gnubg vs. snowie
Scott Steiner
I have a question for people who have experience with both gnubg and
snowie: regarding the _features_ that the software has to offer, what
would you say are the differences between the two (if any, I don't know
since I'm not familiar with snowie)? What features does one program
offer that the other doesn't and vice versa.
thx
--
Email replies to following address: bpp at chello dot at
amni
Also, I miss *permanent* additional info like PIP-COUNT or
instruction COMMENTS.
Also, the board of my installed GNU is terribly small, at most 40 percents
of the screen. Also, their fonts are terribly tiny.
So, my eyes are tearing and my back is in pain
after playing more that an hour with my installed GNU.
I prefer to play against GNU in GamesGrid which has much better
grapical interface.
The best graphical interface is in JellyFish. Much better than
SNOWIE. GamesGrid graphical interface is the second best
after JellyFish.
JellyFish board is 90 percents of the screen,
and all the fonts are *big*. You may enjoy long playing ssessions
only is you don't strain your eyes and muscles.
It is a pity that GNU didn't considered the seriously
the graphic interface of their product.
It seems that this problem is much easier than the
complicated algotithms involved with the "playing engine".
Scott Steiner <nos...@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:<3D77B5AF...@nospam.nospam>...
Gregg Cattanach
scale up to a larger side as the window gets bigger.
Gregg
"amni" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3504803.02090...@posting.google.com...
Back4U2 BBL
"amni" wrote in message
news:e3504803.02090...@posting.google.com...
> It is a *torture* to move the pieces in my installed GNU.
Left click a checker: will move the pips of left die.
Click second: moves the pips of right die.
Right click on dice: switches them.
Not that hard?
You can - if you want - always have the higher die on the left
(Settings - Appearance (general tab))
> Also, I miss *permanent* additional info like PIP-COUNT or
You don't have a 'permanent' pipcount on real boards either, though it would
be a nice add-on to GNUBg seeing it.
Yet: Analyse - Pipcount shows the pipcount in the status line.
> instruction COMMENTS.
I don't know what you 'miss' here....
Analyse - Hint (or Ctrl + H) is a really nice feature.... always. Before you
roll (cube actions), after you roll and before you move (best play?), after
your move to check out if you played 'the best'.
And you tried Tutor Mode ?
Settings - Options. Check the Tutor mode.
> Also, the board of my installed GNU is terribly small, at most 40 percents
> of the screen. Also, their fonts are terribly tiny.
> So, my eyes are tearing and my back is in pain
> after playing more that an hour with my installed GNU.
Change the size of the window :-)
Settings - Appearance lets you 'build' the board you want with the colors
you like.
And the next time you open GNUBg, it will 'pop up' the way you like it.
You can pick another theme if you think of 'peeping my eyes out' fonts.
> It is a pity that GNU didn't considered the seriously
> the graphic interface of their product.
AFAIK, GTK is one of the best Graphical User Interfaces....
but: I can be wrong
Oh.... one more thing:
*before* exiting GNUBg.... if you want to keep it the way you changed it:
Settings - Save Settings
...
or you will have to start changing all over.
Louis Nardy Pillards
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.385 / Virus Database: 217 - Release Date: 4/09/2002
Kees van den Doel
amni <am...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Also, the board of my installed GNU is terribly small, at most 40 percents
>of the screen. Also, their fonts are terribly tiny.
>So, my eyes are tearing and my back is in pain
>after playing more that an hour with my installed GNU.
You can adjust the fonts in gnubg.gtkrc. In the themes/ folder you can
find examples.
I also wish the area of the main window was utilized better. A huge area
under the board is wasted. On a small screen the board is tiny even when
the window is maxed.
Kees (I canceled their sheep, that great I accept, continue.)
amni
never got the board bigger than *40 percent* of the screen.
Best results are in screen resolution >> 800x600 pixels, but it is still
below 40 percents (and my screen becomes fuzzy or flickers a bit
if the resolution is > 800x600).
"Gregg Cattanach" <gcattana...@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:<iR%d9.3292$sm2.93...@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com>...
Gregg Cattanach
cursor over the bottom right corner of the window, and the cursor should
change to a diagonal double arrow pointing NE-SW. Now click and drag down
and to the right; the entire window gets bigger and so does the board.
Alternately, you can maximize the window. with the square box at the top
right of the title bar.
amni
One may learn to walk on his hands and feet up, but it is not very
convinient.
I didn't ask how to move pieces in GNU, I claimed it is complicated.
Again, the most convinient way to move pieces is the options which
JellyFish offers, and the second best way to move pieces is in the
interface of GamesGrid (which is much like JellyFish).
You don't have to *think* about what is "on the left dice" or
"on right dice" you have only to see what is the roll (just the
two numbers).
The tutor mode is for beginners. I don't want be warned *before* my
moves
because this way I'll never learn (by suffering from my mistakes).
What I need is a short "evaluation comment" after my move done,
possibly with the option for detailed analysis if I see this comment
interesting. I cannot open the menue after each move, I play
at least 2 hours a day and openning menue each move will
take me 20 hours a day for the same number of games; besides it is
boring
to open menu if at most 10 percent of the moves are of crucial
importance.
