Hi Folks:
I would think the DPI of the environment is playing into this. David, =
what DPI is on your EEE?
Regards
Mario Limonciello=20
Dell | Linux Engineering=20
[email protected]=20
-----Original Message-----
From: David Sainty [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tue 9/30/2008 3:56 AM
To: Marcel Holtmann
Cc: Bastien Nocera; Limonciello, Mario; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make bluetooth-properties fit on smaller displays
=20
Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> =20
>>>> A lot of these MID devices don't have screens bigger than 1024x600
>>>> (some 800x600 depending on their aspect ratio). This change really
>>>> just reorganizes the GUI so that both laptops and MID devices can =
use
>>>> the same layout. I'm attaching an updated patch relative to 1.6.
>>>> =20
>>>> =20
>>> Both versions would fit on both those screens. What's wrong with =
leaving
>>> it as is? In the worst case, I'd move the contextual buttons to the =
side
>>> of the treeview, instead of underneath, and add labels to those =
buttons.
>>> =20
>>> =20
>> The preferences dialog on an Eee PC (701) screen is a real pain, it =
is=20
>> too big vertically. 800x480 screen, plus a window manager bar at the =
>> bottom, plus some chunky window decorations up the top. For a window =
to=20
>> fit conveniently on a standard Eee PC screen it needs to be 422 =
pixels=20
>> vertically it looks like (the standard decorations are VERY chunky :)
>> =20
>
> the dialog ix 420x420 and thus it should fit.
> =20
Interesting - that's not what I'm seeing. I've just tried xwininfo on=20
bluez-gnome-1.7 on both an Eee PC and a full sized PC (possibly with=20
slightly different support library versions).
Full sized PC geometry for the preferences window is 420x521. EeePC=20
geometry for the same is 420x523.
I'm not sure where the 2 pixel difference comes from (I don't think=20
the geometry here is including the window manager decorations). But=20
neither are close to 420x420. You weren't thinking 420x520 perchance?
xdpyinfo says the DPI is 100x101... heh...
dimensions: 800x480 pixels (203x121 millimeters)
resolution: 100x101 dots per inch
In reality it's around 133dpi (153mm x 92mm).
[email protected] wrote:
> Hi Folks:
>
> I would think the DPI of the environment is playing into this. David, what DPI is on your EEE?
>
> Regards
>
> Mario Limonciello
> Dell | Linux Engineering
> [email protected]
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Sainty [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tue 9/30/2008 3:56 AM
> To: Marcel Holtmann
> Cc: Bastien Nocera; Limonciello, Mario; [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make bluetooth-properties fit on smaller displays
>
> Marcel Holtmann wrote:
>
>> Hi David,
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> A lot of these MID devices don't have screens bigger than 1024x600
>>>>> (some 800x600 depending on their aspect ratio). This change really
>>>>> just reorganizes the GUI so that both laptops and MID devices can use
>>>>> the same layout. I'm attaching an updated patch relative to 1.6.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Both versions would fit on both those screens. What's wrong with leaving
>>>> it as is? In the worst case, I'd move the contextual buttons to the side
>>>> of the treeview, instead of underneath, and add labels to those buttons.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> The preferences dialog on an Eee PC (701) screen is a real pain, it is
>>> too big vertically. 800x480 screen, plus a window manager bar at the
>>> bottom, plus some chunky window decorations up the top. For a window to
>>> fit conveniently on a standard Eee PC screen it needs to be 422 pixels
>>> vertically it looks like (the standard decorations are VERY chunky :)
>>>
>>>
>> the dialog ix 420x420 and thus it should fit.
>>
>>
> Interesting - that's not what I'm seeing. I've just tried xwininfo on
> bluez-gnome-1.7 on both an Eee PC and a full sized PC (possibly with
> slightly different support library versions).
>
> Full sized PC geometry for the preferences window is 420x521. EeePC
> geometry for the same is 420x523.
> I'm not sure where the 2 pixel difference comes from (I don't think
> the geometry here is including the window manager decorations). But
> neither are close to 420x420. You weren't thinking 420x520 perchance?
>
>