Glen,
Just to add to whats already been said...
Your app can run at full screen mode or in a window.
Your app can resize and reposition the controls as the window is resized.
(using very simple commands inside a resizestack handler), so instead of
worrying about monitor size, you can make it
I ran into this too concerning the "effective" keyword. The dictionary says,
"Adding the effective adjective to either form returns the area of the screen
the application has to itself. In particular, if the keyboard is activated, it
take into account if the keyboard is taking up space on the s
is
>
>
>
> On 6/6/19 6:47 AM, Glen Bojsza via use-livecode wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I was looking for input on the following design questions...I haven't
> done
> > anything for years so I am looking for other developers' experiences.
> >
>
put on the following design questions...I haven't done
anything for years so I am looking for other developers' experiences.
1. what would be considered the smallest stack size for a desktop app?
2. Does the above fill most of the screens in use today ...ie what is the
noraml or considered
mand of the customer.
;)
Matthias
> Am 06.06.2019 um 15:47 schrieb Glen Bojsza via use-livecode
> mailto:use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>>:
>
> Hello,
>
> I was looking for input on the following design questions...I haven't done
> anything for years so I am lookin
I deploy (fancy word saying I have a load of ancient Pentiums . . .)
some machines
in my school hooked up to flat-screens with a Max Res of 1024 by 780. I
mean,
at $10 a pop those monitors were impossible to resist!
I make my EFL (English as a Fried Language) standalones to a "standard"
of 102
Here's a silly thought that may help a bit . . .
http://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=32683
Richmond.
On 6.06.19 16:47, Glen Bojsza via use-livecode wrote:
Hello,
I was looking for input on the following design questions...I haven't done
anything for years so I am loo
We use a height of 728—that’s in compensation for a variety of issues—some
laptops have very small screens:
LC window title bar (can be hidden by LC if necessary)
Windows Task bar (can be hidden by LC if necessary)
You can get the height of the screen:
(item 4 of the working screenRect) - (item
NP. BTW what I do for functionality that exists in both buttons and menus is,
barring the handlers being in a library or behavior, I simply send mouseUp from
the menu script to the button with the pertinent handlers. It's easier to edit
the script of a button than it is to pull up the Menu Build
Bob, thanks for the info...I will start with 1024x768 as a minimal screen
resolution for now and see what happens. As for the combo of menus and
buttons I will try to find if there is a benefit of both and also usability
space within the app.
My target platforms are Windows 10 and OS X 10.X
Glen
The smallerst monitor I know of is 640x480. That is tiny. Many developers
require a minimal size monitor to function correctly. Our ERP system specifies
a minimum of 1024x768.
As far as scrolling, I suppose it depends on the app. Take Facebook for
example. It depends on scrolling. You couldn't
Hello,
I was looking for input on the following design questions...I haven't done
anything for years so I am looking for other developers' experiences.
1. what would be considered the smallest stack size for a desktop app?
2. Does the above fill most of the screens in use today ...
12 matches
Mail list logo
