Originally Posted by KCK
Therefore, what you see on the 12.1" XGA screen will be reduced by 106/147 = 72.1% on the 15.4" WUXGA screen. In words, everything will look three quarters smaller. Most people would deem it "much smaller".
I think what KCK is trying to say is that everything on the UXGA will only be three quarters the size of what it is on a 12.1" XGA. I believe his method of calculating "percent reduction" is an error. It instead nearly represents the relative size of objects on the UXGA as compared to the XGA. To calculate percent reduction(difference) I would use: ((|value1 - value2|)/((value1 + value2) * .5))) * 100%.
So the percent difference(reduction) would = ((|147-106|)/((147 + 106) * .5))) * 100% = (41/126.5) * 100% = 32.4%.
Therefore based on those PPI values objects on the UXGA will be about 32% smaller than on the XGA. This is similar to saying that the objects are reduced by a third, or that they will be displayed at two-thirds the size. Hope that impoved your understanding of the matter dynamic, instead of clouding it further.
Originally Posted by kdynamic
Hmm, so what's the deal with having a WUXGA for when you need it, but using a lower-than-native resolution when you want things to be bigger (like if you're reading)? Is there some reason this is not a good scheme?
The "deal" is that with LCD technology displays look best at their native resolutions. In order to scale the display, which is what is required when changing resolutions, the new display has to interpolate the new image sizes for every pixel. This limitation is due to the fact that each pixel is actually a small transistor, as opposed to CRT's where electrons illuminate a phosphorous coated surface.
In short going from a native resolution to a non-native resolution can cause the display to lose image quality and even appear "fuzzy". This effect is minimized, however, on UGXA screens due to smaller pixel pitches(distance between pixels).