On Sunday 23 January 2005 16:44, Offer Kaye wrote: > I don't (well, except for games and that's a different story) prefer > Windows, I prefer Linux.
This should be the beginning of your first mail :-)
Seems like many people got defensive because somebody
hinted Linux may have limitations or (God forbid) bugs.
Let me remind my dear mailling list fellows that Linux
(and Unix for that matter) always contained a BUGS section
in their manual pages -- This is to our credit to confront
limitation and not hide behind irrelevant curtains.
My few cents:
1. Only one mail (Matan?) mentioned that X protocol does
not support changing color-depth on the fly (Thanks,
I didn't know this).
2. Since on-the-fly change was not the most important
request -- you settled for a GUI color-depth setup.
Few distro specific tools where mentioned.
An example from Fedora:
"Main Menu/System Settings/Display".
3. One user interface design problem was that KDE desktop
configuration tool (desktop right click) gave the
dynamic RANDR options (size, refresh rate etc.) without
hinting about the static color-depth option.
4. While Ira had a valid technical point about the
separation between system settings (/etc/X11 files)
and user desktop settings (RANDR dynamic behavior),
It is still a UI design bug from the user POV.
[and I don't have a clean solution -- having desktops
messing with X11 config isn't my wet dream]
Question: anybody knows why (and how) RANDR made screen-size
and refresh-rate dynamic (after all X apps had them
static for ages) and why color-depth didn't make
it to the list of dynamic parameters?
[Please save me the "I never change..." because I
really never changed my refresh-rate either. I am
looking for technical knowledge not political one]
--
Oron Peled Voice/Fax: +972-4-8228492
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.actcom.co.il/~oron
ICQ UIN: 16527398
"In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice,
there is."
-- Yogi Berra
pgptb5IMNEGli.pgp
Description: PGP signature
