3:47 p.m.
I am in the process of buying a laptop for travel. it should be 13"-14".
relatively small and lightweight - and still with *power*.
I came across:
https://www.mm-vision.dk/vision-b4385-baerbar-med-ips-panel. They have the
option to purchase with no OS installed (hooray!) and you can choose
between different CPUs, RAM configs and disk systems. It is also not very
expensive specs taken into consideration, really.
But monitor is 3200x1800 pixels on a 13" monitor. And that is the problem.
This machine is designed for Win8, where the 'tiled interface' is DPI-aware
and will scale automatically. I plan to install a dual-boot of Win7 and
Linux (SuSE or Fedora), and they will both be completely hopeless to use on
this system as everything (icons, controls) will be extremely small in
almost every interface and application.
I may opt for this instead: http://mysn.eu/schenker-s413. 14" monitor with
1920*1440 (HDMI) will just accurately work if the monitor is good quality.
It also has similar configuration options as the one above.
I dont think Linux Desktop people takes this seriously enough (or they do
not communicate it). It will IMO take ~12 months and most laptops sold
will a have a monitor with so high resolution that the Linux Desktop will
be a museum item for people who like to play around with old hardware - and
as a hobby only (and same will be true for Win7) .
Are there any efforts anywhere in the Linux world considering support for
high monitor resolutions (auto-scaling based on DPI) like Mac/Retina and
Win8 has? What Linux desktops/window managers have it in progress? Does
anybody know?
What say? Was it too provocative?
post mortem: this is of course not for "Fedora Desktop" only. It is for
the future of the "LInux Desktop" as such. But as Fedora now has a
dedicated Desktop distro they should be serious about it. I think there
should be no 'holy cows'. not X11 if Wayland does better and not Gnome if
Enlightment does better.
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
3:58 p.m.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I am in the process of buying a laptop for travel. it should be
13"-14".
relatively small and lightweight - and still with *power*.
I came across:
https://www.mm-vision.dk/vision-b4385-baerbar-med-ips-panel. They have the
option to purchase with no OS installed (hooray!) and you can choose between
different CPUs, RAM configs and disk systems. It is also not very expensive
specs taken into consideration, really.
But monitor is 3200x1800 pixels on a 13" monitor. And that is the problem.
This machine is designed for Win8, where the 'tiled interface' is DPI-aware
and will scale automatically. I plan to install a dual-boot of Win7 and
Linux (SuSE or Fedora), and they will both be completely hopeless to use on
this system as everything (icons, controls) will be extremely small in
almost every interface and application.
You said in a different email that you use XFCE. That might be your
problem. I have two laptops with high resolution monitors and GNOME 3
scales things very well. F21 even more than F20, which was already
quite usable.
I dont think Linux Desktop people takes this seriously enough (or
they do
not communicate it). It will IMO take ~12 months and most laptops sold will
HiDPI support has been touted as a feature in Fedora for the past two
releases. For F21 it's explicitly listed as one for Workstation:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/F21_release_announcement#Support_for_high_r...
Are there any efforts anywhere in the Linux world considering support
for
high monitor resolutions (auto-scaling based on DPI) like Mac/Retina and
Win8 has? What Linux desktops/window managers have it in progress? Does
anybody know?
GNOME and I believe KDE both are working on this continually. Both
are already very usable. I have no idea what XFCE is doing, nor any
of the other desktop environments.
What say? Was it too provocative?
Maybe just misinformed. Try GNOME or KDE?
josh
4:14 p.m.
OK ..thanks for the reply! It is true that I like the simplicity of xfce
and lxde. And they work fine with hardware I have had hands on till now.
..and the 'bonus question' Any desktop supports two-finger gestures on
touchpad (scroll and zoom in particular)?
-- Peter
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org>
wrote:
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Peter Laursen
<jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> I am in the process of buying a laptop for travel. it should be 13"-14".
> relatively small and lightweight - and still with *power*.
>
> I came across:
> https://www.mm-vision.dk/vision-b4385-baerbar-med-ips-panel. They have
the
> option to purchase with no OS installed (hooray!) and you can choose
between
> different CPUs, RAM configs and disk systems. It is also not very
expensive
> specs taken into consideration, really.
>
> But monitor is 3200x1800 pixels on a 13" monitor. And that is the
problem.
> This machine is designed for Win8, where the 'tiled interface' is
DPI-aware
> and will scale automatically. I plan to install a dual-boot of Win7 and
> Linux (SuSE or Fedora), and they will both be completely hopeless to use
on
> this system as everything (icons, controls) will be extremely small in
> almost every interface and application.
You said in a different email that you use XFCE. That might be your
problem. I have two laptops with high resolution monitors and GNOME 3
scales things very well. F21 even more than F20, which was already
quite usable.
> I dont think Linux Desktop people takes this seriously enough (or they do
> not communicate it). It will IMO take ~12 months and most laptops sold
will
HiDPI support has been touted as a feature in Fedora for the past two
releases. For F21 it's explicitly listed as one for Workstation:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/F21_release_announcement#Support_for_high_r...
> Are there any efforts anywhere in the Linux world considering support for
> high monitor resolutions (auto-scaling based on DPI) like Mac/Retina and
> Win8 has? What Linux desktops/window managers have it in progress? Does
> anybody know?
GNOME and I believe KDE both are working on this continually. Both
are already very usable. I have no idea what XFCE is doing, nor any
of the other desktop environments.
> What say? Was it too provocative?
Maybe just misinformed. Try GNOME or KDE?
josh
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
4:43 p.m.
