On Jul 8, 2006, at 2:05 AM, Kenneth Wimer wrote:
We make a pic which is 640x400 but will be shown most often at
640x480. Yes, we could get into discussions about how it works on
everyones' systems, but let's avoid that. There is a good reason
that things are done this way, and if you want a spanking, we can
get a developer to scream it at us :-)
I only have Macs at home, some boot funky scaled, some boot in a
small portion of the screen, so I understand the problems but,
generally speaking, this method is correct for *most* computers. I
have a *bit* of experience with splash's during boot (I co-authored
the first linux bootsplash) and I have to say that I agree with
this decision from a development side, given the situation and
decisions made. It works on all platforms and run in user space,
"out of the box" and without any problems, except the restrictions
for the artwork and interface :-)
It will definitely require updating in the future, though. I'm
certain that, in the long run, computers with 16:10-sized monitors
will become more ubiquitous than the usual 4:3 monitors. Laptop sales
are booming, and a lot of laptops have a 16:10 screen, widescreen
LCDs are becoming more popular, and one could think that the whole
widescreen TV hype might get something to do with it, too. I agree
that most computers as of now still have 4:3, but I wouldn't discount
the possibility of it being different in the future.
Michiel Sikma
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
ubuntu-art mailing list
ubuntu-art@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-art
