Slashdot Mirror


Window Managers for High Resolution Displays?

cfish asks: "Recently, I was told by a manager at a major monitor maker that CRTs are phasing out. I have a very weak eye and I read text at 1024x768 on a 21" monitor, sitting 2 feet away. Each alphabet is about 1/4" tall. What makes me panic is the fact that LCDs have fixed resolution and they are simply too small for me to read icons and widget text, like Microsoft's. This is a great chance for Linux to get a head start in a certain market: older folks and those who have eye strain problems. Generally speaking, not many people can read Microsoft's widget text on a 150dpi display, which may explain why no one buys them even that they are available. Imagine how frustrating it could be for medical display (x-rays), cad, image editing to have a high resolution realistic image but cannot read the menu and text. If someone can come up with a Window manager to beat MS on 200dpi displays, no doubt this will capture a strong following in image related applications. I have read about these debates 5 years ago. What has been done about it?"

36 of 382 comments (clear)

  1. Workaround for you... by eaglebtc · · Score: 5, Informative

    Ya know, LCDs don't *have* to be run at their native resolution all the time. You are free to set an LCD to run at 640x480, 800x600, or whatever you like. The nice thing about a 200dpi LCD display is that you can run it lower than the native resolution and still get a great looking picture. Another thing...Windows can be set to a higher "dpi" than its traditional 96. This will increase the font size for EVERYTHING. Just go to Display Properties > Settings > Advanced, and select the "DPI" from the General tab that you wish to use. Beware, as some applications may not look right because they weren't designed to use that resolution. FP!

    --
    Homestarrunner.net -- It's Dot Com!
    1. Re:Workaround for you... by edwdig · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, LCDs don't have to run at their native resolution. But they really look like crap at lower resolutions. Particuarlly for displaying text. Which would make things worse for the guy asking the question.

      Run the monitor at its native resolution, tell Windows to use Extra Large fonts, and make sure to set the anti-aliasing to ClearType. ClearType actually makes a very big difference on how legible the text is. I think that's the best bet on getting a legible display on Windows with an LCD.

    2. Re:Workaround for you... by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes, LCDs don't have to run at their native resolution. But they really look like crap at lower resolutions. Particuarlly for displaying text.

      If the target image pixel size does not map to the screen pixel size in a clean fraction (1/2, 1/3, 1/4, etc), then some pixels "consume" more of the image than others, making for lumpy-looking text. Averaging could be used, but that would make the edges of the text fuzzier.

      CRT's are still the king of multi-resolutions.

      Using "Large Fonts" settings is probably a better option to try than non-native LCD resolution.

    3. Re:Workaround for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, the submitter was talking about 200 dpi displays. These (as yet largely mythical) displays would be able to scale down nicely. A 3840x2400 display, for example, can scale down to 1920x1200 at 4:1, or 1280x800 at 9:1, or even 960x600 at 16:1.

      A 1280x1024 display, though, can only scale down evenly to 640x512... which isn't especially helpful unless you're legally blind. This fellow isn't.

    4. Re:Workaround for you... by timeOday · · Score: 3, Informative
      No, LCDs do NOT run at anything less than their native resolution. They rely on (usually poor) scaling circuitry, which blurs, antialiases, and generally destroys any picture quality benefit the LCD would have gained you. And it sitll doesn't solve the conundrum of applications where high-resolution imagery is needed with reasonably sized widgets.


      Guess what, you could say exactly the same thing about your beloved CRTs, because they have dot pitch. The only difference has been that traditionally the dot pitch was smaller than the pixels on LCDs. But as your parent mentioned, 200 dpi LCDs will scale well. Those will be ready in plenty of time before CRTs become specialty items.

    5. Re:Workaround for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If you have a really high-res (>150ppi) LCD with a better interpolation algorithm than nearest neighbor, then lower resolutions scale really well. For someone who has reduced eye sight, there will probably no difference between a properly scaled image on a high-res LCD compared to the same resolution on a CRT of the same size.

    6. Re:Workaround for you... by josh+crawley · · Score: 5, Informative

      In Windows, the OS is precisely compliant to what the application developer wanted the program to do. For instance, if I write a web page with an "img src" tag with the height and width set in pixels, then the image will be that size, regardless of the resolution of the monitor. If I set the height and width in a proportional unit like points, or to be a percentage of the window size, then it will scale along with everything else. Programming using Windows Forms works the same way, although I know some of the old widgets refused scaling (I seem to recall some difference in the Picture vs Bitmap control in VB 5 or 6).

