Grrrrrr.... WB config won't fit 800x600

gardenerstouch

Join Date 02/2005

Grrrrrr.... WB config won't fit 800x600

This is really a feature request. There are those of us out here that require a larger screen resolution due to poor eyesight. Many of the programs in Windows still have hardwired text that were really designed for 800 x 600 screen resolutions. At 1024 x 768 I have a often resorted to the use of a magnifying lens to read the fine print. I tried using 1024 x 768 with the DPI increased 105% of normal, but some skins do not take this very well. Today I went back to 800x600 screen resolution both to save my eyesight and prevent DPI distortions. Now I find that at this resolution, Window Blinds Configuration will not fit on the screen.

Please, please reduce the size of the configuration window! Thank you.

windowblinds

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

[quote]

I'd bet that less than 5% of WB clients use 800x600.

[Snip...]

I would bet FAR LESS than 5 percent. 800x600 resolution is obsolete these days... the harsh reality is, if programs aren't working for you at that res, it's time for you to upgrade, not for developers to step backwards.. [Snip...]

Whether or not the percentage is 2%, 4%, 5%, or whatever is irrelevant to someone who has a device (like me...) that has 800x600 or 800x480 resolution, either the app that I want to use works or it doesn't....

For better or worse, there are quite a few very small, very portable devices that run XP or Vista, that are on the market now with this 'obselete resolution':

- Advent U1a

- AgoPC ago 7

- Amtek T700

- ASUS R2E

- ASUS eee PC

- HTC Shift

- OQO 02

- PaceBlade Easybook

- Raon Everun

- Samsung Q1

- TabletKiosk EO

There are more, but you get the idea....

Successfully updated karma reason!

For better or worse, there are quite a few very small, very portable devices that run XP or Vista, that are on the market now with this 'obselete resolution':

While there may be 'quite a few' machines that are small and run xp or vista, that doesn't change the fact that probably less than 5 percent of all computers are running those resolutions. I doubt those machines make up a fraction of a percent of all the computers on peoples desks. The vast majority of people have 'normal' computers. Not itty bitty portable ones.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Phoon

Join Date 10/2001

+382

you don't HAVE to use the wbconfig tool to apply a windowblind do you? Can't you still select one from the appearance tab of display properties?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Sign Up or Login and this ad disappears!
There are many great features available to you once you register. Sign Up for a free account and browse the forums without ads.

Did you check system requirements for WindowBlinds?

System Requirements from StarDock web site:

* Windows Vista (32-bit) and Windows XP/2003 (Starting with WindowBlinds 5.5)
Windows 2000, ME, 98 users can use WindowBlinds Classic (v4.6).
* 1GHz or faster processor recommended
* 60MB free drive space
* 256MB RAM
* Note: A 16MB DirectX 8 or later compatible video card with appropriate driver support is required for per-pixel alpha-blended skins. Some integrated graphics solutions and lower-end cards from before 2004 may not be able to use per-pixel skins.
* Languages Supported:
Azerbaijani, Danish, Dutch, English, Finnish, French,
German, Hungarian, Japanese, Korean, Norwegian, Polish,
Portuguese - BR, Russian, Spanish, Serbian (Srpski), Swedish, Turkish
Note: The interface has been localized for these languages, but the documentation and help (where available) will be in English.
* 1024x768 minimum supported display resolution.

Successfully updated karma reason!

I got a 22" Samsung from Walmart for $189. How much cheaper do they need to be....

Successfully updated karma reason!

One more note. Can't we compare this to a high end video game, and a user with a lousy on board video card? Would the programmers be expected to make the graphics of the game crappy to accommodate the one guy with the lousy video card? No. If the guy wants to play the game, he needs to go out and buy a new video card.

That kind of attitude ticks me off. Not everyone can afford to spend money on new hardware on a whim. I myself am one of those unfortunates. I hate when people tell me to "just buy new hardware", and I hate that games just keep cranking up the system requirements with no regard to those with lower-end systems. Of course, progress is progress, but it's not all that great if only 10% of people have the hardware strong enough to play your game! Top-of-the-line hardware is bloody expensive!

Have you ever seen the first episode of 30 Days, by Morgan Spurlock? He and his girlfriend attempt to live on minimum wage. Morgan gets two full-time jobs, and his girlfriend gets one job, and it still is barely enough to get by! So this guy, living with, as he himself said, poverty income... it would be a very very very long time before he could afford getting a new monitor, if that time were to even ever come!

Now that I'm done ranting, I'll suggest a solution: One can indeed change WindowBlinds settings from the Appearance tab of the Display Properties, and it will suffice for most tasks. That dialog fits on an 800x600 screen. Is it possible for the remaining tasks that can't be performed with Display Properties to be added in there?

Successfully updated karma reason!

Bravo!

Successfully updated karma reason!

