On Sunday 03 Jan 2016 11:44:37 Peter Humphrey wrote: > On Sunday 03 January 2016 11:08:32 I wrote: > > On Saturday 02 January 2016 12:45:09 Frank Steinmetzger wrote: > > > On Thu, Dec 31, 2015 at 01:23:28PM +0000, Peter Humphrey wrote: > > > > > > you see here. And the qt5 screen shot is half as big again as the > > > > > > qt4. > > > > > > > > > > I don't quite get that. > > > > > > > > ?? > > > > > > Both images are the same size. The usable content area in the qt5 > > > screenshot is far from just half. Maybe the word “again” tips me off b/c > > > I try to interpret a meaning into every word, being a pedantic > > > non-native. ;-) > > > > I meant the size of the file. > > And now I want to add that using 1.5 x the space to represent far less > information is a clear indicator of inefficiency.
Well, ... it depends on your measure of inefficiency. Your statement stands good in terms of pixel density on a page, but perhaps less so in terms of user time taken to process the information on different platforms and display resolutions. In web design at least, the centre of gravity has been shifting towards mobile platforms for a long time now. -- Regards, Mick
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