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 23:14:21 +0100
Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
OK ..thanks for the reply! It is true that I like the simplicity of
xfce and lxde. And they work fine with hardware I have had hands on
till now.
..and the 'bonus question' Any desktop supports two-finger gestures on
touchpad (scroll and zoom in particular)?
Not that I know of. I do personally heavily use three finger tap
(emulates middle button) and edge scrolling (run finger along right
side to scroll).
I don't know if it's possible to do more complex gestures off hand.
kevin
3:03 a.m.
The touchpad hardware on recent laptops designed for Win8 most often does
no support edge scrolling (run finger along right side to scroll). If
touchpad has multipoint touch recognition (up to 4 simultaneous points is
common, I believe) and as two-finger scroll is supported in the driver
there is no need for such dedicated area on the touchpad.
-- Peter
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 23:14:21 +0100
Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> OK ..thanks for the reply! It is true that I like the simplicity of
> xfce and lxde. And they work fine with hardware I have had hands on
> till now.
>
> ..and the 'bonus question' Any desktop supports two-finger gestures on
> touchpad (scroll and zoom in particular)?
Not that I know of. I do personally heavily use three finger tap
(emulates middle button) and edge scrolling (run finger along right
side to scroll).
I don't know if it's possible to do more complex gestures off hand.
kevin
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
3:11 a.m.
What is not true? I have seen 2 recent Win8 laptops without edge scrool
support. Are you telling that this is because Win8 ignores it?
-- Peter
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 10:05 AM, drago01 <drago01(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Peter Laursen
<jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> The touchpad hardware on recent laptops designed for Win8 most often
does no
> support edge scrolling (run finger along right side to scroll).
That's not true.
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
3:20 a.m.
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
What is not true? I have seen 2 recent Win8 laptops without edge
scrool
support. Are you telling that this is because Win8 ignores it?
The hardware does support it but windows 8 uses two finger scrolling
by default (like we do in gnome) you can enable edge scrolling though.
On the laptops running windows 8 I have seen people had to use an
obscure vendor suppled tool for that.
4:30 p.m.
On 9/01/2015 19:11 , Peter Laursen wrote:
What is not true? I have seen 2 recent Win8 laptops without edge
scrool
support. Are you telling that this is because Win8 ignores it?
touchpads only give you the position of a number of fingers.
anything past that is implemented in software. tapping, twofinger
scrolling, edge scrolling - they're all pure software features. if Win8
doesn't do it out of the box, then that's because they chose not to but
it has nothing to do with the hardware.
Cheers,
Peter
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 10:05 AM, drago01 <drago01(a)gmail.com
<mailto:drago01@gmail.com>> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com
<mailto:jazcyk@gmail.com>> wrote:
> The touchpad hardware on recent laptops designed for Win8 most often does no
> support edge scrolling (run finger along right side to scroll).
That's not true.
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org <mailto:desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
3:06 a.m.
Think about the touchpad in Win8 as a touch screen -replacement.
-- Peter
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 10:03 AM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The touchpad hardware on recent laptops designed for Win8 most often
does
no support edge scrolling (run finger along right side to scroll). If
touchpad has multipoint touch recognition (up to 4 simultaneous points is
common, I believe) and as two-finger scroll is supported in the driver
there is no need for such dedicated area on the touchpad.
-- Peter
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 23:14:21 +0100
> Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > OK ..thanks for the reply! It is true that I like the simplicity of
> > xfce and lxde. And they work fine with hardware I have had hands on
> > till now.
> >
> > ..and the 'bonus question' Any desktop supports two-finger gestures on
> > touchpad (scroll and zoom in particular)?
>
> Not that I know of. I do personally heavily use three finger tap
> (emulates middle button) and edge scrolling (run finger along right
> side to scroll).
>
> I don't know if it's possible to do more complex gestures off hand.
>
> kevin
>
> --
> desktop mailing list
> desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
>
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
4:44 p.m.
On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 11:14 PM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
OK ..thanks for the reply! It is true that I like the simplicity of
xfce and
lxde. And they work fine with hardware I have had hands on till now.
..and the 'bonus question' Any desktop supports two-finger gestures on
touchpad (scroll and zoom in particular)?
Scroll yes zoom no (not yet).
7:36 a.m.
Josh Boyer píše v Čt 08. 01. 2015 v 16:58 -0500:
<snip>
GNOME and I believe KDE both are working on this continually. Both
are already very usable. I have no idea what XFCE is doing, nor any
of the other desktop environments.
> What say? Was it too provocative?
I don't think Xfce can offer any reasonable HiDPI support without
finishing the GTK3 port and because they suffer from lack of
contributors it reportedly may take another 2 years. And that's just
half a way there because from what I have heard it takes implementing
Wayland to bring a complete HiDPI support (coping with several monitors
with different DPIs,...). Wayland is something Xfce developers can't
even think about until they finish the GTK3 port.
It's a sad truth that small desktops are failing to cope with new
hardware, but we should not blame Linux in general.
Jiri
9:51 a.m.
I am not blaming. I am asking (and provoking a little :-) )..
Since I will need a new laptop for travel soon, I am doing some research
before deciding what to buy. I think it will end up as a 14" model with
HDMI (1920*1440) and not higher - also because I still need Win7 (what will
be hopeless with very high DPI, I believe).
-- Peter
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Jiri Eischmann <eischmann(a)redhat.com> wrote:
Josh Boyer píše v Čt 08. 01. 2015 v 16:58 -0500:
<snip>
> GNOME and I believe KDE both are working on this continually. Both
> are already very usable. I have no idea what XFCE is doing, nor any
> of the other desktop environments.
>
> > What say? Was it too provocative?