      In other words, it's up to the app developer to base their UI on the dynamic System Properties rather than on fixed values. If, for instance, Windows YP was developed to "override" fixed pixel sizes and try to make them proportional, it would probably screw up more than it would fix.

    7. Re:Workaround for you... by Fizzlewhiff · · Score: 2, Informative

      All that said, if you take an LCD designed to display 1024x768 and run it at 800x600 your web page, windows forms, even the text in notepad is going to look like shat. This isn't about scaling and sizing widgets, it is about the capability of the LCD.

      --

      'Same speed C but faster'
    8. Re:Workaround for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      This problem happens because you are using a resolution that is not an even division of pixel counts. For example, if you have a native 1600 x 1200 monitor and run it in 1028 x 768 then you'll have horrid looking jagged edges on everything because it will be interpolating pixels between pixels. Or using 1 1/4 pixel for each pixel or some other fraction which an LCD can't display. But if you run in 800 x 600 it will simply use 4 whole pixels square to represent 1 pixel at the lower resolution. It's all depending on what the native resolution is to what you can adjust the resolution to without artifacts. You may have noticed improvement in this recently simply because LCD monitors are much higher resolution than they used to be, but the same problem still exists.

      My suggestion to this fellow is to simply quarter (half each dimension) his resolution to get the desired "largeness" and keep dividing in half until it's large enough. Crude, but it's a heck of a lot easier than rewriting 10 million lines of display code plus another 10 million lines to port your Windows software to Linux.

    9. Re:Workaround for you... by CAIMLAS · · Score: 2, Informative

      You haven't been using the right LCDs, then. Check out Samsung's line, they all do something akin to "pixel blending" at the lower resolutions. I was quite impressed at the aliasing displayed when I installed win2k on an office system w/ one such new LCD.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    10. Re:Workaround for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      Also, if I do use it for a reason, I don't expect a browser to override it and change my page's display.
      Bzzttt... Wrong. The end user should always have final say over how your page is rendered, you the developer should never ever be able to force anything down the users throat just because you thought you knew better than they did.
  2. Change the font size! by danrees · · Score: 4, Informative

    I might be missing the point completely here, but surely for accessibility purposes (i.e. if you have crap vision), the resolution doesn't matter. All you have to do is change the default font size in your window manager... it's hardly revolutionary :S

    1. Re:Change the font size! by josh+crawley · · Score: 2, Informative

      It does suck that Windows doesn't allow any more fine-grained control than Small, Large or Extra Large fonts. You should just be able to tell it the size of your monitor and have fonts displayed at the *correct* size, dammit.

      Umm, that's exactly what it does. If you have a .inf file for your specific monitor, Windows is aware of the physical size and calculates the DPI accordingly. If you don't have a specific INF or you feel its calculation is wrong, You can go into Display Properties>Settings>Advanced and set the DPI settings to Custom, at which point a ruler is displayed onscreen which you can compare to a physical ruler, and adjust until they're equal. At this point, a 10 pt font is the exact same size on any properly calibrated monitor. The Small Large or Extra Large settings are just shortcuts that bump up the size of all UI widgets to a certain setpoint; you can just as easily get into the advanced Appearance settings and set your Icon Captions to be 72 points, if that's what floats your boat.

      HTH

    2. Re:Change the font size! by josh+crawley · · Score: 2, Informative

      XP is probably the first windows that takes some of what the original poster was bitching about. It lets you scale most things. However I would be willing to bet most third party windows do not take these sorts of things into account.

      Nope, it's been there since Win95. Also, the vast majority of professional apps developed in say the past 8 years, base measurements on the System Properties. You usually see problems with some app developed as "my first VB project" by some guy in Bum-Fucked Eastern Siberia or something.

  3. Buy a magnifier. by janda · · Score: 4, Informative

    They make full-screen monitor magnifiers for people with vision problems. Take a look here for starters.

    --
    Karma: Food Fight (Mostly affected by Date Plate).
  4. What you want is an SVG UI by Bistronaut · · Score: 4, Informative

    ..and people are working on it. Seek KDE and I found this project on Sourceforge. I assume that you already turn on "large fonts" in Windows. Windows can theoretcally support font sizes that are larger, but the problem is that most applications aren't designed with varying font sizes in mind. Some applications already look messed up with the dpi setting that "large fonts" uses. It's a matter of poor UI design. People use fixed-size images in their programs and expect them to line up.

  5. x-ray by Davak · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here at the hospital we use a high-resolution radiograph system. The text IN the system itself is fine; however, the OS text from win2k is extremely small.

