[CharlesW]

> In theory, 1px is equal to a single dot in a computer monitor or phone screen.

Even in theory, this has never been true AFAIK. Pixels (px) are relative to the properties of the viewing device, the user's OS and browser settings, etc. The author appears to be confusing "physical pixel" with "logical pixel".

[Veen]

There is a big blue information box in the article that explains this. It's called "Hardware vs. software pixels".

[naberhausj]

I agree with CharlesW here. That information box doesn't mention that a normal grid of pixels can also have a non 1-to-1 mapping between physical and logical pixels. Any discussion of pixels that doesn't specifically call out `window.devicePixelRatio` is not going to give people a complete understanding.

This is important. If you're rendering images/graphics with a pixel as your smallest unit then you're not going to look good on most modern devices.

[CharlesW]

Along with talking about very different issues in that aside, the author calls the px unit "a bit of a lie" when in fact CSS pixels have always been logical (not physical) pixels. My editor-hat advice is that the article would benefit from a rewrite of the px explanation, and I'd also recommend eliminating the confusing hardware pixels vs. sub-pixels distinction.

[teg4n_]

Try reading more. He’s not confusing anything, he specifically calls out how resolution changes and such effect things.

[CharlesW]

I did read the fine article, and this just jumped out at me as something that could be improved.

[CharlesW]

I read TFA and am suggesting that this could use a correction. To be charitable, this is a misleading oversimplification and doesn’t serve readers.