I complained about the *size* of the board not about the colors
(which I can set). Size of 40 percents of the screen is a very poor
graphic design decision. 80 percent at least is reasonable.
Also the fonts are tiny, and I have to put my nose close to the
screen to see what is written.
"Back4U2 BBL" <nardy.p...@skynet.be> wrote in message news:<3d78beea$0$198$ba62...@news.skynet.be>...
Amy Snelgrove
With Snowie there is an option to help the person who would like to learn
the "correct plays". I have been using this option ever since I read an
article written by Oliver Heuler. You can read it on
http://www.bgsnowie.com/backgammon/articles.dhtml. It explains it much
better than I would ever be able to. And the good news is it doesn't warn
you before your move but tells you just how stupid you are after you have
made the play. :-)
Also, I don't know gamesgrid but I play on TrueMoneygames and think it is
pretty good for graphics and from what I hear Snowie 4 is going to have the
same graphics.
I actually think that GNU is an excellent product for what it is....FREE :-)
I think the team worked really hard and came up with a pretty good
alternative to Snowie or Jellyfish.
"amni" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3504803.0209...@posting.google.com...
WILLIAM WOMACK
easy movement.
Also, remember you are comparing free software to $400 software, given every
thing I have read about snowie I'll stick with free even with the minor
annoyances.
"amni" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3504803.02090...@posting.google.com...
amni
menu.
Changing fonts in the GTK needs programming skill.
kvan...@xs4all.nl (Kees van den Doel) wrote in message news:<3d78ee48$0$12353$e4fe...@dreader3.news.xs4all.nl>...
Kees van den Doel
amni <am...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Also the fonts are tiny, and I have to put my nose close to the
>screen to see what is written.
For this you can buy special spectacles with built-in magnifying
glasses, look on the GNU website.
For the headache the GUI gives you you can take aspirin or tylenol. If
that doesn't help maybe your doctor can prescribe something stronger for
you.
Kees (Article: 261325 of unemployment and generate a wonderful
programming to understand???)
Kees van den Doel
>I use the WINDOWS (like most users) and cannot change the font size in
>the menu. Changing fonts in the GTK needs programming skill.
No, all you need to be able to do is read and type.
If that's too much GNUBG is probably not for you yet (remember it is not
finished).
Kees (Article of data, and only eight decimal places in Asia; unto
Jacob.)
amni
percent of the screen. By draging, the window size is never more than
the the screen size,
and the board is never more than 40 percent of the window.
amni
"Gregg Cattanach" <gcattana...@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:<XC7e9.168$HR4.6...@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com>...
amni
Good graphic has a crucial effect on the play enjoyment:
people can buy $5 chinese board (including dice),
but prefere to buy $50 delux board to enjoy better the game.
"WILLIAM WOMACK" <wr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:<xNae9.1883$1C2.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
Kees van den Doel
>I have done all these things, and the board is still at most 40
>percent of the screen. By draging, the window size is never more than
>the the screen size,
>and the board is never more than 40 percent of the window.
It depends on your resolution. On a 640 X 480 screen the board is
actually only 22% of the main window when maximized.
This is the reason a relative of mine play JF instead of GNUBG: his
monitor is small and the computer old and the board is never more than
40 percent of the window.
Kees (Does GNU requires a three-year re-examination of deed dat kader
toch is enormous plastic tubes die batmobyl weet Jezus-urine
expert bijvoorbeeld zijn je-weet-wel?)
Kees van den Doel
>Graphic design is simple enough to be done *well* even in freeware.
>Good graphic has a crucial effect on the play enjoyment:
>people can buy $5 chinese board (including dice),
>but prefere to buy $50 delux board to enjoy better the game.
Good point.
I play GNUBG usually on www.gamesite2000.com (a bot "based" on GNUBG but
close enough) rather than through the GNUBG GUI because of the pretty 3D
board they have there. I am happy to pay $00.14/day for their GUI. I
then analyse the game in GNUBG.
Still, on my 1600X1200 resolution GNUBG looks pretty enough that I play
it the occasional game...
Kees (There's been addressed yet full and Ham, after me say ye silent.)
cubist
"This is not a release. The intention of making this binary
distribution is mostly to get feedback and bug reports from users. If
you like complaining about the state of this software and don't like
reporting bugs, don't even bother to download"
am...@hotmail.com (amni) wrote in message news:<e3504803.02090...@posting.google.com>...
Scott Steiner
>
> Hi
>
> One may learn to walk on his hands and feet up, but it is not very
> convinient.
> I didn't ask how to move pieces in GNU, I claimed it is complicated.
> Again, the most convinient way to move pieces is the options which
> JellyFish offers, and the second best way to move pieces is in the
> interface of GamesGrid (which is much like JellyFish).
> You don't have to *think* about what is "on the left dice" or
> "on right dice" you have only to see what is the roll (just the
> two numbers).
Hi amni,
having read your posts I don't really see your criticism concerning
moving checkers in gnubg. I have freeware Jellyfish and gnubg and both
provide the same features on the topic of moving checkers. You can drag
and drop in both, you can move with one mouse button only in both and
you can move with two mouse buttons in both. I would say that gnubg is
even better because it gives you the option to sort the dice after you
roll them which Jellyfish doesn't since JF always displays the larger
one first. Maybe I'm missing something here but I would like to
understand what you mean.
