Problems in resolution of Windows 7

[Lalana]

I am new to this forum, so please ignore my mistakes. Also I am new user to the Windows 7. Before I have used Windows XP which I liked the most because of its user friendly behavior. Now I am finding Windows 7 little bit tough. The main thing is that I am not able to understand the resolution provided by it. I do not have good resolution in the list. I'd like to know if anyone can help me or if someone has the same problem!! Also I am expecting some details about the DPI, resolution and character that are used in Windows 7. Please provide me proper information.

[Swetlano]

As after any installation of operating system, install the drivers for devices. This is the basic thing you should aware about. A little explanation is needed. An LCD has a native resolution (typically 1680 x 1 050 for a 22-inch, for example). Use a separate resolution, the lower will force the screen to calculate the intermediate pixels and produce a blur effect. However, many people decline this resolution: the characters are often too small. The problem is the management of OS: The characters have a fixed point size and font size (and the interface in general) is decreasing according to the resolution.

[GANGSTA]

Definition is typically measured in DPI screen between 100 and 110 dpi is perfect, the characters below are often too large (a 15-inch 1024 x 768 at 85 dpi) above characters are sometimes regarded as too small (a 17-inch 1920 x 1200 and 133 dpi). I think that you might have got an idea about the resolution that gets displayed on the monitor.

[napoleon]

Windows 7 will offer a default option for resolution independence. Already available for testing on Mac OS X (with some bugs), this option is essentially to change the font size in the OS. Specifically, the size of characters remains the same on a 17-inch 1280 x 1024 or a 17-inch 1920 x 1200. Even if the option existed under the old systems (like Windows XP), the foundations of the OS graphics do not enlarge without loss of sharpness (especially images and interface elements) which limited interest.

[Justvicks]

Specifically, the size of characters remains the same on a 17-inch 1280 x 1024 or a 17-inch 1920 x 1200. Even if the option existed under the old systems (like Windows XP), the foundations of the OS graphics do not enlarge without loss of sharpness (especially images and interface elements) which limited interest.

With interfaces fully scalable OSes recent expansion of elements is done without loss of quality. Microsoft also states that tests show that 91% of applications work seamlessly with HighDPI (and only 9% of programs work well).

[shivendra]

In practice, interest is clear on one point: keep a screen with a fineness of correct image (for videos, games , etc..) while offering an interface usable even for those with sight problems. Note that many users do not seem moved by this problem and work on a 19-inch LCD (5 / 4, 1280 x 1024 native) 800 x 600 (4 / 3) does not bother them. I may be poorly expressed. I mean it's not the images / graphics elements that pose the most problems when a resolution is too large / views down. And Linux, the independence of font sizes (only) has existed for at least 2 years in GTK and Qt, and quite adequate at 130 dpi. There is a Windows mechanism certainly rough, but this for a very long time (at least since Windows 95, it seems in any case, there existed on Win98 and NT4) for text fonts larger or smaller, which is in "Display Properties" -> "Settings" -> "Advanced" -> "General" tab -> under "View" / DPI setting.

[Acalapati]

Obviously it's not always what you (originally reserved only for texts), especially when Windows is to apply to icons (for example, the taskbar, I speak for XP), the fault of non-use of Vector Icons (for Vista, I do not know). Moreover, it is not always compatible with all apps, or it overflows outright windows if the application is not really expected (in fact, the text is "cutting" the borders of its area, for example, modules attributes Adobe XMP). It also seems that all the fonts are not compatible. But even if he had not been developed far more than that (on Windows), this setting had the merit to exist.

[henrykipson]

thanks for sharing this useful information with us.

[Gefry]

Especially as Microsoft is left is passed in recent years while the company has long been an example in terms of communication and marketing, but the resurgence of Apple, is a fine example, very few share global market and little gain overall market share albeit says, but the marketing is so aggressive and developed Apple succeeded in appropriating with the public, while a set of technologies that are But not from them at the base, and a place challenger, likely to file for bankruptcy to Microsoft .

[Gill_christ]

It's not a question of monopoly or not (because, well, Microsoft does not of course speak of Apple) is a matter of satisfying the public. It is a function that will become necessary, monopoly or not, because the resolution increases more and more. A 15 inches a few years ago was 1024 x 768 1400 x 1050 in some high-end. Now it is 1280 x 800 1440 x 900 view of 1920 x 1200 and based in upscale ... (Yes, I know there have been 15 in 2048 x 1536 but is super rare).