11-18-2022, 06:37 PM
(11-18-2022, 05:50 PM)Coolman Wrote: the problem should be fixed in the source code, not fixing it exposes to future problems. the link you provided is interesting because it confirms that it happens with other commands than _DESKTOPWIDTH and _DESKTOPHEIGHT...The "problem" really is that people want to use budget laptops and high-end gaming computers, and everything else in between. For Windows, there was a nice, easy solution provided by the makers of OS. But for Linux...
I'm not saying you are wrong or anybody else trying QB64(PE) and dealing with inconsistent behavior, and desiring the same thing on Linux or MacOS that was experienced on Windows. But right now this issue has to do with how the OS is designed. ApCo and M$ have to get it right, at any cost (including spying on neighbors) and it must be snappy, because they have to make money out of it, it's part of the "American Dream." I don't like this "inequality" between Windows and Linux, but it doesn't bother me.
You said you use KDE Neon right? But what about someone who has a different desktop/window manager? Say GNOME, or Cinnamon, or that Awesome WM that I should like because I could fix things up with Lua?
Anyway this "problem" is insignificant for somebody who only cares about putting an integer 13 or less right after "SCREEN" to get a graphics screen. Ho ho do a "SCREEN 13" on one of today's viewports. "But that's all?" or "What the fork it's too small!" or some other interjection is always an interesting reaction. It comes from people who have never seen an AT&T terminal before Mr. Torvalds gave the world an incredible gift.
Yeah just use a number with "SCREEN" instead of "_NEWIMAGE()" then. Things are different when somebody wants 1920x1020 or something like that, or much larger, then complains the text is "too tiny." This "problem" is going to remain until more people move on to the super-large screens and computers that right now cost USD2000. Very unlikely that's going to happen. Also you have to think about users on older versions of Windows which are 32-bit, and are also running 16-bit software they're not interested in giving up only for any small fix they might not be interested in.
How long does it take you to log in? I mean, after you give your username and password, then confirm, then you see the desktop? For me on Ubuntu Studio, with the 10-year-old portable computer with slow HDD that I have it took a good deal of a minute. I soon got tired of "Ubuntu Studio" written in large letters and the gear that wasn't even spinning all the time I was waiting for it to load. Sometime later I put in Manjaro KDE. That took about half the time but still, it was ten seconds or so. How long did I have to wait until Solus MATE desktop, or Manjaro MATE desktop? Almost 30 seconds for some reason, from that HDD.
Therefore I don't mind waiting a few seconds until any dialog pops up out of this programming system. Because before QB64PE v3.4.0 it was either "xmessage" or "do-it-yourself"...