Derek Ray
am...@hotmail.com (amni) mumbled something about:
>I have done all these things, and the board is still at most 40
>percent of the screen. By draging, the window size is never more than
>the the screen size,
>and the board is never more than 40 percent of the window.
No, you haven't.
If you resize the window, the board grows along with the window. If you
maximise the window, the board also grows. And wonder of wonders, the
latest release of gnubg/windows appears to actually, FINALLY, save the
state of the window on exit, so you don't have to keep resizing every
time you start the thing.
Now just try resizing the window, OK? It's obvious that you haven't.
-- Derek
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge."
- C. Darwin, 1871
amni
bugs. I hope that you don't play with GNU by typing COMMAND LINES
since because graphic interface is not important.
rind...@hotmail.com (cubist) wrote in message news:<f3d0b253.02090...@posting.google.com>...
amni
without opening the menue) I'll have to see if this is
better with the new setting ("higher die on left").
Scott Steiner <nos...@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:<3D79D7DA...@nospam.nospam>...
Morten Wang
> The GRAPHIC design is of crucial importance, not less that
> bugs.
I think you'll find several developers with an opinion who differs
greatly from yours. the graphic design is important in the actual
release, but it's not vitally important during development. the GnuBG
interface is good enough to play with and use for testing. the
quality of the interface is not a bug in itself, but there may be bugs
related to the interface (of course).
of the things you have brought up, the only thing I can say is
actually close to being important is the board size, the other things
can be dealt with later.
#include <standard-disclaimer-about-me-not-being-a-gnubg-developer.h>
Morten!
--
"God does not deduct from our alloted life span
the time spent playing backgammon."
Zorba
> Graphic design is simple enough to be done *well* even in freeware.
I don't think graphic design is "simple" at all. GNUBG has done a very
reasonable job so far, IMO.
Anyway, if your eyes aren't so good and you don't want to change a
font in an .rc file, treat yourself a nice 17 or 19 inch monitor. I
use 1152x864 on 17" and things look quite good here. 640x480 is hardly
a standard resolution anymore nowadays; I can think of many programs
that would look awful on such a screen (if they even run at all).
Dragging chequers and setting up positions with GNUBG is very fast and
convenient IMO, I think you might just be unaware of some features if
you have trouble with it.
One of the ideas about the current GNUBG is to get feedback from
users, and these users might want to experiment a bit with the
program. It's not a release yet.
Hope you'll enjoy the program anyway (perhaps through some tips from
others)
--
_
/
_ orba
amni
I t seems to me that this involves only changing several numercal values.
I use a mainstream monitor, 17'' 800x600 resolution
(higher resolution on non expensive monitor are often fuzzy or
flicker). I don't think that a software should expect the users
to have expensive hardware, if the software can easily solve the
problems for average hardware.
Also, most users wouln't like to re-type data files
(like ".rc" files). Most users have no *minimal* programing skills.
What do you think, my opinion about bad graphics are not a
legitimate feedback (which should be resolved) ?
amni
zo...@chello.nl (Zorba) wrote in message news:<8e504b59.02090...@posting.google.com>...
amni
and tried variou resolution an hour or two. Still, the board
is at most 40 percents of the screen. very inconvinient.
Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<IuacnfXcqal...@News.GigaNews.Com>...
Jørn Thyssen
> It is a *torture* to move the pieces in my installed GNU.
> Also, I miss *permanent* additional info like PIP-COUNT or
> instruction COMMENTS.
>
> Also, the board of my installed GNU is terribly small, at most 40 percents
> of the screen. Also, their fonts are terribly tiny.
> So, my eyes are tearing and my back is in pain
> after playing more that an hour with my installed GNU.
The sizing of the board in gnubg is discrete: board size: 1, 2, 3, ....
To get a reasonable usage of your screen real estate you need a window
size of (depending on your font settings):
440 x 500 (board size 4)
550 x 570 (board size 5)
650 x 650 (board size 6)
760 x 730 (board size 7)
etc etc
Unfortunately none of these matches the standard setups of 640 x 480,
800 x 600, ...
However, I would typically have the game list and annotation window open
next to the main window. The discrete board sizes may fit better in
this case. Still, I'll see if I can do anything to improve the screen usage.
You can adjust the font by inserting lines like
style "default" {
fontset = "-*-helvetica-medium-r-normal--20-*-*-*-*-*-iso8859-1,\
-*-arial-medium-r-normal--20-*-*-*-*-*-iso8859-1,\
-*-helvetica-medium-r-normal--20-*-*-*-*-*-microsoft-cp1251,\
-*-arial-medium-r-normal--20-*-*-*-*-*-microsoft-cp1251,*-r-*"}
# common default
class "*" style "default"
in your gnubg.gtkrc. The "20" in the lines above indicates font size 20.
I'm not sure how the Windows version of gnubg work, but you may have to
copy gnubg.gtkrc from the gnubg directory to C:\.gnubg.gtkrc
Is the default font smaller than your other windows programs?