    Luckily, all of these systems only have the imaging system and the OS installed... so the only program that ever runs is the radiograph system.

    Isn't this just a setting, however? I figured the admins were just idiots and didn't bump up the text size.

    Davak

  6. Re:Quartz by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2, Informative
    Being based on OpenGL, PDF, and making extensive use of TrueType fonts, I was under the impression that Quartz and MacOS X were aptly suited for this sort of use.

    Every OS makes use of TrueType fonts.

    IIRC, essentially the entire UI is vector graphics (being done by OpenGL and all), so Apple might have this covered.

    You do not recall correctly. The Aqua gui is entirely pixmap based, the widgets aren't even scalable (which has caused the safari team some grief).

  7. Re:Phasing Out? by Phosphor3k · · Score: 3, Informative

    I know local conputer shops that have already phased out CRTs because the shipping is so much cheaper that it balances out. They also save much needed floorspace in their inventories.

  8. windows Accessibility by gbjbaanb · · Score: 4, Informative

    One of the things that ships with Windows is the magnifier accessibility applet - for people with poor vision. it turns the top of the screen into a magnified area of the screen under the mouse, so you can have the screen estate nicely laid out, and be still able to read any part of it you want to. (BTW I'm using XP, but I think its available on the other OS versions)

    You can change its settings, make it follow text editing cursor, and keyboard focus, (its quite cool actually, I may bump my resolution down to 1600x1200 on my 17" monitor and use it :-)

    Not only that, when you first start it up, you get a dialog box offering to take you to see more poor-vision tools on the web.

    10/10 for Microsoft on the accesibility features? na, this is /. after all.

    1. Re:windows Accessibility by ---- · · Score: 2, Informative

      Accessibility Utilities in WinXP can be accessed via the [Win]-U key combination.

      It will open up the Magnifier (what was described),
      and Narrator (voice read-back of active window),
      and On-Screen Keyboard (uh, a clickable kweyboard).

      /* --- */

  9. Mac OS X can zoom in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Once zooming is activated in the universal access control panel of Mac OS X, pressing apple-option-+ zooms in, while preserving clarity.

    Also, the idea of senior citizens who have trouble seeing using linux is extremely laughable. I regularly help such people solve simple problems like ejecting a disk. I seriously doubt most would be able to do anything useful in linux at all.

  10. Windows by sql*kitten · · Score: 4, Informative
    This is a great chance for Linux to get a head start in a certain market: older folks and those who have eye strain problems. Generally speaking, not many people can read Microsoft's widget text on a 150dpi display, which may explain why no one buys them even that they are available. Imagine how frustrating it could be for medical display (x-rays), cad, image editing to have a high resolution realistic image but cannot read the menu and text. If someone can come up with a Window manager to beat MS on 200dpi displays, no doubt this will capture a strong following in image related applications.

    Using XP, but it's almost the same on 2000 and NT:
    1. Right-click on the desktop
    2. Select "Properties" from the menu that will appear
    3. Select the "Appearance" tab from the window that will appear
    4. Select "Large" or "Extra large" from the "Font Size" menu on that pane.
    5. Click "OK"

    And you're done. This functionality has been in Windows for, I don't know, a decade or more. Generally, commercial OSs, whether Windows or Solaris or MacOS, leave free ones standing when it comes to accessibility. The reason is that they want to sell to corporates, and corporates have to comply with legislation like ADA. Free software authors generally don't have that incentive.
    1. Re:Windows by ptr2void · · Score: 3, Informative

      And you're done. This functionality has been in Windows for, I don't know, a decade or more. Generally, commercial OSs, whether Windows or Solaris or MacOS, leave free ones standing when it comes to accessibility. The reason is that they want to sell to corporates, and corporates have to comply with legislation like ADA. Free software authors generally don't have that incentive.

      Yes. The feature has been there for ages. Unused. At least 70% of the Windows desktop software (that I used) ignore it. Either they required manually choosing a different font, or didn't allow changing of font sizes at all. The strange thing is, all GTK+ apps support this fine -- out of the box, because it was designed into the toolkit itself. Windows development software OTOH assumed (does still assume?) that every f**king dialog has to be displayed in MS Sans Serif, 8 pixels. Yeah, commercial software is wonderful, isn't it?

  11. Re:I know how you feel by toddestan · · Score: 4, Informative

    You should check out Opera's browser. It has a magnifying feature that can magnify any webpage from 20% to 1000%. Anytime I can't see what's going on, I just bump it up and I can see again. It works pretty smooth too, on graphics, text, even flash.

