Yep, very good read, thanks alot for sharing. Quoth c_c: > 5. The 640x480 resolution on the FR and the glamo chip are perhaps > not a > great design decision after all - as raster has been saying all this while. > I wasn't convinced - but the qualitative difference between the spica's > screen at 320x240 and the FR at 640x480 starts to wear off really fast as > you get used to the larger screen and the faster experience on the Spica. I > love the FR screen, but it seems like without decent hw acceleration for X, > we wont be getting UI goodies and usability at the same time.
Indeed. The freerunner screen is very pretty, but speed is more important to usability as a whole. I remember people in the past (when I was just drooling over the freerunner, before I had one) talking about using a lower resolution and maybe other graphics 'underclocking.' How do we go about this, and if it has much of an effect on the overall speed, perhaps we should consider making it default? In the Illume settings, the screen resolution window only lists 480x640. xrandr lists 240x320 also, so I tried to switch to that with 'xrandr -s 240x320'. This actually mostly worked, but everything is pushed about 40 pixels down, and the stuff which should be at the bottom is wrapped at the top. Which made the touchscreen off by about 40 pixels. I'd attach a screenshot, but I can't remember the program to get one. (I'm using shr-testing, by the way). > c) startup times are crucial to the overall experience. I agree that this is very important. Particularly with the low screen blanking timeouts, it's quite common for the screen to turn off while a program is still loading, which is never going to be a good thing for usability. Thanks again, Nick
pgpSgkuj6xACl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Shr-User mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shr-project.org/mailman/listinfo/shr-user