Jørn
Scott Steiner
>
> In message <e3504803.02090...@posting.google.com>,
> am...@hotmail.com (amni) mumbled something about:
>
> >and tried variou resolution an hour or two. Still, the board
> >is at most 40 percents of the screen. very inconvinient.
>
>
> Resize your window. Works fine for me, I get a board that's plenty big
> enough to play on and see the checkers, see the text, see whatever.
>
> Better yet, maximize the window if you're running 800x600. You'll have
> to do that with almost everything ANYWAY in that res.
Having read all the posts I think that there seems to be a
misunderstanding concerning amni's complaints about board size.
Amni claims that when the board window is maximized, the board contained
inside the board window is still not big enough meaning that it doesn't
fill the maximized board window completely or even nearly completely
like in Jellyfish. In fact, when the board window is maximized the
contained board takes up an area which is approximately 40% of the total
screen area, which is in fact true, at least with my screen resolution
it is.
I personally have absolutely no problems with the graphics of gnubg or
the size of the board for this matter. It is the nicest board I've
played on on screen so far. For me, the board is big enough when the
window is maximized but it seems that amni wants it yet bigger, which is
fair enough I guess.
I hope I interpreted amni correctly and could clear things up a little.
Ile
Well, I too, can back Amni up. I use Windows, and resizing is buggy.
However, this workaround helps for me:
resize it by dragging it taller and not wider, and then the board will
resize along. Of course, first you have made with wider too, and then apply
this workaround.
Also one other bug:
When the dice is 4, 2 or 2, 1 the movement doesn't work properly. You can
move THREE times when dice show these number. With 2, 1 it goes like this:
one step, one step, one step! With 4, 2 it goes like this: two steps, two
steps, two steps.
If the movement was like in every other program, it would be ok, that is,
the left (or right?) mouse button will always use the bigger dice first.
Ilkka
"Scott Steiner" <nos...@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
news:3D7B73CF...@nospam.nospam...
Zorba
>I t seems to me that this involves only changing several numercal
values.
You're welcome to change the relevant values in the GNUBG source code
then(freely available)! Recompile, et voila: there is your bigger
board!
If it turns out "designing a bigger board" is actually a bit harder
than you expected, you might ask the GNUBG-team for help, maybe they
can change the lay-out such that the board appears larger, especially
with smaller window sizes.
Bigger fonts are already available, and in fact indeed only involves
changing some numerical values (no recompile needed!). I guess there
might be one day when you can change the fonts from within the
program, but I doubt it's a high priority for most, since it's
relatively easy to change them now if you really want to.
>I use a mainstream monitor, 17'' 800x600 resolution
>(higher resolution on non expensive monitor are often fuzzy or
>flicker).
Okay. Well, personally I think the board is large enough (actually too
large) on that resolution, but one might want a bigger board when you
don't do any analysis etc. Maybe the GNUBG-team could change something
here. Meanwhile, if you haven't tried this already, if you drag down
your (Windows) task bar completely the board might become a little
bigger.
> I don't think that a software should expect the users
> to have expensive hardware, if the software can easily solve the
> problems for average hardware.
I agree, although "problems" is subjective of course. I use GNUBG with
3 or more open windows, and then the lay-out is much better. I want
the board to fill only part of my screen, I need the rest for the
analysis etc.
>Also, most users wouln't like to re-type data files
>(like ".rc" files). Most users have no *minimal* programing skills.
Maybe you're actually saying that changing things like board and font
size is somewhat hard, after all? :-)
Changing font size requires no programming skills; if you can use
NOTEPAD that's enough. Just ask how it should be done, if you can't
find it out for yourself! It's really easy. Given the development
stage of GNUBG I think this is more than sufficient (many released
programs don't even allow you to change fonts and sizes at all).
>What do you think, my opinion about bad graphics are not a
>legitimate feedback
It's legitimate feedback; however "GNUBG has an awful graphics
interface" seems needlessly negative.
> (which should be resolved) ?
Well, that's upto the GNUBG-team. They might consider your complaints
and see if they can do something about it.
Enjoy the progam!
Jørn Thyssen
> Yes,
>
> Well, I too, can back Amni up. I use Windows, and resizing is buggy.
> However, this workaround helps for me:
> resize it by dragging it taller and not wider, and then the board will
> resize along. Of course, first you have made with wider too, and then apply
> this workaround.
The resizing is not buggy, but it occurs in horisontal steps of 108px
and vertical steps of 72px. For every time you make the gnubg window 108
pixels wider and 72 pixels heigher, you should get a board one size larger.
> Also one other bug:
>
> When the dice is 4, 2 or 2, 1 the movement doesn't work properly. You can
> move THREE times when dice show these number.
yes, unless you disabled "allow dragging to illegal points".
> With 2, 1 it goes like this:
> one step, one step, one step! With 4, 2 it goes like this: two steps, two
> steps, two steps.
>
> If the movement was like in every other program, it would be ok, that is,
> the left (or right?) mouse button will always use the bigger dice first.
Left mouse button clicks move the left die, and right mouse button
clicks moves right die.
If "allow dragging to illegal points" is disabled
(Settings->Appearance->General), a second left mouse button click will
move the right die.