I don't think Xfce can offer any reasonable HiDPI support without
finishing the GTK3 port and because they suffer from lack of
contributors it reportedly may take another 2 years. And that's just
half a way there because from what I have heard it takes implementing
Wayland to bring a complete HiDPI support (coping with several monitors
with different DPIs,...). Wayland is something Xfce developers can't
even think about until they finish the GTK3 port.
It's a sad truth that small desktops are failing to cope with new
hardware, but we should not blame Linux in general.
Jiri
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
9:54 a.m.
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I am not blaming. I am asking (and provoking a little :-) )..
Since I will need a new laptop for travel soon, I am doing some research
before deciding what to buy. I think it will end up as a 14" model with HDMI
(1920*1440) and not higher - also because I still need Win7 (what will be
hopeless with very high DPI, I believe).
Well it is as "hopeless" as lxde or xfce ... you can make the fonts
bigger and hope for the best.
5:34 p.m.
On Fri, 9 Jan 2015 16:54:46 +0100
drago01 <drago01(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Peter Laursen
<jazcyk(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> I am not blaming. I am asking (and provoking a little :-) )..
>
> Since I will need a new laptop for travel soon, I am doing some
> research before deciding what to buy. I think it will end up as a
> 14" model with HDMI (1920*1440) and not higher - also because I
> still need Win7 (what will be hopeless with very high DPI, I
> believe).
Well it is as "hopeless" as lxde or xfce ... you can make the fonts
bigger and hope for the best.
As noted earlier in this thread you can adjust the dpi in Xfce, so it's
slightly better than just making the fonts bigger, but it's less than
a real HIDPI solution.
kevin
1:30 p.m.
On 01/10/2015 12:34 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> 14" model with HDMI (1920*1440) and not higher - also
because I
As noted earlier in this thread you can adjust the dpi in Xfce, so
it's
slightly better than just making the fonts bigger, but it's less than
a real HIDPI solution.
If GNOME enters HiDPI mode with 1440 vertical pixels, you end up with
720 effective pixels vertically, which is not enough for some GNOME
dialog boxes.
At this point, manually tweaked settings appear superior to stock
configurations (even for basic usability).
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security
3:12 p.m.
"If GNOME enters HiDPI mode with 1440 vertical pixels "
Could you please explain* "If"*? The question is:* does* it *use such
simple logic*?* Do you know about it? That would be ridiculous IMO. If not,
it would be nice if someone could elaborate the logic/algorithm Gnome uses.
It should at least depend on DPI, and there should further be a
'scaling'/zoom' (at least globally but preferably also per_application)
user setting. A good quality monitor is usable with higher DPI than a
poorer one. On an 27" monitor, for instance, 1920*1440 is actually a
somewhat low DPI. Win7 (and various Linuxes running virtualized) works fine
on my stationary here with a 27" monitor (this one:
http://www.samsung.com/ca/consumer/office/monitors/led/LS27B970DS/ZC) with
2560*1440 resolution. I bought this monitor in order to work in 3-4
application (all reasonable sized) simultaneously. I will not accept that
some stupid Window Manager *thinks that I am better off* with 1280*720 or
whtever similar. I really don't hope this is the case.
There are also personal preferences. Some people like it big and some
people like it small.
-- Peter
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Florian Weimer <fweimer(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 01/10/2015 12:34 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> 14" model with HDMI (1920*1440) and not higher - also because I
>>>
>>
As noted earlier in this thread you can adjust the dpi in Xfce, so it's
> slightly better than just making the fonts bigger, but it's less than
> a real HIDPI solution.
>
If GNOME enters HiDPI mode with 1440 vertical pixels, you end up with 720
effective pixels vertically, which is not enough for some GNOME dialog
boxes.
At this point, manually tweaked settings appear superior to stock
configurations (even for basic usability).
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
4:12 p.m.
I have the previous (late 2013) Dell XPS 13, which does not have a
particularly hires display at 1920x1080 but is still more than a
Macbook Air. The new XPS 13 obliterates both of those at 3200x1800.
I've got very mixed opinions on the default GNOME experience. Text
overall renders better than on Windows 8 which I find to be too soft,
but the text is definitely too small on GNOME. So just making it
smaller is really not OK, but it's not so bad that I've decided to
fiddle with learning how to change it (yet). Therefore the UX is
"damn, so now I have to go learn how to change the rendered text size"
which is not the same thing as "it looks like crap" but it's just a
bit tedious this isn't figured out automatically.
Whereas Windows 8, it's go the text size right, but it's just fuzzy so
the UX is "umm, is the screen dirty? no it's brand new, hmm maybe I
need glasses? Uhh no, looks like it's just bad rendering."
For probably 3-4 years now I've though GNOME renders text better than
Windows, but the size is too small now, even though it's sharp.
Chris Murphy
4:15 p.m.
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 10:12 PM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
"If GNOME enters HiDPI mode with 1440 vertical pixels "
Could you please explain "If"? The question is: does* it use such simple
logic? Do you know about it? That would be ridiculous IMO. If not, it would
be nice if someone could elaborate the logic/algorithm Gnome uses.
That's what hidpi displays are designed for. A 3200x1800 hidpi display
renders like 1600x900 but with everything sharper. What GNOME does is
trigger the hidpi mode if the display's dpi is over a threshold.
That's what the "if" means.
5:07 p.m.
@drago1 .. you have posted two confilcting statements.
Frist you stated that if *the vertical resolution* ... And you even wrote
a specific number (1440)
Next you stated that if *the DPI* ...
.. there is no simple correlation between monitor resolution and DPI (as
monitors have different size).
