On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 13:52:55 -0500, Rich Pieri wrote: > On 1/6/2016 1:24 PM, Robert Krawitz wrote: >> I use a 6x10 (pixel) font in emacs and xterm. Using a 9x15 font at >> twice the linear resolution would let me get quite a lot more on the >> screen. > > 50% more. Which is more but the other 50% is wasted by the upscaling. > You would need a physically larger display to offset that waste.
Yes, but 50% linear increase is not negligible. >> I'm currently using a 10 point font for general purpose on my laptop; >> I set my display to lie and claim 72 dpi. 8 (in particular) and 9 >> point fonts are harder to read not so much because they're smaller as >> because the screen doesn't have enough pixels to render them as >> cleanly as the 10 point font. > > I suggest that this has more to do with your choice of fonts. The X > bitmap fonts in particular are absolutely horrible. Try Cousine, > currently my preferred monospaced font. I was actually referring to my generic KDE fonts (Noto). I tried Cousine with emacs; it's both bigger (or at least more leading) and harder (for me) to read than the 6x10 bitmap font. -- Robert Krawitz <[email protected]> *** MIT Engineers A Proud Tradition http://mitathletics.com *** Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- http://ProgFree.org Project lead for Gutenprint -- http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net "Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works." --Eric Crampton _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