If "show higher die on the left" is enabled, gnubg will always show the
higher die on the left.
Does this solve your problem?
Jørn
Kees van den Doel
Jørn Thyssen <j...@NOSPAMchem.sdu.dk> wrote:
>this case. Still, I'll see if I can do anything to improve the screen usage.
My suggestion would be to get rid of everything on the main window
except the board and the score and expand the board accordingly. The
edit controls can go into the menu and other stuff in some "info" window
you can open from the menu if you want. The JF layout is very good IMO.
Even on my 1600X1200 screen when analysing games I have annotation and
game record windows open and still the board is uncomfortably small
because of the wasted space below the board.
Kees (What program that illuminates the leader of cowardice or 3, would
chose option b, and should be wasted veritably at that I'll differ
you!!)
Kees van den Doel
Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>I don't see what is hard in designing bigger board, or bigger fonts.
>>I t seems to me that this involves only changing several numercal values.
>Or for you to just bloody resize the window.
OK, I'll try to explain real bloody slowly for you.
Set your bloody screen resolution to 800X600.
Open bloody GNUBG.
Maximize GNUBG's bloody main window.
Take out a bloody tape measure.
Measure the bloody width and height of the GNUBG window.
Multiply these bloody numbers and write them on your bloody right wrist.
Measure the width and height of the bloody board that is displayed inside
the main GNUBG window.
Multiply these bloody numbers and write them on your bloody left wrist.
Divide the bloody number on your bloody left wrist by the bloody number
on your bloody right wrist.
Multiply the bloody result by 100 and write '%' after the bloody answer.
If you did not make any bloody mistakes the resulting bloody number
should be about 40%.
Let me know if you want me to explain if differently, IN ALL CAPS
PERHAPS?
Kees (Write your sense good old Family Ties'-episode where thou cry?)
Scott Steiner
>
> Yes,
>
> Well, I too, can back Amni up. I use Windows, and resizing is buggy.
> However, this workaround helps for me:
> resize it by dragging it taller and not wider, and then the board will
> resize along. Of course, first you have made with wider too, and then apply
> this workaround.
>
> Also one other bug:
I would like state that there is no bug concerning board size. As Jørn
Thyssen explained earlier, the sizing of the board in gnubg is discrete:
board size: 1, 2, 3 etc. If you want you can say that it is
conditionally scalable, meaning, scalable yes but at larger increments.
Adrian Pitt
Seriously...you should go and see an eye doctor. You must be the ONLY
one complaining about not being able to see board, even though we have
all told you how to resize it. I run my screen at 1600x1200 so the
fonts generally are very tiny. The opening board size is tiny. So
what? I simply resize it just like we do for EVERY OTHER WINDOWS
PROGRAM!! So go and get your eys checked out and while your out by a
basic book on using Windows.
Adrian
Adrian Pitt
Once again I STRONGLY suggest you go and buy a book on basic Windows
handling. When I open my GNU and hit the window maximise button in the
top right hand corner the program fills my screen beautifully with the
actual board taking up 70% of the space roughly. The fonts dont
resize but who cares they are easily readable on my screen and on a
800x600 should be able to be read even by a blind person. There is
NOTHING complicated about this at all.
Adrian
Zorba
> In article <e8SdnZcFiqCF..agXTWQlg@News.GigaNews.Com>,
> Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Or for you to just bloody resize the window.
>
> OK, I'll try to explain real bloody slowly for you.
>
> Set your bloody screen resolution to 800X600.
> Multiply these bloody numbers and write them on your bloody right wrist.(...)
> Multiply these bloody numbers and write them on your bloody left wrist.
> Let me know if you want me to explain if differently, IN ALL CAPS
> PERHAPS?
I have a question. I don't understand. Why does he have to write on his wrist?
It doesn't seem too hard for the developers to design a piece of paper.
--
_
/
_ orba (Why CAPITALISM bloody Michael J.'s elbows period? Nu even niet!)
Kees van den Doel
Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Let me know if you want me to explain if differently, IN ALL CAPS
>>PERHAPS?
>Then 40% should be plenty.
>Bloody plenty, even.
>Granted that there is "dead space" in the gnubg window itself around the
>board, this still doesn't seem to be much of an issue, I'm sorry. I set
>it to 800x600 and I can see the board just fine, move the checkers, etc.
>Sure, it's not perfect, but for him to be rushing around like he is
>declaring how awful gnubg is, considering how FREE gnubg is?? Sorry.
>Wrong answer.
I'm glad you now seem to understand that the board takes 40% of the
screen when maximized at 800X600 resolution.
It would be better if it would take 90% of the screen instead.
Not a big deal to me and you but apparently it is too others.
Kees (Some other groups, for Windows Mail-Copies-To: never ever since
August 9, rather short sentences above.)
Kees van den Doel
Zorba <zo...@chello.nl> wrote:
>> >Or for you to just bloody resize the window.
>> OK, I'll try to explain real bloody slowly for you.
>> Set your bloody screen resolution to 800X600.
>> Multiply these bloody numbers and write them on your bloody right
>> wrist.(...) Multiply these bloody numbers and write them on your
>> bloody left wrist. Let me know if you want me to explain if
>> differently, IN ALL CAPS PERHAPS?