I know that Mac simply operates such a factor2 for 'retina' displays. Win8
does not. It will simply scale to fit the monitor and it may result in a
zoom factor 1.2 1.4 ,1.5 or whatever (and @Chris .. that interpolation
could result in fonts appearing somewhat blurred) . And there also is a
user setting for zoom in the (traditionial) desktop context menu
.Addtitionally individual applications may be zoomed (with two-finger
gesture on touch screen or touchpad) if they are built for it (I tried to
find the docs in MSDN - cannot right now but there is one specific Windows
API function call that needs to be made). Try zooming Notepad or whatever
in Win8 like this: put two fingers on the touchpad and spread the fingers
(few non-Microsoft applications support it currently, but most of those
that ship with Win8 do - also those that run in the traditional desktop,
including Control Panel, Windows Explorer etc. ).
@Chris .. on my stationary (as said 27" - 2560*1440) I think that
everything - icons, fonts etc. - is too big. Gnome is wasting my desktop
space here. Maybe it wold be Ok for a cheap TV set and similar not very
sharp screen - but not for a premium quality monitor as mine.
BTW: I was asking what logic Gnome uses. ;-)
-- Peter
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 11:15 PM, drago01 <drago01(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 10:12 PM, Peter Laursen
<jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> "If GNOME enters HiDPI mode with 1440 vertical pixels "
>
> Could you please explain "If"? The question is: does* it use such simple
> logic? Do you know about it? That would be ridiculous IMO. If not, it
would
> be nice if someone could elaborate the logic/algorithm Gnome uses.
That's what hidpi displays are designed for. A 3200x1800 hidpi display
renders like 1600x900 but with everything sharper. What GNOME does is
trigger the hidpi mode if the display's dpi is over a threshold.
That's what the "if" means.
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
3:51 a.m.
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
@drago1 .. you have posted two confilcting statements.
Frist you stated that if *the vertical resolution* ... And you even wrote a
specific number (1440)
No I did not Florian did. And he meant "a high dpi display with a
vertical resolution of 1440" not "any display with a vertical
resolution of 1440"
Next you stated that if *the DPI* ...
.. there is no simple correlation between monitor resolution and DPI (as
monitors have different size).
Yes I know a hidpi display is one with ... a high dpi value ;)
What GNOME does is basically this: If the DPI (computed from screen
size *and* resolution) is bigger then 192 it will turn on hidpi
support which means
setting a scale factor of two.
So if you have 2560x1440 display with a size of 22 inch .. it won't do anything.
If you have a 2560x1440 display with a size of 12 inch ... it will
turn on hidpi scaling.
4:21 a.m.
"setting a scale factor of two" is a much too simple logic IMO. There
should be a number of scaling option (a logarithmic scale for this would
obvious).
Besides I am the user and I want controls (per monitor if there is more
than one) so that I can tune it to my taste, the quality of my monitor(s)
and the applications I use. It is OK that the desktop has a reasonable
default, of course, but user controls could be at least "very_small ..
small ..normal/default .. large ..very_large" for instance. System should
not take control(s) away from user.
I accept that there is an ongoing process, and it is not simple nor
trivial. Various mainstream Linux desktops should agree on a common
mechanism (so that it will work for KDE applications running in Gnome, for
instance). But that is of course also not easy. I don't think the
developers of different desktops communicate much and they use different
'abstraction layers' (various versions of qt and GTK as well as X11 versus
Wayland (soon)) for development.
-- Peter
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 10:51 AM, drago01 <drago01(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Peter Laursen
<jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> @drago1 .. you have posted two confilcting statements.
>
> Frist you stated that if *the vertical resolution* ... And you even
wrote a
> specific number (1440)
No I did not Florian did. And he meant "a high dpi display with a
vertical resolution of 1440" not "any display with a vertical
resolution of 1440"
> Next you stated that if *the DPI* ...
> .. there is no simple correlation between monitor resolution and DPI (as
> monitors have different size).
Yes I know a hidpi display is one with ... a high dpi value ;)
What GNOME does is basically this: If the DPI (computed from screen
size *and* resolution) is bigger then 192 it will turn on hidpi
support which means
setting a scale factor of two.
So if you have 2560x1440 display with a size of 22 inch .. it won't do
anything.
If you have a 2560x1440 display with a size of 12 inch ... it will
turn on hidpi scaling.
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
4:28 a.m.
controls (per monitor if there is more than one)
even better:
controls (per monitor if there is more than one and per application)
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
"setting a scale factor of two" is a much too simple logic
IMO. There
should be a number of scaling option (a logarithmic scale for this would
obvious).
Besides I am the user and I want controls (per monitor if there is more
than one) so that I can tune it to my taste, the quality of my monitor(s)
and the applications I use. It is OK that the desktop has a reasonable
default, of course, but user controls could be at least "very_small ..
small ..normal/default .. large ..very_large" for instance. System should
not take control(s) away from user.
I accept that there is an ongoing process, and it is not simple nor
trivial. Various mainstream Linux desktops should agree on a common
mechanism (so that it will work for KDE applications running in Gnome, for
instance). But that is of course also not easy. I don't think the
developers of different desktops communicate much and they use different
'abstraction layers' (various versions of qt and GTK as well as X11 versus
Wayland (soon)) for development.
-- Peter
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 10:51 AM, drago01 <drago01(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > @drago1 .. you have posted two confilcting statements.
> >
> > Frist you stated that if *the vertical resolution* ... And you even
> wrote a
> > specific number (1440)
>
> No I did not Florian did. And he meant "a high dpi display with a
> vertical resolution of 1440" not "any display with a vertical
> resolution of 1440"
>
> > Next you stated that if *the DPI* ...
