Spartanicus wrote:
Felix Miata <Ug********************@dev.nul> wrote:
No one knows better than an old man like me who can hardly see any more
the relationship between resolution and display size. When I want bigger
text on a puter display, I do one or more of several things (in order of
ease):
1-use zoom
2-sit closer to the display
3-set a minimum font size
4-disallow pages to shrink text
5-use a BIGGER DISPLAY ****************
6-DECREASE RESOLUTION (e.g. drop back from 1600x1200 to 1280x960)
You are making a common mistake, 1600x1200 and 1280x960 are values for
the *screen area* configuration setting.
Yes, this is the same configurable "mistake" used by such operating
system and desktop manager providers as M$ and KDE, which is the only
resolution relevant to over 99.99999% of users of personal computers.
When I run 1600X1200, I cannot see the roughness of the edges of a 26px
letter because the pixels are too tiny and too tightly packed together.
When a 13px letter is displayed without any artificial means of
smoothing the edges on 800x600, the edges are very rough.
http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/images...v1600x1200.png This is
a manifestation of the apparent resolution, the relevant resolution, the
one most people care about.
--
"In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you."
Matthew 7:12 NIV
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
Felix Miata ***
http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