>I have a question. I don't understand. Why does he have to write on his wrist?
It's too hard to read when he writes it on his eyelids.
Kees (Such as pertained to believe this bloody etc bij sommige
theejoriejen.)
amni
Adrian Pitt <ap...@nectar.com.au> wrote in message news:<qtbnnu4asgbf1o0d5...@4ax.com>...
amni
Using Notepad is the minor demand, the major demand is
reading technical documents und understaning the "strange"
terminology.
You should remember that at least 99 percent of BG players
do not have these skills. But still, they are the best
source for a feedback on GNU BG.
zo...@chello.nl (Zorba) wrote in message news:<8e504b59.02090...@posting.google.com>...
jthyssen
> There were other problems with clicking (like undo-ing erronous clicks
> without opening the menue)
Ctrl+Z or click [Reset] is equivalent to Edit->Undo.
Jørn
jthyssen
> Most people wouldn't be able to do change "script files".
> Using Notepad is the minor demand, the major demand is
> reading technical documents und understaning the "strange"
> terminology.
>
> You should remember that at least 99 percent of BG players
> do not have these skills. But still, they are the best
> source for a feedback on GNU BG.
You're asking for functionality that most windows programs do not have
(including Jellyfish and Snowie). I haven't seen any programs where
you can change the font size of the menus and dialogs independently.
Of course, you can change the font settings all windows applications.
Well, I might be wrong...
Jørn
Nis Jorgensen
A step-by-step undo would be nice, meaning that Ctr-Z only undoes the
last checker moved - like in Fibs/w and probably others.
--
Nis Jorgensen
Amsterdam
A coin has no memory.
Backgammon, however, is played with dice.
Frank Mazza
The size of Gnu's board is fine when it is enlarged, and I even
sometimes just like to play when the board is small.
I've played it on everything from a 15-inch to a 21-inch monitor and
never had a problem seeing anything.
If I had any complaint about Gnu's graphics it would be that the
checkers look a little like ping pong balls and I don't care for the
"floaty" way they move. But this is abolutely trivial when your
talking about a free program that comes damn close to the
functionality of a $400 program (even does things Snowie Pro doesn
not).
I agree with others who think a visit to the Opthamologist is in order
for Amni.
Frank Mazza
On Sun, 08 Sep 2002 20:17:24 GMT, Adrian Pitt <ap...@nectar.com.au>
wrote:
amni
this is more intuitive and convinient.
j...@chem.sdu.dk (jthyssen) wrote in message news:<36775ed0.02090...@posting.google.com>...
Steve Harris
kvan...@xs4all.nl says...
I can't write a thing with my left hand. Can I put both numbers on my left
wrist?
Jørn Thyssen
> I meant "undo by click-and-drag", like in most bg-software,
> this is more intuitive and convinient.
Sorry, can you elaborate?
You should be able to move the chequer back by dragging it to the point
where it originated from.
Jørn
Kees van den Doel
amni <am...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>In the maximized GAME WINDOW, the board takes at most 40 percent of the
>WINDOW.
AT A SCREEN RESOLUTION OF 800X600.
Kees (I personally have tracked down some bushes when quoting others.)
Back4U2 BBL
"amni" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3504803.02090...@posting.google.com...
> Most people wouldn't be able to do change "script files".
> Using Notepad is the minor demand, the major demand is
> reading technical documents und understaning the "strange"
> terminology.
>
> You should remember that at least 99 percent of BG players
> do not have these skills. But still, they are the best
> source for a feedback on GNU BG.
There also themes. Included. Ready to be used.
To change from one theme to another, copy and paste will do.
And Copy&Paste... that can't be that hard?
Nardy
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.385 / Virus Database: 217 - Release Date: 5/09/2002
Zorba
> Most people wouldn't be able to do change "script files".
Not at all, anyone who can use a PC can do it.
> Using Notepad is the minor demand, the major demand is
> reading technical documents und understaning the "strange"
> terminology.
Not needed. Changing a "12" into a "16" and saving the document might
be enough for what you want.
Just ask people for help and you'll find out how easy it is.
It has nothing to do with "programming skills".
> You should remember that at least 99 percent of BG players
> do not have these skills. But still, they are the best
> source for a feedback on GNU BG.
I don't agree, I think most bg players are very well capable of doing
this by themselves; some without help, many with some help.
Also, in the stage where GNUBG is right now, perhaps more knowledgable
people when it comes to computers (and bg...) might be (and in fact
often are) a better source for feedback. Just my personal opinion; I'm
not of the GNUBG-team but I've been following their efforts for a
while.
Enjoy the program!
qwerrk
"Frank Mazza" <fxmaz...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:o2hpnu89pimq5h26b...@4ax.com...
> I amazed that this thread has gone on this long!
>
> The size of Gnu's board is fine when it is enlarged, and I even
> sometimes just like to play when the board is small.
>
> I've played it on everything from a 15-inch to a 21-inch monitor and
> never had a problem seeing anything.
>
> If I had any complaint about Gnu's graphics it would be that the
> checkers look a little like ping pong balls and I don't care for the
> "floaty" way they move. But this is abolutely trivial when your
> talking about a free program that comes damn close to the
> functionality of a $400 program (even does things Snowie Pro doesn
> not).
