On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Miloslav Trmač <mitr(a)redhat.com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Miloslav Trmač <mitr(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> > (And I always thought that HiDPI is trying to keep the screen size of
> > elements the same and only add detail, which is inconsistent with
> > displaying low-resolution icons in a smaller physical size, but what do I
> > know…)
>
> No 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.
It seems to me we are saying the same thing: if you have a 32×32 icon on 1600×900 taking
2%×3.6% of the screen, on 3200x1600 it should still be taking 2%×3.6%, i.e. be rendered as
64×64 pixels. Is that not the case?
Well almost that is the fallback way for non hidpi aware apps. If your
application supports hidpi it won't render a 32x32 icon that way but
use a 64x64 one instead and render it unscaled. Which looks better
(i.e non blurry).