or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Resolution independence in Leopard confirmed by Apple
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Resolution independence in Leopard confirmed by Apple - Page 5

post #161 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

I just thought I'd throw in the fact that Apple has said all developars need to make their icons 512 x 512px's.

Like this;



Is that big enough for ya?

Ooooh! Pretty!
post #162 of 185
A blast from the past. Not too distant past, but still the past.
post #163 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker View Post

Yeah.

Straight from the horse's mouth:




I see zero difference in these two images!
post #164 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

I see zero difference in these two images!

It's there, I can see some difference. The pictures aren't very good examples.
post #165 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

It's there, I can see some difference. The pictures aren't very good examples.

It does look like the 200 DPI is lighter (less bold) than the 100 DPI, but the text sizes look exactly the same. If this is what resolution independence is, can't say as it would do me any good.
post #166 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

It does look like the 200 DPI is lighter (less bold) than the 100 DPI, but the text sizes look exactly the same.

It's subtle, but the text is slightly sharper.

Quote:
If this is what resolution independence is, can't say as it would do me any good.

I've already said that the image is a bad example. I'll spell it out more clearly and say that it's a horrible example. It looks like a screen capture of a presentation video.
post #167 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

It does look like the 200 DPI is lighter (less bold) than the 100 DPI, but the text sizes look exactly the same. If this is what resolution independence is, can't say as it would do me any good.

Yes, the size should look exactly the same. The 200 DPI one is sharper, however. Resolution independence means that text and images on the screen can be defined in terms of physical size (e.g. cm, inches) rather than pixel size. With no resolution independence, everything on that 200 dpi image would look 1/4 the size of the 100 dpi one. (1/2 the size vertically and horizontally -> 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4 the size).

With resolution independence implemented, that would then present the opportunity for the user to set the scaling they want for the user interface. Rather than just increasing/decreasing font size, this would enlarge/shrink all interface elements by the same factor.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #168 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

Yes, the size should look exactly the same. The 200 DPI one is sharper, however. Resolution independence means that text and images on the screen can be defined in terms of physical size (e.g. cm, inches) rather than pixel size. With no resolution independence, everything on that 200 dpi image would look 1/4 the size of the 100 dpi one. (1/2 the size vertically and horizontally -> 1/2 * 1/2 = 1/4 the size).

With resolution independence implemented, that would then present the opportunity for the user to set the scaling they want for the user interface. Rather than just increasing/decreasing font size, this would enlarge/shrink all interface elements by the same factor.

I suppose for some, the 200 DPI looks better. I also understand the picture quality is bad. For me, using the magnification feature of Mac OS, I filled the screen with the two images. I sort of like the bolder look of the 100 DPI image. The 200 DPI picture looks a little too bright (washed out). So would this allow me to increase everything on my screen by 25% and still have it all looking crisp? Just for giggles, why is this needed in Mac OS? I might see the benefit if Apple was going to employ a touch screen on the iMac. Larger place for big fingers. Lastly, I suspect this is a pretty intense deal. Probably nowhere near as easy as it might appear. Guess that is why we have not yet seen it in Leopard or Snow Leopard. Is it at all possible to get that cool blue look from Tiger in Leopard? I am still miffed with Apple for never finding a way to replace my Restore Tiger DVDs. They simply told me we are in a Leopard world now and those DVDs are gone. My DVDs are probably meant for another machine. They load but don't install. While I'm sure Leopard is better, I bought a Tiger machine and never got to use it. RATS!
post #169 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

So would this allow me to increase everything on my screen by 25% and still have it all looking crisp?

Yes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

Just for giggles, why is this needed in Mac OS?

Because increasing screen resolution gives you more work space and ultimately presents the possibility of rendering text with the same quality as print (laser printers have at least 600 dpi resolution) and maybe one day displaying images with the same resolution as in print (2400 dpi or more).

Without resolution independence, the UI (menu bar, window control widgets etc.) would be insanely, unusably small.