>
> I agree with others who think a visit to the Opthamologist is in order
> for Amni.
>
> Frank Mazza
>
Or he might benefit from calling a good mule whisperer...
amni
100,000 lines of code. Just the ability to read tecnical
documents which describe the scripts, edit the right documents
and to put them in the right place.
You maybe surprised but one of the authors of GNU BG said that
he is not absolutely sure how this should be done in WINDOWS OS.
And about the good audience for feedback, again, 99 percent
of good players who can give the most valuable comments
cannot re-write scripts and won't ask their friends.
amni
zo...@chello.nl (Zorba) wrote in message news:<8e504b59.02090...@posting.google.com>...
amni
again, because anything which is not plain strain the vision
(if you play 2 hours daily this matters).
"Back4U2 BBL" <nardy.p...@skynet.be> wrote in message news:<3d7d2f29$0$212$ba62...@news.skynet.be>...
amni
and while "refusing" there is a sound of "legal move".
I'll have still to confirm this claim because I didn't
played much with settin "higher dice on the left".
If this problem persists I'll post a message.
Jørn Thyssen <j...@NOSPAMchem.sdu.dk> wrote in message news:<3D7CFDE6...@NOSPAMchem.sdu.dk>...
Scott Steiner
>
> The pieces "refuses" to be dragged back from where it was
> and while "refusing" there is a sound of "legal move".
I cannot reproduce what you are saying, I am able to drag the checker
back at any legal point it could have come from.
>
> I'll have still to confirm this claim because I didn't
> played much with settin "higher dice on the left".
> If this problem persists I'll post a message.
Dragging back works regardless of the setting "higher dice on the left"
amni
amni
Frank Mazza <fxmaz...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<o2hpnu89pimq5h26b...@4ax.com>...
Ile
There could be a point to make these settings as default (not allowed to go
to illegal points, bigger dice on left?)
Ilkka
> If "show higher die on the left" is enabled, gnubg will always show the
> higher die on the left.
>
> Does this solve your problem?
>
> Jørn
>
amni
occured in my game 5 minutes ago. I tried to save the game but
failed somehow. The only thing to be confirmed.
In the previous setting it was about 10 percents of the trial
to draw back (undo-ing move). I cannot estimate yet the
percentage in the new setting, althou it occurs less (maybe 1 percent
of the cases).
amni
Scott Steiner <nos...@nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:<3D7DCEDC...@nospam.nospam>...
amni
of most players. This was a response for those who advised
me to change the font size via re-scripting.
My main complain was about the *default* font size,
which is too small (hard to read).
amni
j...@chem.sdu.dk (jthyssen) wrote in message news:<36775ed0.02090...@posting.google.com>...
Zorba
> By programming skill I didn't meant the ability tro write
> 100,000 lines of code. Just the ability to read tecnical
> documents which describe the scripts, edit the right documents
> and to put them in the right place.
> You maybe surprised but one of the authors of GNU BG said that
> he is not absolutely sure how this should be done in WINDOWS OS.
I'm sure this author would be able to find out in no time, if not by
himself, then just by asking someone who does know. :-)
> And about the good audience for feedback, again, 99 percent
> of good players who can give the most valuable comments
> cannot re-write scripts and won't ask their friends.
If you refuse to ask others for help, then that's your own problem...
Why should we expect these people to give "valuable comments"?
Anyway, there's plenty of feedback on gnubg I think and many people
seem to be able to use the program, ask questions, learn how to do
something if it's not immediately clear, etc.
Meanwhile, you might be glad to know that the GNUBG developers are
already busy trying to improve its "awful interface", by your
comments. Isn't that great?
Back4U2 BBL
> > To change from one theme to another, copy and paste will do.
> >
> > And Copy&Paste... that can't be that hard?
> >
> > Nardy
> I hate cooked graphic styles. I like to see the board in plain colors,
> again, because anything which is not plain strain the vision
> (if you play 2 hours daily this matters).
Not answering this one, as I think (but: bad memory here) this was commented
once or twice before.
Nardy
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.385 / Virus Database: 217 - Release Date: 4/09/2002
Frank Mazza
I wasn't trying to be insulting, but I think if you look at the
majority of responses to your threads you will find:
1) Many practical suggestions to fix the board/font size (though you
say they don't work).
and
2) For most everyone else it isn't even an issue.
I can understand if you use the program a lot and it hurts your eyes,
your wanting to seek relief. I was just surprised at the number of
threads about a "small" (pun intended) matter.
Frank Mazza
Ile
Well, I had it disabled all the time. Still can move three times when dice
show 2, 1 or 4, 2.
And another thing: Wouldn't these settings be better placed in
"Settings->Options" than "Settings->Appearance"?
Aside from these, GnuBG is an awesome program :-)
Ilkka
Back4U2 BBL
"Ile" <gonzoile....@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bXuf9.414$gM5....@read2.inet.fi...
> Back to this "illegal points" thing:
> Well, I had it disabled all the time. Still can move three times when dice
> show 2, 1 or 4, 2.
Yes you can, even with 'Allow dragging to illegal points' unchecked.
Why?
