Recommended Posts

DPI Settings are completely fixed in Windows 7. They demonstrated it at PDC, and it all looks great.

Screenies:

http://www.istartedsomething.com/20081029/...er-than-your-7/

Dammit, that's not fixed at all... 120DPI still stretches 16x16 icons, and it looks like ass. :crazy:

Er, so crappy res icons look crappy when stretched? Why does this not surprise me?

What are you expecting to happen?

I don't know, maybe not stretching them? There is no reason why they couldn't stay at 16x16 with only the clickable area around them being increased. Or how about downscaling 32 pixel versions instead?

Yea, clearly there is nothing that could be done...

I don't know, maybe not stretching them? There is no reason why they couldn't stay at 16x16 with only the clickable area around them being increased. Or how about downscaling 32 pixel versions instead?

Yea, clearly there is nothing that could be done...

Not stretching them is just ridiculous. The whole point of increasing the DPI is for people who cannot see the interface clearly at the smaller DPI settings, so keeping an icon at its original size while increasing the size of everything else will leave that icon just as hard to see as it was before. And as far as using a larger-sized icon and downscaling it, that would require that developers include a larger-sized icon for the system tray icon, which probably won't happen often, if at all.

Not stretching them is just ridiculous. The whole point of increasing the DPI is for people who cannot see the interface clearly at the smaller DPI settings, so keeping an icon at its original size while increasing the size of everything else will leave that icon just as hard to see as it was before. And as far as using a larger-sized icon and downscaling it, that would require that developers include a larger-sized icon for the system tray icon, which probably won't happen often, if at all.

How does stretching an icon by 2 frickin' pixels make anything more visible? It only makes icons blurry and harder to read. Look at the screenshot.

http://www.istartedsomething.com/wp-conten...2008/10/120.png

I don't know, maybe not stretching them? There is no reason why they couldn't stay at 16x16 with only the clickable area around them being increased. Or how about downscaling 32 pixel versions instead?

Yea, clearly there is nothing that could be done...

Microsoft can't just magically whip up 32x32 tray icons for those apps who only designate 16x16 icons for the tray, especially animating/changing icons. In any case, for apps such as Windows Live Messenger, they won't use the tray anymore, instead opting for the taskbar button instead.

They have done their own part to properly scale up their own main three tray icons: Volume, Power, and Network look pixel sharp at 120 DPI. Action Center's icon in 6801 is gone from the later builds.

post-99705-1227389687.png

Also I noticed Windows 7 uses XP-style DPI scaling by default... any reason?

How does stretching an icon by 2 frickin' pixels make anything more visible? It only makes icons blurry and harder to read. Look at the screenshot.

http://www.istartedsomething.com/wp-conten...2008/10/120.png

I already looked at the screenshot. I'd say that's far better than leaving it the same size as before.

How does stretching an icon by 2 frickin' pixels make anything more visible?

We are talking about increasing the size of stuff on the screen ... so yes, it will be increased in size, as that is the point.

If the icons weren't scaled up, it wouldn't be doing the job its supposed to be doing. Yes, this is bad for old icons at crap resolutions. No, there isn't some magical solution.

The "magical solution" everyone is looking for lies in vectorized graphics, rather than rasterized ones. Microsoft should be supporting them, but as far as I know they do not. SVG rendering is something that should, without a doubt, be built into Windows 7 for icons, as an *option* for developers. You'll still get the ones who like the PNG's, but with a little extra effort, those who make the icons can have one that scales infinitely.

But as for the blurry icons, if 2 pixels doesn't make a difference for being able to see them, then a) you probably don't need to change your DPI anyway, and b) it shouldn't blur them to the point of distracting you. DPI scaling compensates for smaller items on a screen, and a 16x16 icon is definitely one of them.

The "magical solution" everyone is looking for lies in vectorized graphics, rather than rasterized ones. Microsoft should be supporting them, but as far as I know they do not. SVG rendering is something that should, without a doubt, be built into Windows 7 for icons, as an *option* for developers. You'll still get the ones who like the PNG's, but with a little extra effort, those who make the icons can have one that scales infinitely.

But as for the blurry icons, if 2 pixels doesn't make a difference for being able to see them, then a) you probably don't need to change your DPI anyway, and b) it shouldn't blur them to the point of distracting you. DPI scaling compensates for smaller items on a screen, and a 16x16 icon is definitely one of them.

But it does make a difference, it makes them less readable than just keeping them at 16 pixels. Here is a random screenshot of someone's notification area at 120DPI. Would you call this "more visible"?

vista_dpi_scaling_problem_programs.png

And yes I do actually need the 120DPI setting, for the fonts, which is what the option boasts to increase in the first place. A 15.4" WUXGA screen isn't very readable at 96DPI.

