Computer science is BINARY not decimal by nature, so
we're just NOT going to get nicely rounded decimal
numbers like many prefer on this board. Since a switch
is either "ON" or "OFF" it is only going to have two
possible numeric values 0 or 1. With the base-2
numbering system you get numbers like:

2^0 = 1
2^1 = 2
2^2 = 4
2^3 = 8
2^4 = 16
2^5 = 32
2^6 = 64
2^7 = 128
2^8 = 256

et cetera. 

To show how little most people know about their
display device and just rely on what marketing people
tell them:

A lot of people know they have a 0.28 dot-pitch
monitor, and that screen resolution is 72 dpi ...but
have no idea what that means.

Hint: 0.28 mm / dot and 72 dot / in are both rounded
values of the same thing.

The modern trend is to have graphics in PIXELS, so
that it is device and output independent. 

ALSO....high-resolution output:

After the number of dots/unit reaches a certain
threshold, the human eye can not tell the difference.
Printer manufacturers target this limit as a their
goal, not a rounded, rational number (regardless or
the measurement system).



--- Philip S Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> twip
> 
> hmm. A Microsoft invention eh? I didn't know Bill
> Gates spoke with  a lisp.
> 
> Anyway what we need now is to get rid of dpi in
> favour of dpc, or maybe dpm, 
> for printing.
> 
> 50 dpm, 100 dpm, etc would be a useful way to go.
> 
> Phil Hall
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "James Hudnall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 5:00 PM
> Subject: [USMA:33415] Re: PowerPoint Centimeters
> Different from Actual 
> Centimeters
> 
> 
> > Microsoft has indeed changed their stance since
> then.
> > The prior standard was based on the TWIP
> (twentienth
> > of a pica point - which did not present nice round
> > numbers for either in or cm measurement).
> Microsoft
> > dropped support for the TWIP a couple of years
> back
> > with the release of .NET. Previously you had to
> create
> > something in TWIPS, then convert it to PIXELS,
> then
> > convert it to the target output size.
> >
> > Now all measurements are in PIXELS - which are
> > unit-less. This makes it easier to create graphics
> > independent of what the target output size will
> be,
> > then scale to their target output (be it A4 or
> > billboard size). There is an article about this
> posted
> > at
> >
>
http://visualbasic.about.com/cs/visualbasicfaq/a/dykpixeltwip.htm
> >
> >
> > --- Pat Naughtin
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Dear All,
> >>
> >> I know that this is a bit old but it shows a
> strange
> >> mindset that it is
> >> quite comfortable redefining world standards < on
> >> the fly.
> >>
> >> See:
> >> http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=189826
> >> for Microsoft's attitude to the metric system
> back
> >> in 1997.
> >>
> >> Has Microsoft changed their attitude to standards
> >> since then?
> >>
> >> By the way this reminds me of an even older
> riddle.
> >>
> >> Question: How many software engineers does it
> take
> >> to change a light bulb?
> >>
> >> Answer: None, they simply redefine darkness as
> the
> >> new standard.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Pat Naughtin ASM (NSAA), LCAMS (USMA)*
> >> PO Box 305, Belmont, Geelong, Australia
> >> Phone 61 3 5241 2008
> >>
> >> Pat Naughtin is the editor of the free online
> >> monthly newsletter,
> >> 'Metrication matters'. You can subscribe by going
> to
> >> http://www.metricationmatters.com and clicking on
> >> 'Newsletter'.
> >>
> >>  * Pat is the editor of the 'Numbers and
> >> measurement' chapter of the
> >> Australian Government Publishing Service 'Style
> >> manual ­ for writers,
> >> editors and printers', he is an Accredited
> Speaking
> >> Member (ASM) with the
> >> National Speakers Association of Australia, and a
> >> Lifetime Certified
> >> Advanced Metrication Specialist (LCAMS) with the
> >> United States Metric
> >> Association.
> >>
> >> This email and its attachments are for the sole
> use
> >> of the addressee and may
> >> contain information that is confidential and/or
> >> legally privileged. This
> >> email and its attachments are subject to
> copyright
> >> and should not be partly
> >> or wholly reproduced without the consent of the
> >> copyright owner. Any
> >> unauthorised use of disclosure of this email or
> its
> >> attachments is
> >> prohibited. If you receive this email in error,
> >> please immediately delete it
> >> from your system and notify the sender by return
> >> email.
> >>
> >>
> > 
> 
> 

Reply via email to