As it stands, lack of resolution independence is holding back the use of high DPI monitors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

Lastly, I suspect this is a pretty intense deal. Probably nowhere near as easy as it might appear. Guess that is why we have not yet seen it in Leopard or Snow Leopard.

Well, Apple have been working on it since Tiger. It would seem that there are issues getting it to work smoothly with carbon and getting developers to support it properly.

My feeling is that Apple ultimately want to ditch carbon. When OS X is cocoa only, we'll get our resolution independence. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple announce at next year's WWDC that 10.7 will be cocoa only, and will be released 18 months later at the earliest, giving those developers dragging their feet enough time to catch up.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #170 of 185
Um ... is this gonna take lots more processor speed and memory? I have no clue what you are talking about with carbon or cocoa. Don't even try to explain. CoCo was my very first computer from Tandy/Radio Shack. The old Color Computer. Used a 6809E processor and sent an RF signal to a TV @ 320 x 240. Cost $400 and came with 4K of RAM. Yes, K! Those were the days. I would like to see a mini priced at $400 but I don't think Apple could do it and still allow it to run SL. So maybe when OS X 10.7 comes out in a couple of years, all Macs will come with 4 Gigs standard.
post #171 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker View Post

Yeah.

Straight from the horse's mouth:




If you want to show people the difference between 100dpi and 200dpi you have to save the PNG at 100dpi and 200dpi respectively.

They are at 96dpi. That doesn't help.
post #172 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

If you want to show people the difference between 100dpi and 200dpi you have to save the PNG at 100dpi and 200dpi respectively.

They are at 96dpi. That doesn't help.

You could so easily have started your post with "Umm."

But you didn't and I want to thank you for that.

From the bottom of my heart.
Aside from that bag of hurt, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?
Reply
Aside from that bag of hurt, Mrs Lincoln, what did you think of the play?
Reply
post #173 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

If you want to show people the difference between 100dpi and 200dpi you have to save the PNG at 100dpi and 200dpi respectively.

They are at 96dpi. That doesn't help.

They are screenshots of a QT movie
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #174 of 185
I like how the zombie thread segued smoothly from the exciting promise of RI in Leopard three years ago to talking now about how it would work were it ever to actually be implemented while barely pausing to acknowledge the heavy irony.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #175 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I like how the zombie thread segued smoothly from the exciting promise of RI in Leopard three years ago to talking now about how it would work were it ever to actually be implemented while barely pausing to acknowledge the heavy irony.

I always thought that folks expecting full RI in Leopard were getting ahead of themselves.

RI is clearly something that Apple have been working on for a long time, and they have to get it working if they ever want to use high DPI monitors in their hardware. If they can get RI working properly before Microsoft, it'll be another advantage of the Mac platform over the PC platform.

I think the dumping of 64-bit carbon is a signal that Apple have finally bit the bullet and decided to eventually go cocoa-only in OS X. I'm confident that when that happens, RI will happen too.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #176 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by WPLJ42 View Post

So maybe when OS X 10.7 comes out in a couple of years, all Macs will come with 4 Gigs standard.

MacBook Pros already do, afaik. I'm on a 17" one now. Bought 3 months ago. With 4 Gigs standard. Goes like greased lightning.
post #177 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

I like how the zombie thread segued smoothly from the exciting promise of RI in Leopard three years ago to talking now about how it would work were it ever to actually be implemented while barely pausing to acknowledge the heavy irony.

I don't get where the irony is.

Is there irony in being excited about technology which ends up not being ready for the next OS X release?
post #178 of 185
It's ironic if the "excitement" at something Almost Here jumps a three year gap with no apparent concern, acknowledgement or modulation.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #179 of 185
I honestly still don't get where the irony is. (Although I'm willing to be convinced if i've failed to notice something.)

Some people have been wanting RI for a while now. They still want it even though it has been delayed.
post #180 of 185
My screenshots from the previous post were (rather obviously) from a WWDC State of the Union video. The idea was to prove that it's real by pointing to a publicly-available video. I accept the criticism that it wasn't good quality, though, but I wasn't really expecting them to be discussed almost two and a half years later. So here's a bunch of screenshots that do roughly the same, only in Leopard, and with full quality:

Regular shot, at 72ppi:


The same thing, except with 144ppi:


And finally, the above, scaled down to 50%:


The first and last next to each other:



Granted, some of the differences in smoothness will be due to the scaling, but regardless, there are definitely changes. The radius of the window border's round corder and the inner texture/bevel of the buttons, for instance.

There are also still bugs; I doubt the non-centered placement of the Apple logo is intentional, for example.
post #181 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker View Post

My screenshots from the previous post were (rather obviously) from a WWDC State of the Union video. The idea was to prove that it's real by pointing to a publicly-available video. I accept the criticism that it wasn't good quality, though, but I wasn't really expecting them to be discussed almost two and a half years later. So here's a bunch of screenshots that do roughly the same, only in Leopard, and with full quality:

Thanks for the new images, chucker.

What do you think of my "no RI (by default) in OS X until OS X is cocoa-only" theory? Is a carbon-free 10.7 likely?
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #182 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

Thanks for the new images, chucker.

What do you think of my "no RI (by default) in OS X until OS X is cocoa-only" theory? Is a carbon-free 10.7 likely?

Well, Apple had started back in 10.4 development to provide APIs for ResInd at a lower level than Cocoa. And even aside from Carbon, there are cases where this will prove valuable, even in Cocoa apps. Basically, anything where you directly interface with Quartz.

Honestly, Apple's behavior with ResInd is kind of strange, and leads me to suspect that there are unexpected hold-ups, perhaps externally (maybe they expected higher-pixel density panelsto be available a lot sooner). Several of their apps ship partially vector-based, partially pixel-based. Some of the toolbar buttons in Safari 4 are PDFs (vector; infinitely scalable); some are PNGs (pixel; low-resolution). Same goes for, say, Screen Sharing.
post #183 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucker View Post

Well, Apple had started back in 10.4 development to provide APIs for ResInd at a lower level than Cocoa. And even aside from Carbon, there are cases where this will prove valuable, even in Cocoa apps. Basically, anything where you directly interface with Quartz.

Honestly, Apple's behavior with ResInd is kind of strange, and leads me to suspect that there are unexpected hold-ups, perhaps externally (maybe they expected higher-pixel density panelsto be available a lot sooner). Several of their apps ship partially vector-based, partially pixel-based. Some of the toolbar buttons in Safari 4 are PDFs (vector; infinitely scalable); some are PNGs (pixel; low-resolution). Same goes for, say, Screen Sharing.

I just wasn't sure if there were any carbon-based drawing APIs that were causing problems? Can developers still use QuickDraw or is that now gone entirely?

Another consideration is that if developers who are shipping Carbon apps (*cough* Microsoft *cough*) are dragging their heals on supporting RI, getting rid of Carbon entirely and forcing developers to go Cocoa should encourage them to get with the program on RI at the same time.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #184 of 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post

I just wasn't sure if there were any carbon-based drawing APIs that were causing problems? Can developers still use QuickDraw or is that now gone entirely?

Another consideration is that if developers who are shipping Carbon apps (*cough* Microsoft *cough*) are dragging their heals on supporting RI, getting rid of Carbon entirely and forcing developers to go Cocoa should encourage them to get with the program on RI at the same time.

QuickDraw was deprecated in 10.4, and isn't available for 64-bit on 10.5, so it's essentially on life support. I'm not sure any major app uses it any more (I think Office 2008 moved away from it entirely?).

There are Carbon-specific ResInd APIs introduced in 10.4, but they weren't updated in 10.5. Given that 10.4 shipped with poor, broken, incomplete support for this, I wouldn't be surprised if no Carbon app will ever fully work with ResInd.

As for using ResInd as leverage to pressure vendors into dropping Carbon: there is plenty of that already, such as with 64-bit.
post #185 of 185
Shouldn't the title of this thread be changed to "Resolution independence in Snow Leopard denied by Apple"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Resolution independence in Leopard confirmed by Apple