E-mail List Archives
Re: Serif vs sans-serif
From: Emma Duke-Williams
Date: Jan 4, 2007 8:00AM
- Next message: Alastair Campbell: "Re: screen resolutions, was Serif vs sans-serif"
- Previous message: Austin, Darrel: "Re: Serif vs sans-serif"
- Next message in Thread: None
- Previous message in Thread: Austin, Darrel: "Re: Serif vs sans-serif"
- View all messages in this Thread
Guess you are right. ... I was thinking of the fact that late 90s I
had a CRT monitor that was 800 by 600 pixels. (And I think a 15"
screen). Now I have a couple of flat screens, including one on the
laptop - which is a 1400 pixel screen - and a 12.1" screen. To me,
that seems a massive change (especially as I don't see my computer
being that much faster ... it might be more powerful, but the software
on it is so much more clogging!)
Emma
On 1/4/07, Austin, Darrel < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> > and since then
> > screen technology has come on in leaps and bounds
>
> Has it? The only major improvement, AFAICT is that we now have better
> system-level anti-aliasing. Other than that, though, screen technologies
> haven't change a whole lot...at least not compared to the leaps and
> bounds that we've seen in other aspects of computing (speed, ram,
> storage space, etc.) We're still dealing with rather low resolution
> devices.
>
> -Darrel
>
- Next message: Alastair Campbell: "Re: screen resolutions, was Serif vs sans-serif"
- Previous message: Austin, Darrel: "Re: Serif vs sans-serif"
- Next message in Thread: None
- Previous message in Thread: Austin, Darrel: "Re: Serif vs sans-serif"
- View all messages in this Thread