A plan for the release

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
22 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A plan for the release

Chris Muller-3
> The difference with developer machines starts to get really large.
> I think 1024*720 should be safe for nearly every device sold in the past 3
> years. I recently switched to 4K, and settings for 800*600
> don't work too well for that.

My newest laptop is a Lenovo X230T with a  screen resolution of
1366x768 (the best offered for that model).  This is a very common
screen size, lots of modern ultra-book portables use this same
resolution.

By the time one accounts for the real-estate taken by the underlying
OS for button bars, etc., you no longer have 768 lines of vertical
resolution.  So if we open Squeak at 1024x768, it guaranteed to be
truncated on top and/or bottom at least by the OS widgets, which is
annoying to the user.

I think it even sends a particular message that Squeak is a large and
monolithic application which, it can be, but opening a 800x600
(especially on a large screen) reinforces the notion that there can
also be multiple instances of Squeak running concurrently.

If you are running on 4K, my hunch is that you would do the same thing
with a 1024x768 image as you would a 800x600 image -- simply expand
it.   :)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A plan for the release

Tobias Pape
What about 1024x600 then?

Best
        -Tobias
On 08.04.2015, at 17:34, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> The difference with developer machines starts to get really large.
>> I think 1024*720 should be safe for nearly every device sold in the past 3
>> years. I recently switched to 4K, and settings for 800*600
>> don't work too well for that.
>
> My newest laptop is a Lenovo X230T with a  screen resolution of
> 1366x768 (the best offered for that model).  This is a very common
> screen size, lots of modern ultra-book portables use this same
> resolution.
>
> By the time one accounts for the real-estate taken by the underlying
> OS for button bars, etc., you no longer have 768 lines of vertical
> resolution.  So if we open Squeak at 1024x768, it guaranteed to be
> truncated on top and/or bottom at least by the OS widgets, which is
> annoying to the user.
>
> I think it even sends a particular message that Squeak is a large and
> monolithic application which, it can be, but opening a 800x600
> (especially on a large screen) reinforces the notion that there can
> also be multiple instances of Squeak running concurrently.
>
> If you are running on 4K, my hunch is that you would do the same thing
> with a 1024x768 image as you would a 800x600 image -- simply expand
> it.   :)



12