Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!world!decwrl!shelby!agate!darkstar!ucscb.UCSC.EDU!unknown
From: unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (The Unknown User)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: Pixel squareness (was:Re: Duet card reservations (was:Re: GS/MAC card))
Message-ID: <7659@darkstar.ucsc.edu>
Date: 9 Oct 90 17:38:14 GMT
References: <9010081947.AA13443@cwns11.INS.CWRU.Edu> <14065@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Sender: usenet@darkstar.ucsc.edu
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz; Open Access Computing
Lines: 21


In article <14065@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>Actually, "squareness" (1:1 aspect ratio) is not particularly important
>for most purposes, the main exception being displaying a raster image
>made for that resolution on some other system.

	Well I think that pixel squareness was a great advantage for the Mac
in the beginning... With square pixels circles come out as circles, etc with
no modifications to the regular equation for a square.

	And everything just looked "cute" so to speak (ick I hate that word).
Someone said the orig. Mac resolution was 5xx by 384 (or thereabouts)... I
believe I have the #s close... But isn't the monitor itself literally square?


	Also with 300 dpi (per inch vertically or horizontally), WYSIWYG is
a lot better looking with square pixels.. (And more realistically "what you 
get")
-- 
/               Apple II(GS) Forever!    unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu               \
\"If cartoons were meant for adults, they'd be on in prime time."-Lisa Simpson/