  12. Still, they look weird at lower res. by gotr00t · · Score: 2, Informative

    It is true that LCDs actually have a fixed resolution, but you can actually adjust them. When this happens, the monitor makes two or more pixels represent one. However, this is a huge disadvantage, because of the fact that resolutions usually don't divide into each other evenly, there are some regions that are duped, some that are not, making a really wavy image that is readable, but still rather unclear.

  13. Perhaps future KDE versions? by GeekDork · · Score: 2, Informative

    XFree can handle screen DPI so that all other applications can use it productively. That's a pretty good base to build on. And no one yell "X sucks" now. Any framework that provides that measure would be suitable!

    Now that gives you a way to make measurements unrelated to screen resolution. Handling fonts becomes ridiculously easy, and from my experience it's taken into account quite nicely. Just try fiddling with the physical screen measurements in your XF86Config.

    Now, where KDE comes in is the part when we aren't talking about pure text anymore. KDE has at least the ability to handle icons created from SVG source which scale "lossless" and could also be tailored to use the resolution-independent measures.

    --

    Fight hunger. Filet a politician and send him to a 3rd world country of your choice.

  14. Opera has a great zoom feature that might help out by james72 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's a tip : Use Opera for your web browser. Even in Windows, you get beautifully magnified text/graphics when you use the in-built zoom. -James.

  15. Re:I think you are overstating the problem. by ptr2void · · Score: 2, Informative

    Really, this is not a big problem.. I would be surprised if you can't quite easily overcome the problem of your high resolution display. I dare say, easier than you can in linux.

    Yeah, Bill Windows Luser again tries to use his brain. Next time, check the facts...

    XF86 detects display dpi automatically. (Though you can still override the dpi value if something goes wrong...)

    _ALL_ GTK+ apps scale their fonts properly _by default_. This is a major design feature of the GTK+ toolkit. Not like in Windows, where every second app stays at a 8-pixel bitmap font and ignores user preferences happily. I imagine the situation is similar on the Qt side.

  16. "LCDs have fixed resolution:" (semi-)myth. by Slartibartfast · · Score: 5, Informative

    What they have is a fixed number of pixels. The entirely unsatisfactory solution to this dilemma is to merely drive it at an inferior resolution. It'll look like garbage, but it'll be bigger. A much better solution, however, is to drive it at an even divisor of the number of pixels, which will give you clean output. For example, a 1600x1200 LCD could be driven at 800x600; the letters will be nice and crisp, and will be four times larger.

  17. Umm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Increase your window manger's font size, increase the font size of any toolkits. For example, I once made a .gtkrc with HUGE fonts that are readable from a few feet away. (This is because I was displaying things on a television.)

    This is pretty much a no-brainer. You do not need a special window manager, and at any rate, it's the toolkits that handle application widgets, not the WM.

  18. In the Opera browser ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    1.)Hold Ctrl down on the keyboard

    2.)Roll the mouse wheel forward to zoom

    3.)Sit back an read

  19. How to change in Linux by Richard_J_N · · Score: 3, Informative

    I had the same problem - my wonderful Thinkpad A22p has a 1600x1200 LCD at 15" (that's 133 dpi) and the default fonts are almost unreadable. This is what's needed - and it will change fonts globally.

    1)In XF86Config-4, add the DisplaySize option like this:

    Section "Monitor"
    Identifier "Generic|Generic Laptop Display Panel 1600x1200"
    VendorName "Generic"
    ModelName "Unknown"
    #Sort out tiny fonts - these are width, height in mm
    DisplaySize 304 228

    2)Change the line in /etc/X11/Xresources to

    Xft.dpi: 133

    where 133 is the value of xdpyinfo | grep resolution.

    Then, restart X and the xfont server (xfs), and log back into KDE. The fonts should all look better (and larger). Hope that helps.

    Richard

  20. Not mythical, just expensive by sootman · · Score: 2, Informative

    ViewSonic has a 200 DPI 22.2" display, 3840x2400.
    (http://www.viewsonic.com/products/lcd _vp2290b.htm )
    And Dell makes the Inspiron 8500 notebook with a 1920x1200 screen--that's 150 dpi, folks. That's the same number of pixels as the 23" Apple HD Cinema Display. The future is coming and it's going to be high-res flat panels. Might as well start planning now.