> > .. there is no simple correlation between monitor resolution and DPI (as
> > monitors have different size).
>
> Yes I know a hidpi display is one with ... a high dpi value ;)
>
> What GNOME does is basically this: If the DPI (computed from screen
> size *and* resolution) is bigger then 192 it will turn on hidpi
> support which means
> setting a scale factor of two.
>
> So if you have 2560x1440 display with a size of 22 inch .. it won't do
> anything.
> If you have a 2560x1440 display with a size of 12 inch ... it will
> turn on hidpi scaling.
> --
> desktop mailing list
> desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
>
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
4:42 a.m.
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
"setting a scale factor of two" is a much too simple logic
IMO. There should
be a number of scaling option (a logarithmic scale for this would obvious).
A non integer scaling factor can't work, see
http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2013/06/28/hidpi-support-in-gnome/comment-pa...
for details.
Besides I am the user and I want controls
You can override the scaling factor using gnome-tweak-tool
(per monitor if there is more than
one)
That's not possible with X11. We will fix that with wayland though.
so that I can tune it to my taste, the quality of my monitor(s) and
the
applications I use. It is OK that the desktop has a reasonable default, of
course, but user controls could be at least "very_small .. small
..normal/default .. large ..very_large" for instance. System should not take
control(s) away from user.
No one is taking control away from you. I have no idea how you come to
that conclusion.
That being said most people don't want control but the system should
simply "just work", which is what we focus on i.e the system should
scale when its appropriate without having the user messing around with
settings.
I accept that there is an ongoing process, and it is not simple nor
trivial.
Various mainstream Linux desktops should agree on a common mechanism (so
that it will work for KDE applications running in Gnome, for instance).
For X11 there is no "common mechanism" GNOME exports the scaling
factor via xsettings, no idea how KDE handles that.
But
that is of course also not easy. I don't think the developers of different
desktops communicate much and they use different 'abstraction layers'
(various versions of qt and GTK as well as X11 versus Wayland (soon)) for
development.
On wayland the buffer scale is part of the protocol so it works for
all toolkits / applications.
5:01 a.m.
This problem reminds me of this:
A 12pt font should look useful everywhere
http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/14802.html
6:22 a.m.
Please see attached image. I think many people here may not know Win8 very
well.
This is the user control on a small 11" Win8 notebok (actually a tablet
with an optional keyboard with built-in touchpad), that I use for GPS
primarily. The physical resolution of the screen is 1920 horizontally. The
traditional desktop interface scales as default to 1280. Usable, but
everything is a little small though.
However you can actually increase (but not decrease) to 125, 150, 200, 300,
400 and 500% of default sizes as the image shows. This setting has effect
for the traditional desktop as such and all applications opening on it.
Additionally applications (including the desktop itself) can be scaled
individually with 'gesture' if they are built with the option (what few
applications for traditional desktop are. Also not Notepad as I wrote
before. But Explorer/Windows file manager is for instance).
This provides reasonable control, but Win8's interface is confusing
(settings are hidden behind a number of dialogs as often in Windows) and
complexity of the workings of multiple settings doing partially the same is
difficult to understand. And it also seems to have changed since I had this
machine 10 months ago (maybe when upgrading from Win8 to 8.1). I remember
it being otherwise and simpler, actually (I don't tweek it every week).
Some details may change again with Win10. It may also matter for some
details here that Win8 idetifies this machine as a 'tablet' - probably
because all that is not basic tablet hardware is attached with USB (not
using a standard USB jack - but 'device manager' reports them as attached
with USB, so they are!).
-- Peter
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Chris Murphy <lists(a)colorremedies.com>
wrote:
This problem reminds me of this:
A 12pt font should look useful everywhere
http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/14802.html
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
6:29 a.m.
@Chris .. very good link. Thanks!
-- Peter
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Please see attached image. I think many people here may not know
Win8
very well.
This is the user control on a small 11" Win8 notebok (actually a tablet
with an optional keyboard with built-in touchpad), that I use for GPS
primarily. The physical resolution of the screen is 1920 horizontally. The
traditional desktop interface scales as default to 1280. Usable, but
everything is a little small though.
However you can actually increase (but not decrease) to 125, 150, 200,
300, 400 and 500% of default sizes as the image shows. This setting has
effect for the traditional desktop as such and all applications opening on
it. Additionally applications (including the desktop itself) can be scaled
individually with 'gesture' if they are built with the option (what few
applications for traditional desktop are. Also not Notepad as I wrote
before. But Explorer/Windows file manager is for instance).
This provides reasonable control, but Win8's interface is confusing
(settings are hidden behind a number of dialogs as often in Windows) and
complexity of the workings of multiple settings doing partially the same is
difficult to understand. And it also seems to have changed since I had this
machine 10 months ago (maybe when upgrading from Win8 to 8.1). I remember
it being otherwise and simpler, actually (I don't tweek it every week).
Some details may change again with Win10. It may also matter for some
details here that Win8 idetifies this machine as a 'tablet' - probably
because all that is not basic tablet hardware is attached with USB (not
using a standard USB jack - but 'device manager' reports them as attached
with USB, so they are!).
-- Peter
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Chris Murphy <lists(a)colorremedies.com>
wrote:
> This problem reminds me of this:
>
> A 12pt font should look useful everywhere
> http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/14802.html
> --
> desktop mailing list
> desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
>
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
8:22 a.m.
Just one clarification: the reason for extensive references to Win8 is that
we are primarly discussing the Linux desktop on hardware designed for Win8
(and vice versa).
--Peter
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
@Chris .. very good link. Thanks!
