Chromium does it, to a pretty useless extent. With so many window managers, it's pretty hard to draw correct window borders on every machine, and Chromium doesn't even try: with Ubuntu, for example, it draws the titlebar buttons in the "wrong" corner.
Let's face it, the Linux version will only show the window frame if you choose to draw it: not all do (with tiling wm's it's pretty rare, even). Firefox is easy to customize, which allows every distribution to match it looks to whatever theme they use. Linux doesn't have the DE like OSX and Windows do.
When you say "your", you mean "my", don't you? Also, you seem confused by these TV-related terms and only think of videos and games here; you'd have to be half-way blind not to see the difference between 75 and 150 PPI density with typical font sizes (computer fonts are usually a tad bigger than what's necessary just because of the lousy displays we have).
The original comment missed the point of the chart in the article you link: the increased pixel density is useless __at TV viewing distances__. When you go down to about 2 feet from the screen, 4k is pretty apparent on a 30 inch screen.
A clearer chart is at [1], and the Carlton Bale's original article even has a handy calculator that lets you verify this [2].
Thanks for posting this. It wasn't meant to be a snarky comment, but I did leave out some basic assumptions which I thought were obvious. "Usually" the larger the screen the further away most people will sit from there screen. Right now, I'm on a 21" monitor sitting about 3'2" (already out of the 2'6" for added benefit of a 4K screen if you take this chart as gospel) from the screen. If I went up to a 28" monitor, I would most likely move it back at least 6" so that I don't have to move my head and eyes around too much. That would put the screen about 3'8" from me which is within the range of full benefit of 1080p but outside the range of 4K for this size and viewing distance.
How close are you to your monitor(s) at the exact moment you read this?
I'm not at 2 feet with a smaller dual display, and I'd imagine I'd sit further away with gigantic 30+ monitor(s). I know I do when I use a 27. Others at $work mostly sit at least as far away.
In this area of improved vision, what does it gain you? Did all the old hackers not amount to what they could have been because they perceived some less pixels than there could have been?
I don't think a serious argument can be made on this this front until standards reach at least 16k.
Comments like yours are why people say HN's comments are degrading in quality. You can't even grasp the difference in viewing distance of a television versus a computer monitor, and the obvious impact that would have on how noticeable a particular pixel density is, yet you wrote a condescending comment. Unbelievable.
Incidentally, given that displays seem to be continually trending larger, I expect that we'll eventually have an entire wall in our homes that's a display. 4k is just another step toward that.
It should be offset to an extent by the larger cell (or pixel) size. The only reason it's "not", is that manufacturers have invested huge sums of money on production lines incapable of producing larger products while at the same time complaining that their ancient subpar desktop offerings don't sell well.
Are you really knowledgeable about the internals of LCD manufacturing processes to make such sweeping claims, or are you just asserting your general corporations are evil narrative?
Why? It's not like you're going to play graphically intensive games with it. 30Hz sounds just fine for many types of content, like text (and even videos).
The situation described by GP is so ridiculous that it's unlikely to be true, which is why I wouldn't recommend anyone to waste their time trying to solve the mentioned "problems".
I mean, really, why would anyone switch from Windows to Ubuntu on a gaming machine? Just think about it for a sec.
(Videos not loading or USB not working are issues the OEM are supposed to handle. The fact that someone like GP can't tell even the series of their GPU hints strongly toward them using a prebuilt computer - yet expecting to be able to work as their own Linux OEM, which one could argue is more difficult than being a Windows OEM.)
(I don't really care about the specific model of the board, because there are dozens to chose from. But I checked my email, its an Evga GTX650 1Gb DDR5. Oh, I avoided ATI because of past problems with Linux.)
Why Linux? Because coding (web stuff) on Windows sucks. Expandrive hasn't been working that well for me, makes explorer sluggish, etc.
Of course I didn't replace Windows - Ubuntu suggests you to install it along Windows (that part works really well these days).
See, the other day someone posted on HN that their Unity experience was bad because they had used a slow computer; I bought that idea and tried on the PC this time. (Then I went to XFCE, as usual. Which also failed on me, as I mentioned about the USB drive problem).
I should have videotaped myself installing and using Ubuntu - its just dozens of tiny UX mistakes that make me mad.
The problem is that everything has to work really well for a "power user" to use a computer happily. I can't believe someone that says the experience/aesthetics of Ubuntu matches that of OSX.
I absolutely don't want anyone to help me solve the problems (they were examples, there were dozens)[1] which you consider imaginary - my algorithm regarding Linux on the Desktop is to come back every 6 months and try it again).
(BTW, VLC works very well, I meant web based videos.)
[1] Small example: When I clicked "Install" on Synaptic, the button state didn't change until several seconds had passed, then the box asking for the root password pops up. By that time, I had already clicked it again several times.
Actually, opening this very tweet shows me squares instead of characters in some places. (It migh be "my fault" since I installed something called Infinality to improve font rendering. Oh well.)
I installed ubuntu alongside windows on my alienware, and I'm quite happy with it, I only switch to windows to play dota 2 and amalur, for browsing, other games and miscellaneous tasks I use linux.
Well I did. So far I have close to 100 native games and I have been able to play a lot of recent games with playonlinux. So not bad at all. One of the few things missing is decent Everything clone for linux - something that reads directly from the journal and is able to find files instantly by names without useless indexing of the contents.
Problem with BSD license?
We are discussing two separate issues here
1) Ability to unlock or root your device to run any OS
2) Having access to an open App Ecosystem.
The GNU license doesn't help with either of this issues. There are plenty of GNU/Android devices shipped with locked boot loaders. And nothing is stopping Google from locking down their App Store like Apples except a different corporate policy.
I don't think there's a problem with the BSD license, but the GNU license is actually supposed to help with those issues, just not the version used by the Linux kernel (v2).
You do realize that the proposed HTML5 DRM specification has nothing to do with being able to view DRM-protected videos without plugins, as it's mostly centered around specifying a platform for plugins, do you?
Netflix actually already "works" in Linux, or at least did back when I last looked it up, and most probably their CDM would as well. I'm of course speaking of using wine. (Having not actually tested the solution, I cannot verify it nor tell about its shortcomings.)
Or perhaps they would rely on secure/trusted path this time. I doubt that - the hardware simply isn't there for their customers.
Anyhow, I certainly wouldn't want W3C to endorse any type of DRM, or have them make it easier to abuse DRM. It's a good thing that Flash and Silverlight are restricted to PCs. It's a good thing that plugins annoy people; it makes them less desirable. We really shouldn't be building a new framework for plugins on all platforms.
Furthermore, I'd like to assure everyone reading this that DRM-free media is (still) thriving on the Internet. It's unfortunate that some people fail to play along; this only means that money doesn't go to the right people even if it's their media that's being exchanged.
a) just your laptop,
b) your laptop and all files, or
c) your laptop and all your files, and access to servers as per above.
I like "a" the best, and it's achieved through full-disk encryption. You don't even need a new passphrase for that, considering that you probably already password-protect your computer.
Let's face it, the Linux version will only show the window frame if you choose to draw it: not all do (with tiling wm's it's pretty rare, even). Firefox is easy to customize, which allows every distribution to match it looks to whatever theme they use. Linux doesn't have the DE like OSX and Windows do.