I hate that games just keep cranking up the system requirements with no regard to those with lower-end systems.

Does that mean those cutting edge games should not be developed?

I know some will say it is different, but let me try some analogies.

- Should there be no HD programs on TV because not everyone can afford an HD TV?
- Should there be no computers because poor people in the third world cannot afford them? They hate your computer!

That top 10% may be the ones who are willing to pay premium for those games

Successfully updated karma reason!

Only 10%? I can honestly say that I don't personally know 1 person that still uses an 800X600 desktop. And a $189 dollar monitor is hardly "top of the line". Much less the $129 nVidia 8500GT I bought on sale. WB wasn't designed to fit that resolution, plain and simple. Look at #29. It tells you in system requirements what the min resolution is.

And if only 10% of people use better hardware, then what sense would it make for companies to put out software for only that 10%???

The reality of it is, computer hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper everyday. It's easier for people to afford better graphics cards, monitors, even new PCs. You don't have to spend a fortune to upgrade your system ya know.....

Successfully updated karma reason!

The simple fact of the matter is, WB was made as a desktop improvement, it's not made for people with horribly bad eyesight.

If your eyesight is that bad anyway, I'd personally stick to your main programs and not try to run something with blurring, shading, transparencies.

It would make your eyesight worse.

Successfully updated karma reason!

That kind of attitude ticks me off. Not everyone can afford to spend money on new hardware on a whim.

then you live without it! You don't demand that it be made accessible to you. It's that simple. The attitude of "I deserve everything everyone else has even if I can't afford it" ticks ME off.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Lantec

Join Date 07/2003

+346

I have to agree........if your eyesight is so bad that you can ONLY get by at 800x600 then what the hell do you need Windowblinds for anyway. The program is after all visual eye candy.

I'm not a great believer in the ADA. I believe in access when it makes sense but not in EVERY case. I have a client who wanted to build a Karate Dojo on a very small lot and very tight budget. The ADA REQUIRED that he provide a elevator ($35,000) or chair lift ($13,000) to the exercise area on the second floor. I'm sorry, but if you can't manage stairs you shouldn't be taking karate......

edit: man, I can be a vicious bastard sometimes.......

Successfully updated karma reason!

I'm sorry, but my eyesight isn't an ADA issue. My eyesight problems are the result of a combination of a strong correction for myopia (which causes the image that meets the eye to be smaller than it would be if my eyes were normal) and the fact that I am over 45 and can no longer focus my eyes on small print anymore. This is a problem that everyone of you, if you live long enough, will have to deal with eventually. I can pass any eyesight test required for driving and can read the second to the bottom line on the opthalmologist's chart. I can see well enough to enjoy (in sharp focus as long as it's beyond arms reach) the beauties of the world around me... and by implication enjoy "eyecandy" on my computer. I never said that I could only get along at 800x600. I said that whenever text hardcoded for 800x600 apppears on my 1024x768 screen, I had to use a magnifier to read it. To avoid that, I had to increase the DPI by at least 105%, which in some of my favorite skins, caused unacceptable distortions.

I did some shopping around, and every one of the half dozen 22" monitors I could get the specs for supports 800x600 resolutions. And that also turned out to be true of the video cards that I checked out as well. All I'm asking is that Stardock support the existing technology.

By the way, I do support the ADA, but I don't support the way it has been enforced.

Successfully updated karma reason!

As an addendum to my previous points and the points made by others on my behalf... Startdock makes a program that enhances the operating system of a computer. By implication it should, by rights, support to a reasonable degree, all the resolutions the OS supports. I recognize that should I want to run programs that are are on the bleeding edge of technology, that it isn't MS's or Startdock's responsiblitity to buy me the upgrades to run them. Since what Stardock is doing is enhancing the OS that MS built, along with the claim that they are speeding up the display of the OS with a more efficient and therefore less demanding display engine, then I expect that they support, at a minimum, what MS supports. My system exceeds the recommended specs suggested by MS for the efficent and proper functioning of Windows. I expect StartDock to do the same.

According to MS.... Recomended System Requirements (emphasis mine):

- PC with 300Mhz or higher processor clock speed.
- 128 mb RAM or higher.
- 1.5 gb available disk space.
- Super VGA (800x600)or higher resolution video adapter and monitor.
- CD-ROM or DVD drive,
- Keyboard, mouse, or other compatable pointing device.

My own system:

MSI KM4M-v mainboard, AMD Athlon 3000+ CPU 256mb L1 cache 512mb L2 cache, 1.5gb 333 mhz DDR RAM, Biostar Nvidia 6800 XE 256mb DDR RAM 8x AGP video card, Creative Audigy SE Audio card, USR Performance Pro Modem V92 56 kbs modem, 17" Viewsonic CRT Monitor

Successfully updated karma reason!