-- Peter
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Please see attached image. I think many people here may not know Win8
> very well.
>
> This is the user control on a small 11" Win8 notebok (actually a tablet
> with an optional keyboard with built-in touchpad), that I use for GPS
> primarily. The physical resolution of the screen is 1920 horizontally. The
> traditional desktop interface scales as default to 1280. Usable, but
> everything is a little small though.
>
> However you can actually increase (but not decrease) to 125, 150, 200,
> 300, 400 and 500% of default sizes as the image shows. This setting has
> effect for the traditional desktop as such and all applications opening on
> it. Additionally applications (including the desktop itself) can be scaled
> individually with 'gesture' if they are built with the option (what few
> applications for traditional desktop are. Also not Notepad as I wrote
> before. But Explorer/Windows file manager is for instance).
>
> This provides reasonable control, but Win8's interface is confusing
> (settings are hidden behind a number of dialogs as often in Windows) and
> complexity of the workings of multiple settings doing partially the same is
> difficult to understand. And it also seems to have changed since I had this
> machine 10 months ago (maybe when upgrading from Win8 to 8.1). I remember
> it being otherwise and simpler, actually (I don't tweek it every week).
> Some details may change again with Win10. It may also matter for some
> details here that Win8 idetifies this machine as a 'tablet' - probably
> because all that is not basic tablet hardware is attached with USB (not
> using a standard USB jack - but 'device manager' reports them as attached
> with USB, so they are!).
>
>
> -- Peter
>
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Chris Murphy <lists(a)colorremedies.com>
> wrote:
>
>> This problem reminds me of this:
>>
>> A 12pt font should look useful everywhere
>> http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/14802.html
>> --
>> desktop mailing list
>> desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Hilsen / Regards
>
> Peter Laursen
>
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
5:23 a.m.
On 11.01.2015 11:42, drago01 wrote:
On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Peter Laursen
<jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> "setting a scale factor of two" is a much too simple logic IMO. There
should
> be a number of scaling option (a logarithmic scale for this would obvious).
A non integer scaling factor can't work, see
http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2013/06/28/hidpi-support-in-gnome/comment-pa...
for details.
Apple would agree with this:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8634895
but on the other hand Mozilla claims that non-integer scale factors
empirically work well for the web:
http://robert.ocallahan.org/2014/11/relax-scaling-user-interfaces-by-non....
is there something particular to HTML/CSS that makes this work better
for the web than desktop apps, or do web users have lower expectations
of rendering quality, or what?
5:48 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
On 11.01.2015 11:42, drago01 wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> "setting a scale factor of two" is a much too simple logic IMO. There
>> should
>> be a number of scaling option (a logarithmic scale for this would
>> obvious).
>
> A non integer scaling factor can't work, see
>
http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2013/06/28/hidpi-support-in-gnome/comment-pa...
> for details.
Apple would agree with this:
Well, Apple can afford it as they control both HW and SW and sells real HiDPI
displays...
Jaroslav
5:55 a.m.
On 2015-01-12 12:23, Michael Stahl wrote:
http://robert.ocallahan.org/2014/11/relax-scaling-user-interfaces-by-non....
is there something particular to HTML/CSS that makes this work better
for the web than desktop apps, or do web users have lower expectations
of rendering quality, or what?
The web has a concept of device pixels vs css pixels as well. It allows
for websites to look nice by default on hidpi screens.
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2012/08/20/towards-retina-web/
Zooming of websites is a nice bonus to have, but doesn't solve the same
problem.
- Andreas
6:08 a.m.
1)
Good point here "Apple can afford it as they control both HW and SW".
Let us take an example: say we have 14" and a 15" laptop with same physical
resolution. If the logic is simply to scale a factor 2 if DPI exceeds a
certain fixed threshold, it may happen that this threshold is exceeded on
the 14" screen and not on the 15" and icons, controls, text etc.will be
printed to the screen almost twice as big on the 14" screen as compared to
the 15". This makes little sense to me. The small one may have a better
quality monitor and could in some cases actually better be able to cope
with unscaled display than the bigger one. An one person may be able to
(and may prefer to) ane another person may not.
2)
"The web has a concept of device pixels vs css pixels as well". Does
anybody know how Chromebooks handle it? That could bring a new perspective
into discussion.
-- Peter
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Andreas Nilsson <lists(a)andreasn.se> wrote:
On 2015-01-12 12:23, Michael Stahl wrote:
> http://robert.ocallahan.org/2014/11/relax-scaling-user-
> interfaces-by-non.html is there something particular to HTML/CSS that
> makes this work better for the web than desktop apps, or do web users have
> lower expectations of rendering quality, or what?
>
The web has a concept of device pixels vs css pixels as well. It allows
for websites to look nice by default on hidpi screens.
http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2012/08/20/towards-retina-web/
Zooming of websites is a nice bonus to have, but doesn't solve the same
problem.
- Andreas
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
6:37 a.m.
A Microsoft resource
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/dn469266(v=vs.85)...
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/dn469266(v=vs.85)...
-- Peter
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
1)
Good point here "Apple can afford it as they control both HW and SW".
Let us take an example: say we have 14" and a 15" laptop with same
physical resolution. If the logic is simply to scale a factor 2 if DPI
exceeds a certain fixed threshold, it may happen that this threshold is
exceeded on the 14" screen and not on the 15" and icons, controls, text
etc.will be printed to the screen almost twice as big on the 14" screen as
compared to the 15". This makes little sense to me. The small one may
have a better quality monitor and could in some cases actually better be
able to cope with unscaled display than the bigger one. An one person may
be able to (and may prefer to) ane another person may not.
