this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2025
22 points (86.7% liked)
LinuxHardware
415 readers
3 users here now
A community where you can ask questions about what hardware supports GNU/Linux, how to get things working, places to buy from (i.e. they support GNU/Linux) and so on.
Quick rules:
- Be nice to each other.
- Report toxic people.
EXTERNAL RESOURCES
- Linux on Laptops[↗]
- OpenPrinting Database[↗]
- RHEL Compatibility Database[↗]
- Wifi Adapter Compatibility Database[↗]
- FSF Hardware Database[↗]
GNU/LINUX VENDORS
- Entroware[↗] [UK/Eire]
- Juno Computers[↗] [UK/USA]
- Ministry of Freedom[↗] [UK]
- System76[↗] [USA]
- ThinkPenguin[↗] [USA]
- Tuxedo Computers[↗] [Germany]
OTHER VENDORS
- Dell[↗] (certain lines) [Global]
- Lenovo[↗] (X and T lines) [Global]
- Raspberry Foundation via various vendors
Webcasts
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So because they achieved the same result going a different path, it's wrong?
Anti Commercial-AI license
Its not the same result lol its the incorrect thing to do. Lowering the resolution fucks the image. You need to scale instead to maintain resolution and image quality
The perceived result is the same. There's a limit to visual acuity and if the reviewer's limit is lower than yours, it in no way invalidates the approach.
Also, lowering the resolution doesn't fuck the image, unless the image has greater resolution than the screen's resolution. You're not going to invent quality of nothing. It's not how things work. This thought process of "bigger number means better quality" is just straight up false. It's why cameras with 100 megapixels can easily take pictures with worse quality than cameras with lower megapixels and optical zoom.
Anti Commercial-AI license
i think what they meant is that you end up with 1080p output this way, whereas scaling would give you "real" 4k