What strawman? This entire discussion started because of resolution. You’re implying “higher resolution makes the display good” and seeing “irony” in the fact that the reviewer says it’s a brilliant display. I’m asking you’re sure about that, but it seems like you know it’s not true and thus changing the goalposts 🤷
Plus everyone responding to you ignoring the arguably more important part:
Out of the box, the laptop opted for the highest resolution possible, which made everything way too small for my aging eyes.
Macs, out of the box, “just work”. Granted that this is due to rigid monopolistic content of the hardware+software integration, but however it is achieved, it does work.
Meanwhile, people who enjoy using Arch btw Linux have to go in and tweak settings even be able to BEGIN using the machine.
And if you do manage, people call you a troll for doing it “wrong”.
All right then, I guess I’ll continue to prefer Macs then, especially if my work is paying.
One day it would be nice if Linux would start to choose to work a bit better, like Macs.
The issue here isn’t changing the settings, there is nothing wrong with that. The issue is that the review said the screen was good while lowering the resolution, resulting in a objectively worse image. So the question becomes: can you trust the reviewer on the image quality when the review is possibly based on a less then optimal image quality.
Is resolution the only attribute to judge a display by? Is it really that one-dimensional? “Hammer good if make bong louder”?
Anti Commercial-AI license
I didn’t say that, go strawman someone else. Shoo, troll, shoo!
What strawman? This entire discussion started because of resolution. You’re implying “higher resolution makes the display good” and seeing “irony” in the fact that the reviewer says it’s a brilliant display. I’m asking you’re sure about that, but it seems like you know it’s not true and thus changing the goalposts 🤷
I guess your name really is fitting.
Anti Commercial-AI license
Plus everyone responding to you ignoring the arguably more important part:
Macs, out of the box, “just work”. Granted that this is due to rigid monopolistic content of the hardware+software integration, but however it is achieved, it does work.
Meanwhile, people who enjoy using
Arch btwLinux have to go in and tweak settings even be able to BEGIN using the machine.And if you do manage, people call you a troll for doing it “wrong”.
All right then, I guess I’ll continue to prefer Macs then, especially if my work is paying.
One day it would be nice if Linux would start to choose to work a bit better, like Macs.
The issue here isn’t changing the settings, there is nothing wrong with that. The issue is that the review said the screen was good while lowering the resolution, resulting in a objectively worse image. So the question becomes: can you trust the reviewer on the image quality when the review is possibly based on a less then optimal image quality.