Finally, a Linux laptop with a brilliant display and performance that rivals my MacBook
https://www.zdnet.com/article/finally-a-linux-laptop-with-a-brilliant-display-and-performance-that-rivals-my-macbook/Open linkView original on lemmy.worldSyndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on lemmy.worldhttps://www.zdnet.com/article/finally-a-linux-laptop-with-a-brilliant-display-and-performance-that-rivals-my-macbook/Open linkView original on lemmy.world
20 replies
Just from this snippet it's quite clear the reviewer has no clue.
(Scaling)
Bad eyesight is an indication of "not having a clue"?
Anti Commercial-AI license
Why lowering the resolution when you can use the scaling settings on the very same page?
Based on the headline, they've probably maladapted to Mac OS, which doesn't actually have a scaling setting.
(This is somewhat baffling to me, since Apple clearly cares a lot about their display hardware and about having good screen resolution.)
I have scaling on my mac under displays. They don’t label it scaling anymore but it is.
If you mean the box at the top, with "Larger Text", "Default", and "More Space", mouse-over shows a resolution spec. Is it actually just scaling "as if" the screen had the given resolution?
Even so, I can understand how a Mac user would be confused by this and expect the equivalent feature in a different OS to be called "resolution".
So because they achieved the same result going a different path, it's wrong?
Anti Commercial-AI license
Its not the same result lol its the incorrect thing to do. Lowering the resolution fucks the image. You need to scale instead to maintain resolution and image quality
The perceived result is the same. There's a limit to visual acuity and if the reviewer's limit is lower than yours, it in no way invalidates the approach.
Also, lowering the resolution doesn't fuck the image, unless the image has greater resolution than the screen's resolution. You're not going to invent quality of nothing. It's not how things work. This thought process of "bigger number means better quality" is just straight up false. It's why cameras with 100 megapixels can easily take pictures with worse quality than cameras with lower megapixels and optical zoom.
Anti Commercial-AI license
You really can't see the irony of an article praising the "brilliant display" of the unit while simultaneously erasing what makes the display good in the first place? How is that a valid review?
Is resolution the only attribute to judge a display by? Is it really that one-dimensional? "Hammer good if make bong louder"?
Anti Commercial-AI license
Im not sure where you get your info from but its wrong. If you set your resolution to something lower and you’re displaying on a higher resolution screen the image quality is going to suffer. Dont do things the wrong way, doing things the wrong way isint “unique” or “just the way I like doing things” its wrong and if its not immediately causing problems itll cause problems down the road.
i think what they meant is that you end up with 1080p output this way, whereas scaling would give you "real" 4k
It's a review of the Tuxedo Computers Infinity Book Pro 14 (Gen 9), for those who didn't want to click the link to find out.
https://www.tuxedocomputers.com/en/TUXEDO-InfinityBook-Pro-14-Gen9-Infinitely-portable-and-still-lightning-fast.tuxedo
Tuxedo Computers have been selling good laptops for a while. It's nice that the reviewer is discovering this too.
Anti Commercial-AI license