2)
"The web has a concept of device pixels vs css pixels as well". Does
anybody know how Chromebooks handle it? That could bring a new perspective
into discussion.
-- Peter
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Andreas Nilsson <lists(a)andreasn.se>
wrote:
> On 2015-01-12 12:23, Michael Stahl wrote:
>
>> http://robert.ocallahan.org/2014/11/relax-scaling-user-
>> interfaces-by-non.html is there something particular to HTML/CSS that
>> makes this work better for the web than desktop apps, or do web users have
>> lower expectations of rendering quality, or what?
>>
>
> The web has a concept of device pixels vs css pixels as well. It allows
> for websites to look nice by default on hidpi screens.
> http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2012/08/20/towards-retina-web/
> Zooming of websites is a nice bonus to have, but doesn't solve the same
> problem.
> - Andreas
>
> --
> desktop mailing list
> desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
>
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
7:02 a.m.
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
1)
Good point here "Apple can afford it as they control both HW and SW".
Let us take an example: say we have 14" and a 15" laptop with same physical
resolution. If the logic is simply to scale a factor 2 if DPI exceeds a
certain fixed threshold, it may happen that this threshold is exceeded on
the 14" screen and not on the 15" and icons, controls, text etc.will be
printed to the screen almost twice as big on the 14" screen as compared to
the 15". This makes little sense to me. The small one may have a better
quality monitor and could in some cases actually better be able to cope with
unscaled display than the bigger one. An one person may be able to (and may
prefer to) ane another person may not.
2)
"The web has a concept of device pixels vs css pixels as well". Does
anybody know how Chromebooks handle it? That could bring a new perspective
into discussion.
Which discussion actually? It is not clear to me what are you asking
here. You asked a question it got answered.
The other mails are basically
1) Don't take control away from the user --- no one is doing that
2) Give us a non integer scaling factor --- you have been told why it
is not feasible
3) Multimonitor --- as already stated this requires wayland and will
be hopefully done for F21
7:09 a.m.
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 2:02 PM, drago01 <drago01(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Peter Laursen
<jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 1)
> Good point here "Apple can afford it as they control both HW and SW".
>
> Let us take an example: say we have 14" and a 15" laptop with same
physical
> resolution. If the logic is simply to scale a factor 2 if DPI exceeds a
> certain fixed threshold, it may happen that this threshold is exceeded on
> the 14" screen and not on the 15" and icons, controls, text etc.will be
> printed to the screen almost twice as big on the 14" screen as compared to
> the 15". This makes little sense to me. The small one may have a better
> quality monitor and could in some cases actually better be able to cope with
> unscaled display than the bigger one. An one person may be able to (and may
> prefer to) ane another person may not.
>
>
> 2)
> "The web has a concept of device pixels vs css pixels as well". Does
> anybody know how Chromebooks handle it? That could bring a new perspective
> into discussion.
Which discussion actually? It is not clear to me what are you asking
here. You asked a question it got answered.
The other mails are basically
1) Don't take control away from the user --- no one is doing that
2) Give us a non integer scaling factor --- you have been told why it
is not feasible
3) Multimonitor --- as already stated this requires wayland and will
be hopefully done for F21
s/F21/F22/
7:09 a.m.
I don't agree with 2). And I am not the only onein this discussion as I
understand. If it is not feasible it is a limitation somewhere in toolkits
used. Windows handles it.
-- Peter
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 2:02 PM, drago01 <drago01(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Peter Laursen
<jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 1)
> Good point here "Apple can afford it as they control both HW and SW".
>
> Let us take an example: say we have 14" and a 15" laptop with same
physical
> resolution. If the logic is simply to scale a factor 2 if DPI exceeds a
> certain fixed threshold, it may happen that this threshold is exceeded on
> the 14" screen and not on the 15" and icons, controls, text etc.will be
> printed to the screen almost twice as big on the 14" screen as compared
to
> the 15". This makes little sense to me. The small one may have a better
> quality monitor and could in some cases actually better be able to cope
with
> unscaled display than the bigger one. An one person may be able to (and
may
> prefer to) ane another person may not.
>
>
> 2)
> "The web has a concept of device pixels vs css pixels as well". Does
> anybody know how Chromebooks handle it? That could bring a new
perspective
> into discussion.
Which discussion actually? It is not clear to me what are you asking
here. You asked a question it got answered.
The other mails are basically
1) Don't take control away from the user --- no one is doing that
2) Give us a non integer scaling factor --- you have been told why it
is not feasible
3) Multimonitor --- as already stated this requires wayland and will
be hopefully done for F21
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
--
Hilsen / Regards
Peter Laursen
7:07 a.m.
On 2015-01-12 13:08, Peter Laursen wrote:
2)
"The web has a concept of device pixels vs css pixels as well". Does
anybody know how Chromebooks handle it? That could bring a new
perspective into discussion.
Chrome OS scales only on a 2x multiplier as well.
http://sebastien-gabriel.com/designers-guide-to-dpi/ (scroll down to the
section Mac and Chrome PPI)
- Andreas
4:11 p.m.
On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 22:47:58 +0100
Peter Laursen <jazcyk(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I am in the process of buying a laptop for travel. it should be
13"-14". relatively small and lightweight - and still with *power*.
Cool. There's a number of these out now.
I came across:
https://www.mm-vision.dk/vision-b4385-baerbar-med-ips-panel. They
have the option to purchase with no OS installed (hooray!) and you
can choose between different CPUs, RAM configs and disk systems. It
is also not very expensive specs taken into consideration, really.
ok. I learned long ago when I got some no name brand laptop that the
quality really seems to be less on those. I'd advise looking for
reviews or the like to make sure this place is good quality. (I know
nothing about them personally).
