<Silly> RE: Help with question about web page access

From: der Mouse <mouse_at_Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Date: Tue Aug 17 23:32:36 2004

>> 2048x1536 (with is 4 1024x768 areas on the same glass) is what I use
>> on some of my 21"/22" monitors.
> Ick. I don't do anything higher than about 1280x1024 on a 20"
> monitor, and I usually am sitting no more than 16" back from it. At
> 1600x1200, even on "good" monitors, I can't see things anymore. My
> rule of thumb is you should be able to see the individual dots in a
> grid of 1x1 pixel dots (but they shouldn't be too big).

!! I can't imagine why, unless you insist on using the same
size-in-pixels for things like font glyphs even on decent-resolution
displays where individual pixels are too small to see.

>> 1600x1200 [...] is what I run on my 17" screens.
> You must have 20-10 vision or something, because no human should be
> able to see 1x1 pixel dots on something with that high of DPI.

You seem to have jumped from "this is what I run" to "I can see
individual pixels on this". I see no basis whatever for such an
inference. If I had a 1000dpi display available, I certainly wouldn't
avoid it just because I couldn't make out individual pixels!

And aside from that...1600x1200 is 2000 pixel-widths diagonally; over
17 inches, that's about 118 dpi. What's your reference for believing
118dpi is something "no [normal] human should be able to see"? I have
no problem seeing detail that fine....

/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X Against HTML mouse_at_rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Received on Tue Aug 17 2004 - 23:32:36 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:36:34 BST