Am 20.05.2010 09:45, schrieb scott:

>> However, that change would apparently break compatibility with Windows
>> 95/98/Me; I don't think such a minor improvement would be worth that
>> price.
>
> Couldn't it be a variable rather than a constant, set by a simple check
> for OS version?

Indeed. I'm not familiar with testing for Windows version though, so I'd 
file that under "non-trivial change" - I guess there might be quite some 
pitfalls to that, given the diversity of past, present and (probably) 
future Windows versions (for instance, XP Pro x64 Edition is likely to 
identify as Windows 2003 instead).


Another option would be to activate the nicer smoothing mode in 64-bit 
versions only, as that's a safe bet for XP or newer.

Post a reply to this message