They could try coding in a bilinear filter to upscale the icons, much like how Vista stretches non-DPI aware windows by default. Would that work?

I stand by my first suggestion of just keeping the icons at 16 pixels. If you need bigger icons, cursors or window handles, separate options exist for that. The font DPI option has no reason to enlarge things other than fonts, especially when it actually makes those other things less readable than they were before. In the end, this option is purely about readability. And clearly, what it does to icons does not help in that department.

Where is this referred to as "font" DPI (in Windows 7), and how are you making the distinction for "readability"? How does readability solely mean bigger fonts, when a lot of programs and functions are icon based, especially for the less literate, or hard of sight?

In addition, you realise huge fonts and small everything else would look far far more ridiculous, with fonts going outside their bounds, icons being in the wrong places, etc, etc...

Yes, those icons look bad - few will dispute that - but I don't think that is entirely the fault of Windows - developers should be creating higher resolution icons. SVG would fix it, but only for future icons. It does appear that the filter for old icon could be improved, but there's only so much you can do for pixel artwork.

The "magical solution" everyone is looking for lies in vectorized graphics, rather than rasterized ones. Microsoft should be supporting them, but as far as I know they do not. SVG rendering is something that should, without a doubt, be built into Windows 7 for icons, as an *option* for developers. You'll still get the ones who like the PNG's, but with a little extra effort, those who make the icons can have one that scales infinitely.

But as for the blurry icons, if 2 pixels doesn't make a difference for being able to see them, then a) you probably don't need to change your DPI anyway, and b) it shouldn't blur them to the point of distracting you. DPI scaling compensates for smaller items on a screen, and a 16x16 icon is definitely one of them.

From memory Microsoft have stated that they don't intend to use SVG for icons because large icons with lots of detail become meaningless at 16x16. Microsoft's position on icons is that 16x16 icons should display a slightly different image to 32x32 and above to make the meaning of the icon clear and recognisable with the smaller pixel count.

There's a blog post on the E7 blog about vectorized icons. It isn't the fix-all "magic" solution that some people here make it out to be. That's why nobody implements them.

Notification icons other than the system ones are hidden by default now, so they'll be less of an eyesore. You can't selectively scale things that may or may not look bad... Windows tries to determine if apps are high DPI aware and do special scaling on the app window if it does not, but this is a compatibility measure not a real solution.

The right solution is for apps to do a better job supporting high DPI. We can help by giving developers tools to make this easier, and by building some high DPI awareness into standard components that developers use, but in the end it's up to them to provide the appropriate icons and to test their layout logic at higher DPI settings.

DPI is not font size. If you want to change just the font size, there is an option for that and it will have no impact on your icons.

I run Win7 at the 150% DPI setting at home on my 1080p media center, and it works great.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
    • Cjam 2.5.0.0 by Razvan Serea Cjam is a lightweight and fast MP3 editor for Windows that lets you cut, join, and edit MP3 files without re-encoding. This means your audio quality remains untouched, and edits happen instantly. Cjam is ideal for quick, lossless edits—whether you're trimming music, combining tracks, or preparing audio for learning tools or podcasts. It features batch processing, scripting support, cue and playlist file handling, and a simple interface. Cjam is perfect for anyone who needs efficient MP3 editing without the complexity of full audio suites. Cjam requires a PC running Windows 10 or later and Microsoft .NET 6.0 or later. Key features for Cjam: No Re-encoding: Edit MP3 files without losing quality. Cut and Join MP3: Easily cut, trim, and combine MP3 tracks. Batch Processing: Edit multiple files at once for faster workflows. Scriptable Interface: Automate tasks with a custom command language. Cue and Playlist Support: Handle CUE and playlist files for seamless audio management. Fast and Lightweight: Quick processing with minimal system resources. Lossless Audio Editing: Ensure your edits don't affect audio quality. Simple User Interface: Clean, intuitive design for easy navigation. File Format Support: Works with MP3, Cjam-specific file formats (CJAMC, CJAMJ, CJAM). Cjam 2.5.0.0 changelog: Added clipboard-based import/export support for mp3DirectCut Added clipboard-based export support for REAPER Added support for naming IMP3 elements Changed the Reset behavior to preserve Undo/Redo history; use Shift key + Reset button to clear it Added a new command parameter (qcp) Added 8 new entries to lang.txt (main_c124-126, main_d150-151, main_m082, vme_c014, vme_d005) Fixed a bug where the il parameter was incorrectly applied when pasting VMP3s into the main list Fixed several other minor bugs Download: Cjam 2.5.0.0 | 1.4 MB (Freeware) Links: Cjam Home Page | Cjam Manual | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!