E-mail List Archives
Re: screen resolutions, was Serif vs sans-serif
From: Austin, Darrel
Date: Jan 4, 2007 8:40AM
- Next message: Sohail Shaikh: "Re: WebAIM-Forum Digest, Vol 22, Issue 1"
- Previous message: Alastair Campbell: "Re: screen resolutions, was Serif vs sans-serif"
- Next message in Thread: Alastair Campbell: "Re: screen resolutions, was Serif vs sans-serif"
- Previous message in Thread: Alastair Campbell: "Re: screen resolutions, was Serif vs sans-serif"
- View all messages in this Thread
> > a CRT monitor that was 800 by 600 pixels. (And I think a 15"
> > screen).
> And:
> > a 1400 pixel screen - and a 12.1" screen.
>
> That's a fairly major change in resolution (rover 25%?),
> without much of a change in the interface sizes.
Yes and no. Using sloppy math, it's about a 100% increase in PPI. Which
seems like a lot, but not compared to the pace that nearly every other
portion of computing has increased.
And even todays super-high density displays still aren't pushing
anything close to the resolution of a bad laser printer.
> I think we are going to hear quite a lot about zoomable
> interfaces in the next couple of years: Apple recently
> patented some "resolution independent" interface methods.
There's been talk of this for years. Hopefully it will happen soon.
Maybe next week at MacWorld? Eh, probably not. iPods get more buzz than
better text on screen would. ;o)
-Darrel
- Next message: Sohail Shaikh: "Re: WebAIM-Forum Digest, Vol 22, Issue 1"
- Previous message: Alastair Campbell: "Re: screen resolutions, was Serif vs sans-serif"
- Next message in Thread: Alastair Campbell: "Re: screen resolutions, was Serif vs sans-serif"
- Previous message in Thread: Alastair Campbell: "Re: screen resolutions, was Serif vs sans-serif"
- View all messages in this Thread