Bug: Bad scaling on desktop images

The following is a snapshot of a portion of my desktop. I am currently using
an image that is not as wide as the aspect ratio of my monitor which has
forced Windows to perform the extremely basic task of stretching the image.
As you can see, the image consists of perfect spheres (kudos to anyone who
knows what they are) and they are stretched as expected.

<a
href="http://s220.photobucket.com/albums/dd209/Scuba_Steve1974/?action=view&current=BuggyScaling.jpg"
target="_blank"><img
src="http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd209/Scuba_Steve1974/BuggyScaling.jpg" border="0" alt="Vista bug: Bad scaling"></a>

But the images are stretched poorly. Look at how jagged the edges of the
spheres look! I have placed arrows onto the image to show really bad spots
and resized a piece by 300% to make it more visual.

What the heck is Microsoft doing using a image stretch algorythm that's this
poor? If this was Win3.1 I could understand but this is 2008. Didn't the
developers of Vista know that Vista is supposed to be a GRAPHICAL user
interface?

Steve wrote:
> The following is a snapshot of a portion of my desktop. I am currently using
> an image that is not as wide as the aspect ratio of my monitor which has
> forced Windows to perform the extremely basic task of stretching the image.
> As you can see, the image consists of perfect spheres (kudos to anyone who
> knows what they are) and they are stretched as expected.
>
> <a
> href="http://s220.photobucket.com/albums/dd209/Scuba_Steve1974/?action=view&current=BuggyScaling.jpg"
> target="_blank"><img
> src="http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd209/Scuba_Steve1974/BuggyScaling.jpg" border="0" alt="Vista bug: Bad scaling"></a>
>
> But the images are stretched poorly. Look at how jagged the edges of the
> spheres look! I have placed arrows onto the image to show really bad spots
> and resized a piece by 300% to make it more visual.
>
> What the heck is Microsoft doing using a image stretch algorythm that's this
> poor? If this was Win3.1 I could understand but this is 2008. Didn't the
> developers of Vista know that Vista is supposed to be a GRAPHICAL user
> interface?
>

Looks like the image just has a really weird aspect ratio (taller than
it is wide). Nothing to do with the algorithm.