drago01 wrote on 2014-09-26 13:46 (UCT+0200): > hidpi is about higher pixel destiny (i.e same as you get with > phones today). So my 3200x1600 (14 inch) laptop is effectively just a > 1600x900 screen with twice as high pixel destiny. So eveything gets > render at twice the size to not be ridiculously small. 4 1600x900 blocks fit in a 3200x1600 space without overlapping. "Size" is a function of area, both height and width. Don't be mislead by "sizes" that are actually lengths, such font-size in CSS or toolkits. Ergo, a 3200x1600 screen is not 2X pixel density, but 4X, given the two screens have the same physical dimensions. Ergo, on any given display, a 64x64 icon is 4X the size (4X the pixels) of a 32x32 icon, 4096 vs. 1024. Ergo, any size icon is rendered on a 3200x1600 screen at 1/4 the size of the same icon on a 1600x900 screen of same physical dimensions. IOW, the nominal lengths associated with icon size and screen height and width understate the significance of pixel density on quality. That's why a relatively small nominal change in density, or icon "size", or text "size", produces a relatively larger apparent impact on quality, or lack thereof. It's why a modestly smaller "size" in any given physical space produces a large apparent reduction in legibility, and detail. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
