<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 11:29 PM, faginbagin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mythtv@hbuus.com" target="_blank">mythtv@hbuus.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
<br>
On 4/7/2013 8:11 AM, Simon Hobson wrote:<br>
> Steven Adeff wrote:<br>
>> Is it me or is any screen wit 1280 or greater width resolution<br>
>> capable of 720p which is considered HD?<br>
><br>
> No, I don't think it's just you. However, I get the impression that<br>
> the goal is not so much around SD vs HD displays, but square and<br>
> widescreen - there's a problem finding a theme (or pair of themes)<br>
> which are very similar except for being optimised for wide or square<br>
> screens. The HD vs SD thing is a bit of a red herring, other than<br>
> there bing a significant correlation between SD and square, and HD<br>
> and wide.<br>
><br>
> There is of course a minor detail of a good SD theme allowing for the<br>
> low res of the display - and so may well be significantly different<br>
> (visually) to an HD theme to allow for this. This may be behind the<br>
> OPs problem - he's wanting a "square" theme, but the square thems are<br>
> SD and so designed differently to HD themes, and he can't find a pair<br>
> of themes that are alike other than the width.<br>
<br>
As the OP, I apologize for not replying sooner (broke mt collarbone on Saturday). Simon has it right. The problem was finding themes appropriate for both 4:3 and 16:9 aspect ratio displays and that were consistent with each other.<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Steppes comes in both 16:9 and "-narrow" 4:3 versions.<br><br></div><div>John<br></div></div></div></div>