Re: [Bug-gnubg] Suggestions for enhancement/improvement, Windows version

[Billie Patterson]

Joern,

I was working on your numbers when I got an email from
Oeystein telling me to rename my .gnubgautorc file,

I did, the wide wings are gone, and if I slide the main
window down, I can position it and the hint window so that
I can see the main information on both windows at once. 
That's all I really needed.

I did read the rec.games.backgammon archives as well as the
mail list, and didn't find too much about the sizing issue
(not RE-sizing) except for one person who asserts that
1024x728 is the de facto standard.  Well, it may be for
those of you who don't wear trifocals or have cataracts,
but nobody my age uses it unless they've got 21 inch
monitors.  We're all stuck at 800x600, and likely to stay
there until the big monitor prices come down again,
especially those of us who are retired.

You guys have a GREAT product here -- I've already learned
enough to play MOTIF fairly even as long as I never accept
one of his doubles, and he was trouncing me in the
beginning.  But I DO wish you'd consider setting 800x600 as
your standard for the GUI.  People with larger
monitors/resolutions can always resize the windows up to
get what they need -- it's going down in size that presents
problems.

Thanks again for your help.

Billie Patterson

--- Joern Thyssen <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2003 at 12:54:21PM -0800, Billie
> Patterson wrote
> > > > button on them.  Please either design for the
> 800x600
> > > > setting, or rearrange the long screens so that we
> can
> > > see
> > > > all the information.
> > > 
> > > Can you tell which dialog it is?
> > 
> > Settings->Players is one.
> > 
> > If I click on Windows->Message, the message window
> opens
> > completely off my screen, so that I can't get to it at
> all.
> >  Same thing with Windows->Game Record.
> > 
> > > 
> > > > 2)  The screen has a LOT of unused real estate, but
> if
> > > you
> > 
> > <snipped>
> > 
> > > 
> > > This has been discussed extensively on both the list
> and
> > > on
> > > rec.games.backgammon.
> > 
> > Can you point me to a thread?  I've looked through the
> list
> > and don't see an obvious thread discussing it.
> > 
> > Also, I can't find the rec.games.backgammon archives. 
> One
> 
> rec.games.backgammon:
> 
>
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=rec.games.backgammon&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en
> 
> gnubg mailing list:
> 
> http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnubg/
> 
> > > gnubg's board scales in steps of 108x72 pixels, so
> with a
> > > screen
> > > resolution of 800x600 the maximum board available is
> > > 756x504 which is
> > > 80% of your screen real estate. However, due to
> window
> > > decorations, the
> > > menus, toolbar etc. you'll probably only get 648x432
> or
> > > 63% -- and you
> > > may even have to disable "show position ID and match
> ID"
> > > as well as
> > > "show dice below board" (Settings->Apperance->General
> in
> > > 0.13 or
> > > Settings->Options->Display in "trunk") to get this.
> > 
> > I'm not sure what scalability has to do with pulling in
> the
> > wide wings or moving things from the bottom of the
> board to
> > one side.  If that were done, those of us running at
> lower
> > resolutions wouldn't have to resize anyway, and would
> still
> > be able to see the whole screen, and others that we
> might
> > want to run as well.  People running at higher
> resolutions
> > don't scale to smaller anyhow.
> 
> Try making a screen shot of you entire windows desktop
> running gnubg
> maximised, and
> 
> (1) count the pixels used by the task bar
> (2) count the pixels used by window decorations (the
> frame around the
>     window)
> (3) count the pixels used by the status bar in gnubg
> (4) count the pixels used by the gnubg toolbar 
> (5) count the pixels used by the gnubg menu
> 
> sum these figures up, subtract it from 800 to give you
> the maximum
> number of pixels (vertically) available to the board.
> Divide the number
> by 72 and throw away the fractional part. This gives you
> the maximum
> size of the board you can get  if we move the stuff from
> below the board
> to next to the board.
> 
> If this number is, say, 5, the maxium size is 540x360.
> 
> Redo the same calculation but now add 
> 
> (6) the size of the stuff below the board
> 
> If the final number from this calculation is smaller than
> from the
> first, we may consider moving some of the stuff!
> 
> I would very much like to see these numbers!
> 
> Jørn


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com