BA
I'm sorry, but virtually everything scales anyway. You can't possibly be missing the definition of the logo and the ribbons so much that you've decided to throw your Apple product out of the window.
Please make Neon optimised for retina.
I'm sorry, but virtually everything scales anyway. You can't possibly be missing the definition of the logo and the ribbons so much that you've decided to throw your Apple product out of the window.
AN
What exactly does "optimised for retina" even mean?! The images display exactly as they do in an internet browser.
BA
Basically, the images should support the higher dpi of Retina by being higher resolution but properly scaled.
What exactly does "optimised for retina" even mean?! The images display exactly as they do in an internet browser.
Basically, the images should support the higher dpi of Retina by being higher resolution but properly scaled.
WP
That's exactly how I see it, also.
aka look crap in the majority of browsers, but help people with iGadgets to justify the expense by looking a little better.
That's exactly how I see it, also.
RO
Erm, what difference would it make to the 'majority of browsers'?
aka look crap in the majority of browsers, but help people with iGadgets to justify the expense by looking a little better.
Erm, what difference would it make to the 'majority of browsers'?
DO
Erm, what difference would it make to the 'majority of browsers'?
A good proportion of desktop web browsers have pretty poor image quality when scaling down images.
Then there's the load times and bandwidth requirements.
aka look crap in the majority of browsers, but help people with iGadgets to justify the expense by looking a little better.
Erm, what difference would it make to the 'majority of browsers'?
A good proportion of desktop web browsers have pretty poor image quality when scaling down images.
Then there's the load times and bandwidth requirements.
WP
When I worked with a number of dodgy "bespoke" CMS' (developed by my predecessors) in one of my previous jobs it was a huge bug-bear of mine that they'd all been developed so the uploaded image was presented 'as is'. On a page with multiple pictures, the results were as dosxuk described - slow to download (unless you had Opera Turbo or similar enabled) and looked crap in IE and other older browsers; nasty jagged look.
"Optimising" graphic imagery within headers etc. for retina is sheer folly.
"Optimising" graphic imagery within headers etc. for retina is sheer folly.
RO
Erm, what difference would it make to the 'majority of browsers'?
A good proportion of desktop web browsers have pretty poor image quality when scaling down images.
Then there's the load times and bandwidth requirements.
The idea is generally to have a bit of JS which detects a high-DPI display, and injects higher resolution images, so as to have no effect on anyone else.
aka look crap in the majority of browsers, but help people with iGadgets to justify the expense by looking a little better.
Erm, what difference would it make to the 'majority of browsers'?
A good proportion of desktop web browsers have pretty poor image quality when scaling down images.
Then there's the load times and bandwidth requirements.
The idea is generally to have a bit of JS which detects a high-DPI display, and injects higher resolution images, so as to have no effect on anyone else.
BA
Erm, what difference would it make to the 'majority of browsers'?
A good proportion of desktop web browsers have pretty poor image quality when scaling down images.
Then there's the load times and bandwidth requirements.
The idea is generally to have a bit of JS which detects a high-DPI display, and injects higher resolution images, so as to have no effect on anyone else.
Yes - I thought that was the idea (though I didn't say anything lest I was wrong around a certain web designer) - you can try it yourself on Facebook and Apple's website - as they both have some or total high-DPI support.
However, for this forum, the work required doesn't really produce any benefit to the vast majority of users who don't use Apple devices for accessing the site.
aka look crap in the majority of browsers, but help people with iGadgets to justify the expense by looking a little better.
Erm, what difference would it make to the 'majority of browsers'?
A good proportion of desktop web browsers have pretty poor image quality when scaling down images.
Then there's the load times and bandwidth requirements.
The idea is generally to have a bit of JS which detects a high-DPI display, and injects higher resolution images, so as to have no effect on anyone else.
Yes - I thought that was the idea (though I didn't say anything lest I was wrong around a certain web designer) - you can try it yourself on Facebook and Apple's website - as they both have some or total high-DPI support.
However, for this forum, the work required doesn't really produce any benefit to the vast majority of users who don't use Apple devices for accessing the site.