    In other news (don't feel like starting a whole other post) LCDs look bad at their non-native resolution, and most divide into non-standard screens: 1280x1024/2 = 640x512--who supports that? Or 1024x768 goes to 512x384--that's the same res as a Mac Classic, not even VGA (640x480). We need to make out software smart enough to work in all these scenarios. I'd love to have one of those ViewSonics (they're $7500, btw) but a 640x480 pic on the Web will be the size of a business card. OTOH, I'd *pay* to spend some time working in Illustrator on one--assuming Adobe could grow the pallets to make them visible.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  21. Window resolution by thromigal · · Score: 2, Informative

    Cliff, If you use Mozilla as your browser (as I do in Red Hat 8.0), you can simply type in Ctrl+ as many times to change the font size on the fly. Or type Ctrl- to reduce the font. I use this all the time and it suits me very well. Therefore, Linux already seems to be ahead of the curve here. Of course, this is not a generic fix, but a browser level fix, but thats where one tends to do most of one's reading (I guess). Hope this helps. cheers

  22. I already do what you want... by steveha · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...and I do it under Linux.

    I have a classic, wonderful monitor: an SGI 1600sw, with 1600x1024 resolution. I only run it in its native resolution. My fonts are large and beautiful.

    0) Use TrueType fonts.

    Make sure your X11 setup is all correct for scaled fonts, especially TrueType fonts, and then get some good ones. Go everywhere and make sure you are using your good TrueType fonts. My GNOME preference fonts are all TrueType, plus my web browsers. The GNOME 2.x dialog for this is Applications / Desktop Preferences / Font. If you have an LCD flat panel display, be sure to check the box that says "Subpixel smoothing (LCDs)". For a CRT monitor, I suggest you check the "Best shapes" box.

    1) Grow your fonts.

    Go into XF86Config (or, in Debian, XF86Config-4 if you are using a recent version of XFree86). Find the part where it describes the monitor. There should be a DisplaySize line describing how big your monitor is, in millimeters. If the line is not there, search the web for specs on your monitor, or just measure it, and add the DisplaySize line. For the 1600sw:

    DisplaySize 369.4 236.4

    Now we want to lie to X11 about the size of our monitor, and say it's smaller than it really is. I want fonts 150% the usual size, so I multiply each number by 100/150 (i.e. 2/3 or 0.66666).

    DisplaySize 246.3 157.6 # lie to get 150% font zoom (165 dpi)

    # DisplaySize 369.4 236.4 # correct: 1600x1024 at 110dpi

    Note that I like to leave comments about what the heck I'm doing here and why.

    Now, X11 thinks my monitor is 165 DPI, instead of the real 110 DPI. When an application asks X11 to display 12 point text, X11 scales the TrueType font accordingly. I get automatic, across-the-board font zoom.

    Peeve: there ought to be an X11 setting for this. You ought to be able to specify a zoom level, say 150%, and have X11 honor it without bastardizing the monitor size. If I can't have a zoom level setting, at least let us specify the DPI as a DPI number, instead of as the number of millimeters our monitors are!

    2) Grow your web fonts too

    Now your other big problem will be web sites that hard-code sizes. Even with 150% zoom, you really don't want 6-point fonts. The "minimum font size" setting in Mozilla hasn't worked well for me when I tried it in the past. You can specify a horrid large font size in the prefs, but then when you print a page, it prints huge too!

    The solution is to use a cascading style sheet (.css) file. Go to your ~/.mozilla/default/<something>/chrome directory, and edit a file called userContent.css. (Be sure to check out the example files that Mozilla leaves there for you, while you are there!)

    Add these lines to userContent.css and save:

    @media screen {
    * {
    font-size: 28px !important;
    line-height: 30px !important;
    }
    }

    These lines mean: only for display on the screen (not while printing!), set the font size to 28 pixels height, and the line height to 30 pixels height. The "!important" part means you insist, even if the web page specifies a smaller size.

    Now revel in the easier-to-read text.

    You still have problems. Web designers who lay out pages with tiny fonts didn't expect their fonts to be forced huge, so the page won't look right; it might look downright ugly. And this fix does nothing to help when the webmaster specified a column width in pixels, so you may find a column that was intended to be over half your screen width is actually only three inches wide! (Thus you have big, easy-to-read text in a skinny very tall column, and you have to scroll the page a lot to read it.)

    You also may find some text-entry forms that are 6 points tall, but the text you are typing into them is still huge, so you can't really read it. I ought to figure out what preference sets minimum text-entry box size.

    Anyone with more useful tips, please share them!

    P.S. Slashdot would not let me include the lines from my config files

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely