- TWITTER FOR MAC INCREASE FONT SIZE 1080P
- TWITTER FOR MAC INCREASE FONT SIZE FULL
- TWITTER FOR MAC INCREASE FONT SIZE PRO
- TWITTER FOR MAC INCREASE FONT SIZE TV
TWITTER FOR MAC INCREASE FONT SIZE TV
Find the button on your remote to put the TV in 'native or 1:1' mode.
TWITTER FOR MAC INCREASE FONT SIZE 1080P
If you want a good example of what I'm talking about, pull up a channel on your 1080p HD television that is still being broadcast in SD. UltraHD) takes off, you'll be able to get video resolutions of 3840X2160 which will be more than enough to natively fill your screen without the need to zoom or stretch the picture. Even BluRay-quality video (1920X1080) isn't big enough to natively fill a screen of that resolution. If you're playing a DVD at its native resolution on a monitor set to 2048 pixels wide by 1152 pixels tall, that's going to leave a lot of empty space on your desktop. If you look at the properties of a DVD, the size of the video 'picture' that it puts out is around 640-720 pixels wide by 480 pixels tall. I think what you're experiencing is resolution shock.
TWITTER FOR MAC INCREASE FONT SIZE PRO
At 220 PPI, the Retina MacBook Pro has a high enough pixel density, that non-integer scaling becomes feasible without severely compromising image quality, which is why it offers more than just 1× or 2× scalingit offers equivalents to 1024×7×800 for people that wish to make the UI larger, and 1680×1050 or 1920×1200 for people that wish to make the UI smaller, all while maintaining a sharp image. At that resolution, your 2560×1440 display now has a 1280×720 equivalent workspace, which is enough to actually be productive.Īs higher density displays are introduced, this becomes less of a problem. A 1280×800 MacBook Pro would only have an equivalent workspace of 640×400, which is sub-VGA resolution.Ī 27″ iMac is where it starts to become a realistic option, however. With most current Macs, it is not feasible to use this option though. This maintains perfect sharpness, but makes everything much larger. That said, with Lion/Mountain Lion, you can enable HiDPI mode, which will render everything on-screen at 2× scale. The second display is less functional, and ends up being neglected, or used to display relatively static information such as leaving an email client or iTunes open, rather than actually making use of it for work. Your dock and menu bar only appear on the primary display (or in some setups, on separate displays!) and there have been numerous studies that have shown it to be considerably more efficient to work on one large monitor than have several smaller ones. For one thing, OS X does not have very good support for them.
On the Mac, I lose about 1.5" on either side of the picture.Ĭlick to expand.Multiple monitors are a terrible solution.
TWITTER FOR MAC INCREASE FONT SIZE FULL
If I lower the resolution on my PC, I still have a full screen to work with. But if you just want to double the physical size of items being displayed, it's not really do-able (at least not with the options that I've tried).Īnd why does lowering the resolution only center the picture inside of the display? That makes no sense to me. If you simply want more screen real estate, you already have the option of using multiple monitors. If you're gonna give me the option to plug my 13" laptop into a 26" external monitor (twice the size of the laptop screen), shouldn't you assume that maybe I'd like the option to double the size of everything on the display? There really isn't much point in upgrading a 24"-wide TV where the picture fills the entire 24" width of the screen to say, a 50" TV if the picture remains 24"-wide but centered inside the bigger screen. give you more room for multiple open windows).Ģ) to increase the size of items on the screen. There are two main reasons you would want a bigger monitor:ġ) to increase the size of your desktop (i.e. I was at Best Buy yesterday checking out the 27" iMac and the fonts/UI items didn't really look much larger than what I see on my 13" MBP.
This whole thing doesn't really make much sense to me.
0 kommentar(er)
