Most browsers have a zoom function for small text. One of the things I like about the Pale Moon (a derivative of firefox), & firefox browsers are they're very customizable. I've moved the "+ -" zoom controls to the menu bar at the top of the screen for quick & instant access to zoom controls, or I can reset the zoom to default. It also has the option to zoom "text only" or the whole page.
You can also change the fonts in the browser too. But once again Pale Moon & firefox have the advantage to click to view websites in their default fonts, or click a box too display them in your own font settings... like something a little bolder. You can also customize the font size too. But only change font size a little & don't get carried away or you'll see text overlapping images or buttons you need to click on.
Most of the time I leave my browsers set for, "Arial Rounded MT Bold" fonts for all text to make it easier to read. Most of Betty's uses that same font, so by using that setting, it still looks the same, but text at other sites look a bit bolder & easier to read. I rarely check the box to have font's display the site's own font settings.
Why would you strip the sound off a video when there's a mute button & volume control?
I don't know what kind of clock gadget you're using, but every app I've used designed for Windows 98, 98SE, 2000, XP, Vista, W7, & W8 runs fine on Windows 7 at any resolution down to 640x480. I never seen any clock app for windows that wasn't chock full of bugs or malware though. I'd consider giving up any clock in favor of windows default clock if it's gonna compromise or rule my resolution, functionality, or capabilities. I even have a clock on the wall, but I'd get rid of it if it started screwing with my OS or denied my screen settings.
Most modern sites are designed for 768pixel high displays because that's the most common resolution. By keeping your display set for 700-768P makes most sites look like they were intended to. Of course, just because someone can make a site, doesn't mean they actually know what they're doing... even big shopping sites. Some design them to look & run good on their particular computers & browser settings without realizing most of their users are using something else with different settings. There's the older standard of designing sites to look best at 600x900. Many still use the old standard. But on a 700-768p display text & other stuff may look too small, or the page doesn't fill the screen, so have big empty space on the sides. Then there's those who designed their sites for their 1080p display. On a normal display it looks too big, or the text & images run off the side of the screen.
But if you're mostly a web junkie & surfer, 700-768p is the industry standard for most normal places.
Yeah, I can't understand why my 4" phone screen has 1000x600 pixels. Even with strong reading glasses one can't see all those individual pixels on the small screen. It uses a lot of processing power & resources to run all those pixels, which also drives down battery life.
I see people having HD video stutter, video freezes, or lock ups on portable units, small or underpowered units, or older ones. It just doesn't have the resources to process HD video at full resolution. Just set it to a lower resolution, & it will be fine. On seriously underpowered or old devices, set the display to 16 bit instead of 32 bit to free up more resources. Most video don't look too bad at 16 bit, & it looks a lot better than jittery, skipping, or freezing frames, or the player locking up & stuttering.
I think they just like to push devices with big numbers as a selling point to those who don't fully understand them. Most people know more resolution is great when comparing VHS tape to DVD, & DVD to HDTV. But a DVD quality video will look just as good as HDTV on a small screen tablet or phone. But seriously, if you're sitting 10 feet or more from your 48" TV, you won't notice the difference between 720p & 1080p/i because the screen looks smaller at that distance.
Now the new tech BS is 120-240 frame rates or refresh rates. All movies & videos only made at 24-30 frames per second. So any more is pointless, but the numbers look good as a sales pitch. The human eye cannot detect motion faster than 24 frames per second. Your cat or an owl might, but they don't watch much TV. The quality of the motion on a display will be more dependent on how good the display's processor is, video cards, & device playing the video than it's refresh rate. Refresh rates are usually measured in how fast it can turn every pixel just on & off at the same time. Full motion HD video is much more complex that that, so refresh rates are almost meaningless. A good processor & design will give good performance regardless of the refresh rate... as long as it's at least 30 per second.
Then there's 4K ultra HDTV TVs & displays coming out more now. But unless you'll be sitting within a couple feet of a 32"-48" display, or have a wall sized, theater sized display you won't notice a difference.
Topic: Tempura Kidz (Read 17164 times)
