I would say the scrollpane would be the best here. People using normal resolutions of 1024x768 or higher will not see it and people using abnormal development resolutions like 800x600 would see it but that is a tiny minority (I would guess).
There should not be time wasted trying to get all windows to work with 800x600 for so few people when a scrollpane will do them fine and not affect others with higher resolutions. I'm sure the JetBrains guys have a minimum resolution that all windows should work with and I would guess it is 1024x768 (which to me is a very reasonable choice considering the target audience - I use 1600x1200 so I am not saying this because it is my resolution). Of course supporting lower resolutions with scrollpanes is nice but no extra effort should go into it IMHO. Pete Gordon Tyler wrote: > "Carlos Costa e Silva" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > adipsv$66i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:adipsv$66i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > >>I disagree. I hate it when a property dialog like idea "IDE Options" >>occupies all the screen real estate and can't be resized to show other >>windows at the same time. >> > > Agreed. But that just means the current design of the dialogs do not take > smaller screens into account. Like the use of multiple group boxes on one > page; these can be split into tabs or separate pages. Admittedly, not in all > cases but definitely some pages like Editor which has 7 group boxes, some of > which could be split into sub-pages (in the treeview) or into tabs on the > Editor page. > > >>What tweak? >> > > As I described above. It's more than a tweak though. > > >>More scrollpanes or more entries in the list at the left? >> > > More entries in the list may make sense for certain pages and not for > others. It needs to be decided on a case-by-case basis. > > >>Then each panel will have far fewer fields. >>Then the 99.9% of users that have screens with more than 800x600 will have >>to use lots of entries and each one will have half the screen space >> > wasted! > > But you say in the next paragraph that you want the dialog to take up less > screen space so that you could see other windows? > > >>There's no way - without a LOT of work (multiple dialog designs for the >> > each > >>screen size) - of having the UI fit all screen sizes. >> > > Not different designs for different screen sizes. Just one better design > that will fit all screen sizes. > > >>Either you design to a small screen and there's a lot of wasted space on >>bigger screens or the inverse. >> > > I would prefer wasted space on a bigger screen because it's just a > preferences dialog. It's not something that you use 8 hours a day. > > >>It's possible to have frames/dialogs with everything inside a scrollpane >> > and > >>with a little care in the desing/programming the scrollbars dont appear >> > when > >>the frmae/dialog is shown (if theres enough screen real estate:). >> > > If the scrollpane route absolutely has to be taken because there is no other > alternative (and I believe there is) then what you propose here would be > acceptable. If I don't see scrollpanes, I'll be happy. > > Ciao, > Gordon > > > > _______________________________________________ Eap-bugs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.jetbrains.com/mailman/listinfo/eap-bugs
