uses. I hope their heads fall off.
    - zokier 17y ago
      Are you familiar at all with the PDF format? Its specifically engineered so that it looks equal everywhere. It doesn't embed "DPI metadata" on files, but uses real-world units (millimeters, points) in most, if not all, measurements instead of pixels. And Adobe Reader (almost defacto reader for PDF) has the option specify custom PPI value, or use the value operating system supplies. Therefore my original claim that 1 inch is 1 inch on all properly configured readers still holds true, as all properly configured readers have correct PPI setting set either by OS or by user. And if current operating systems wouldn't be so crappy at scaling stuff, PPI could be set system-wide at installation, and we wouldn't be having this discussion. It's actually quite baffling that there isn't more noise about the insanity that 1 inch rarely (in other software than PDF) is 1 inch
      - blasdel 17y ago
        Are you familiar at all with the PDF format? ...uses real-world units (millimeters, points) ...and has an obnoxious dimensional limit of 5.08 meters on each side. It would have been so much better to be based on no units at all, just ratios or floats. Besides, the PDF viewer generally has no fucking idea what size your screen is. Therefore my original claim that 1 inch is 1 inch on all properly configured readers still holds true You're begging the question in the classical sense. Your original claim holds true given that you assume that it's true. Nobody has their display resolution configured correctly in Acrobat except by accident or anal-retentiveness. I'd bet you $5 that it's not correctly set on your computer -- go ahead, zoom to "actual size" and hold a matching piece of paper up to the screen. It's actually quite baffling that there isn't more noise about the insanity that 1 inch rarely is 1 inch It's not 1984 anymore, noone gives a shit. Users rightly care more about being able to see what they're looking at than some hypothetical WYSIWYG benefit.
zokier 17y ago
You shouldn't need to increase font size. If there is 12pt text, it should be 12pt on screen, regardless of the resolution you are running. Actually if you set larger font to compensate screen resolution, it could wreck the hinting/scaling system in fonts, as the designer assumes that the characters are certain size. The letters are usually differently shaped at different sizes, and with highres screen you actually want those small-size shapes because they are optimized for small sizes. edit: just to say, yes I fully agree that higher pixel pitch is definitely a good thing. I feel like displays are one of the most slowly advancing part of computers. Yes, they are getting bigger and bigger, but we are stuck on the same <100 PPI pixel pitch for large part of desktop LCD monitor history. At the same time mobile devices are having 300 PPI displays, and even laptops have higher pitched screens than desktops. Its just not fair!
- zargon 17y ago
  I refuse to buy a desktop LCD until I can get an even mildly decent PPI. At least 125. 300 would be fantastic. Till then, I have 3 backup FW900s.
raquo 17y ago
How to increase font size in OS X?
- wenbert 17y ago
  I use a 17" Macbook Pro. Generally the OS's font is okay. But when you are used to coding with fontsize 12, it becomes really small on my macbook. I use fontsize 13-14. It's big and looks really smooth.
  - raquo 17y ago
    While many apps provide zoom for content they present, I am yet to find an app that allows increasing font size in its UI elements (Though I think OSX should solve this problem in some standard way, not individual apps). Regarding screen size - the fonts are OK on my MBP too, but 27" is another story - you have to sit farther from such a huge screen. iCal and many other apps on my parents' iMac 24" are pretty much unusable because of tiny font sizes.
    - edd 17y ago
      Resolution independence is coming with OS 10.5...
    - wenbert 17y ago
      You are right to point out that on a 27" screen, you would have to sit farther away. I am still on 10.4 though. One thing that bugs me is the size of the mouse cursor. It is too small for me -- I increase it and it all becomes jagged and ugly.

masklinn 17y ago

It's as wide as the old 30" Cinema Display, FWIW.

riobard 17y ago

The DPI of the 27" iMac display is 108 vs 133 on the 17" MBP. It's closer to the 110 DPI on 15" MBP. I use a 13" with 113 DPI and feel the text size is not that bad.