GamesCom Video and Remaining Tasks

[PowerGod]

I can't imagine what he was telling that made you use the Pandora as a weapon O_O

 

[rygD]

Nevermind.

 

[matzesu]

Interesting, but sadly only for germanspeacers..
I can remember to dit watch the Interview he reffered to..


Gesendet von meinem Klugschnurlosfehrnsprecher mit Plauderbrettweichware

 

[oskda]

There were more reasons why 1080p display was not chosen.
I wouldn't want more stress on the hardware (and less battery life) just to get more pixels I can't see on such a tiny device anyway.
Imho 1080p on a screen below 7'' doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

Did I get it right, that the HDMI-output allows 1080p?

I suppose you never tested real resolution in 5 inches 720p display.

I owned a phone with a 5 inches LCD IPS 1280x720 pixls display (same as Pyra) and I did the test.

I have attached the picture so you can do the test for yourself. It is a 1280x720 pixel resoluction image with lines at 1 pixel width (file weights only 9,5KB).

Please download this image in a phone with a 5 inches 720p display (watch in landscape so you get 1 pixel piture for 1 pixel image) and you will see pixels and full of sawtooths in all image. So, YES, you can see a better resolution would have been better. Even for emultaing scanlines, if you have more resolution, it is good.

[doublepost=1473599406,1473598458][/doublepost]

I don't really need 1080p on a device that I intend to use primarily emulating 480i displays. 720p should be more than enough, even with fancy effects (I like to emulate CRT curvature and scanlines as well).

It would just reduce the frames per second without much visible improvement.

Obviously if you only want to use Pyra to emulate 480p, you can have enough with a 720p display, but others want to use Pyra for much more than 80p emulation. For example I will use for emus but also as a general purpose pocket computer.

Even I don't know if you can get perfect scanline emulation of 480 lines machines: 480x2=960 lines, plus bordes if you want them, so you may be short in 720 lines display.

1080p would have been much better, and it was in initial specs, and cost was like the same. The problem come when they tough rotator chip was needed: the only one available only can handle 720p, so Pyra team decided to change display to 720p in that moment. After that of course you can say "It is better 720 because you can see bigger icons", etc, etc.

In any case we have a 720p Pyra so we must live with it, (now it isn't possible to change that) but don't say it is better or we don't need more, because720p is not a big resoluction for a 5 inches display we use near our eyes like in a smartphone.

You can do the test for yourself. I have just upload a 720p image with 1 pixel width lines in previous message, and if you use that imane at native image (in landscape orientation) on a 720p 5 inches smartphone you will see pixels and specially sawtooths totally clear.

 

[EvilDragon]

We chose to use 720p before we switched to the rotator chip.
We've shown a desktop with a few pictures to various persons and no one really saw a difference between both.

Besides, 1080p on 5 Inch causes a lot of trouble with Linux.
Yes, you can change the DPI settings, but there are MANY common programs that ignore these settings and need some hacking around.

For example, GIMP: It ignores the DPI settings and shows tiny, unusable buttons as tools. Even switching to the biggest icon size within GIMP didn't help - they still were too small.
So I had to manually edit files just to have GIMP usable because of that resolution.

Same thing was with FireFox: Ignoring the DPI settings, it had tiny unreadable fonts which you need to manually increase in size. Yes, in FireFox it's easily possible from the preferences, but it would mean everyone had to do this when installing FireFox from the normal Debian repo.

I remember that 6 or 7 out of 10 tried programs had issues, ignored the DPI or needed to be manually changed either within the config or using a text editor...

That's not a very good out-of-the-box experience.

With 720p, everything worked out of the box and the system feels a lot faster and snappier.

 

[mecksg1]

We chose to use 720p before we switched to the rotator chip.
We've shown a desktop with a few pictures to various persons and no one really saw a difference between both.

Besides, 1080p on 5 Inch causes a lot of trouble with Linux.
Yes, you can change the DPI settings, but there are MANY common programs that ignore these settings and need some hacking around.

For example, GIMP: It ignores the DPI settings and shows tiny, unusable buttons as tools. Even switching to the biggest icon size within GIMP didn't help - they still were too small.
So I had to manually edit files just to have GIMP usable because of that resolution.

Same thing was with FireFox: Ignoring the DPI settings, it had tiny unreadable fonts which you need to manually increase in size. Yes, in FireFox it's easily possible from the preferences, but it would mean everyone had to do this when installing FireFox from the normal Debian repo.

I remember that 6 or 7 out of 10 tried programs had issues, ignored the DPI or needed to be manually changed either within the config or using a text editor...

That's not a very good out-of-the-box experience.

With 720p, everything worked out of the box and the system feels a lot faster and snappier.

thakns for the info ed. i pm'd you about a question i had

 

[canseco]

What desktop enviroment is that, MATE?

Those programs doesn't ignore DPI font settings on Plasma 5.
120 is enough for my 32 inch monitor at 1080p.

 

[TrashyMG]

What desktop enviroment is that, MATE?

Mate is the current default in aTc's rootfs image.

 

[Linux-SWAT]

MATE is a GNOME2 fork.
Overkill for the Pyra, we should stick to Xfce.

 

[TrashyMG]

MATE is a GNOME2 fork.
Overkill for the Pyra, we should stick to Xfce.

Honestly don't notice any performance difference, anyone is free to switch to the desktop of their choosing.

 

[canseco]

MATE is a GNOME2 fork.

They did port to GTK3 recently, but i don't think Debian stable has the more recent version, maybe testing or unstable.

Maybe that's why GTK3 programs ignore DPI settings.

 

[Linux-SWAT]

Honestly don't notice any performance difference, anyone is free to switch to the desktop of their choosing.

RAM usage should be far worse. File manager is overkill too, and last time I tried it device management was awful.
GNOME always have been very intrusive and too much tied to the OS.
No surprise it was kicked out of Slackware years ago.

 

[Silent-Hunter]

I would prefer XFCE but with MATE's document and image viewers.

 

[EvilDragon]

What desktop enviroment is that, MATE?

Those programs doesn't ignore DPI font settings on Plasma 5.
120 is enough for my 32 inch monitor at 1080p.

FireFox probably has been fixed overtime, but I doubt GIMP (a GTK program) cares about KDE dpi settings more than it does for XFCE4 dpi settings.

 

[Linux-SWAT]

Xfce is GTK.
Dpi can also be fixed through Xorg.

 

[ible]

it is super easy to switch DE/WM in debian... why even waste breath about a decent default which should be perfect for most beginners? as for me, i'll probably try out i3 . i use it on my laptop workstation here...

 

[Linux-SWAT]

Because it's better to ship the device with optimal settings.

 

[canseco]

FireFox probably has been fixed overtime, but I doubt GIMP (a GTK program) cares about KDE dpi settings more than it does for XFCE4 dpi settings.

And this is how Firefox, Gimp or any other GTK follow DPI settings, theme, etc.

It was more easy to "fix" Plasma 5 in the end,

 

[ible]

@Linux-SWAT which benchmarks are you using to show that XFCE is less resource hungry than Mate? they can't be that different (compared to each other, not compared to some of the other heavy weights)...

 

[Linux-SWAT]

Why can't they ? Mate isn't considered a lightweight desktop.