But monitor is 3200x1800 pixels on a 13" monitor. And that is the
problem. This machine is designed for Win8, where the 'tiled
interface' is DPI-aware and will scale automatically. I plan to
install a dual-boot of Win7 and Linux (SuSE or Fedora), and they will
both be completely hopeless to use on this system as everything
(icons, controls) will be extremely small in almost every interface
and application.
You are saying that as a statement. It's incorrect based on what I can
see.
I use both Xfce and gnome on my yogo 2 pro which I have had for about
18 months now with that exact screen.
gnome handles things pretty much without having to mess with it much at
all.
With Xfce, you have to go to 'settings -> appearance -> fonts' and set
the dpi up from 96. I use 192. That also doesn't do things fully right.
It sometimes starts apps on login before it makes the dpi change and
you have to restart them, or sometimes window title fonts or the like
have to be adjusted in size. Overall however it works just fine.
I don't know about KDE.
Overall, we can always improve, but hidpi screens are completely usable
now under linux (and have been for a long while).
kevin
3:49 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
With Xfce, you have to go to 'settings -> appearance ->
fonts' and set
the dpi up from 96. I use 192. That also doesn't do things fully right.
It sometimes starts apps on login before it makes the dpi change and
you have to restart them, or sometimes window title fonts or the like
have to be adjusted in size. Overall however it works just fine.
I don't know about KDE.
In KDE, the same is possible 'System Settings -> Appearance -> Fonts' and
'Force Fonts DPI'. Other place to make the experience better is to set
icons size and then various tweaking of decorations sizes etc. So it can
be tuned up but it's still not yet there. On the other hand, this way it's
possible to get working set up where GNOME x2 way is not usable at all -
on semi HiDPI displays like Carbon X1 has and if you add combination of
this semi HiDPI with non HiDPI external displays... Welcome hell. After
some tweaking I was able to find Fonts DPI value + all other values I
mentioned to not to have everything too small on X1 and not to have it
too big on external LCDs.
But there's bright future - Plasma 5 is designed to work with HiDPI
and there's also promise to work on HiDPI/no HiDPI support. On the other
hand pure Qt choose to go with simple x2 as Gtk (at least for now, I know
initial patches supported non-integer scale factor).
Overall, we can always improve, but hidpi screens are completely
usable
now under linux (and have been for a long while).
So in the end, my combo of Plasma 5 and custom tweaks means I have pretty
usable setup but it is still very hackish unless you have a real HiDPI
LCD (and no combo of HiDPI/non HiDPI displays).
And then switch to console (with defaults ;-).
Jaroslav
kevin
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
4:45 a.m.
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Jaroslav Reznik <jreznik(a)redhat.com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> With Xfce, you have to go to 'settings -> appearance -> fonts' and set
> the dpi up from 96. I use 192. That also doesn't do things fully right.
> It sometimes starts apps on login before it makes the dpi change and
> you have to restart them, or sometimes window title fonts or the like
> have to be adjusted in size. Overall however it works just fine.
>
> I don't know about KDE.
In KDE, the same is possible 'System Settings -> Appearance -> Fonts' and
'Force Fonts DPI'. Other place to make the experience better is to set
icons size and then various tweaking of decorations sizes etc. So it can
be tuned up but it's still not yet there. On the other hand, this way it's
possible to get working set up where GNOME x2 way is not usable at all -
on semi HiDPI displays like Carbon X1 has and if you add combination of
this semi HiDPI with non HiDPI external displays... Welcome hell. After
some tweaking I was able to find Fonts DPI value + all other values I
mentioned to not to have everything too small on X1 and not to have it
too big on external LCDs.
That (mutli monitor mixed dpi) is not a GNOME nor KDE limitation but
X11 ... wayland will allow us to solve that ;)
5:45 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Jaroslav Reznik
<jreznik(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> With Xfce, you have to go to 'settings -> appearance -> fonts' and
set
>> the dpi up from 96. I use 192. That also doesn't do things fully right.
>> It sometimes starts apps on login before it makes the dpi change and
>> you have to restart them, or sometimes window title fonts or the like
>> have to be adjusted in size. Overall however it works just fine.
>>
>> I don't know about KDE.
>
> In KDE, the same is possible 'System Settings -> Appearance -> Fonts'
and
> 'Force Fonts DPI'. Other place to make the experience better is to set
> icons size and then various tweaking of decorations sizes etc. So it can
> be tuned up but it's still not yet there. On the other hand, this way it's
> possible to get working set up where GNOME x2 way is not usable at all -
> on semi HiDPI displays like Carbon X1 has and if you add combination of
> this semi HiDPI with non HiDPI external displays... Welcome hell. After
> some tweaking I was able to find Fonts DPI value + all other values I
> mentioned to not to have everything too small on X1 and not to have it
> too big on external LCDs.
That (mutli monitor mixed dpi) is not a GNOME nor KDE limitation but
X11 ... wayland will allow us to solve that ;)
Yeah, I know. Although seems like integer scaling factor is being planned
there too.
One hint - https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/autohidpi/ for
Firefox.
Jaroslav
--
desktop mailing list
desktop(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
3392
days inactive
3396
days old
desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org
40 comments
11 participants
participants (11)
-
Andreas Nilsson -
Chris Murphy -
drago01 -
Florian Weimer -
Jaroslav Reznik -
Jiri Eischmann -
Josh Boyer -
Kevin Fenzi -
Michael Stahl -
Peter Hutterer -
Peter Laursen