24 roll:
The first move (2 pips) is considered to be the 2 die.
The second move (2 pips, same chequer) adds 2 to the first 2, giving you the
4 die.
The third move (2 pips, same chequer) moves the 'second' die, the 2 die.
So what happens:
First you move one chequer (legally) 2 pips.
Then you move that chequer 2 pips. Still legal: you 'changed your mind', not
using the 2 die, but the 4 die to move that one, yes?
And now: the 2 die is the only left, so you can again move 2 pips.
Same for 12 and 36 rolls.
Nardy
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.385 / Virus Database: 217 - Release Date: 5/09/2002
Ile
conversation exists..
Ilkka
"Back4U2 BBL" <nardy.p...@skynet.be> wrote in message
news:3d7e8433$0$197$ba62...@news.skynet.be...
Back4U2 BBL
> conversation exists..
>
> Ilkka
Well... it's legal, and if it still confuses you:
Settings, Appearance. Check: Show higher die on left.
Next 42 roll:
Left-click a checker moves it 4 pips, next click on a chequer moves that one
2 pips.
And... if you right-click _first_ on a chequer.... it will move 2 pips.
Right-click again... again 2 pips.... right-click again.... yep.
;-)
Nardy
qwerrk
GNUBg.
on my 19" monitor (which is 14" wide), the board width is a tad over 10"
which equates to over 70% of the screen width.....all with a single click of
the mouse after booting the program.....I can't see what you're complaining
about, Amni.
the ping-pong ball appearance of the checkers is.....striking
TR Hanlon
"Frank Mazza" <fxmaz...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:v0csnucpbqgsoets8...@4ax.com...
Bruce McIntyre
"Scott Steiner" <nos...@nospam.nospam> wrote in message
> Derek Ray wrote:
> >
> > In message <e3504803.02090...@posting.google.com>,
> > am...@hotmail.com (amni) mumbled something about:
> >
> > >and tried variou resolution an hour or two. Still, the board
> > >is at most 40 percents of the screen. very inconvinient.
> >
> >
> > Resize your window. Works fine for me, I get a board that's plenty big
> > enough to play on and see the checkers, see the text, see whatever.
> >
> > Better yet, maximize the window if you're running 800x600. You'll have
> > to do that with almost everything ANYWAY in that res.
>
> Having read all the posts I think that there seems to be a
> misunderstanding concerning amni's complaints about board size.
>
> Amni claims that when the board window is maximized, the board contained
> inside the board window is still not big enough meaning that it doesn't
> fill the maximized board window completely or even nearly completely
> like in Jellyfish. In fact, when the board window is maximized the
> contained board takes up an area which is approximately 40% of the total
> screen area, which is in fact true, at least with my screen resolution
> it is.
>
> I personally have absolutely no problems with the graphics of gnubg or
> the size of the board for this matter. It is the nicest board I've
> played on on screen so far. For me, the board is big enough when the
> window is maximized but it seems that amni wants it yet bigger, which is
> fair enough I guess.
>
> I hope I interpreted amni correctly and could clear things up a little.
This 40% number sounded nuts to me too, so I measured. On a screen size of
about 136.5 square inches (13 by 10.5), the GNU board covers 86.25 square
inches (11.5 by 7.5), 63% of the total screen size. This is my 19-inch
monitor running 1600x1200, though and other's mileage may vary.
--
.-----------------------.----------------------------------.
| Bruce McIntyre | email: oo...@shaw.ca |
| 6636 Dow Ave., #203 | "OO-ga-shaw-ca, OO-ga-shaw-ca" |
| Burnaby BC CANADA | Editor, the Matchpointer |
| V5H 3C9 604/438-9735 |(ACBL Unit 430 Bridge Publication)|
}-----------------------^----------------------------------{
| Yamaha WX5 wind-synthesizer virtuoso-in-training |
`----------------------------------------------------------´
jthyssen
> that changing font size via re-wring scripts is beyond skill
> of most players. This was a response for those who advised
> me to change the font size via re-scripting.
>
> My main complain was about the *default* font size,
> which is too small (hard to read).
I don't understand that. I just download the Windows version of gnubg,
and on my computer at work (Win2k) the font size of gnubg is exactly
the same as all the other programs....
However, unlike most windows programs that require you to change the
font settings for the entire system, gnubg allows you to change the
font settings for that program only. I know perfectly well how to
change the relevant file (and posted that earlier), but I wasn't sure
where to place the file in Windows, so I just checked: you can leave
the gnubg.gtkrc file where it is (\Program Files\gnubg). In the file
there is a line:
font = "-*-tahoma-normal-r-normal-*-*-100-*-*-*-*-*-*"
I you would like, say, font size 20 instead, change the line to
font = "-*-tahoma-normal-r-normal-*-20-100-*-*-*-*-*-*"
and restart gnubg. Voila!
I'm aware that the average windows user doesn't know to do this, but
as I stated earlier: this is functionality that lies beyond what
standard windows programs offer, and changing expert settings is
often not available through a GUI.
Jørn
jthyssen
> Yes, very much. Thank you.
>
> There could be a point to make these settings as default (not allowed to go
> to illegal points, bigger dice on left?)
Yes, I might do that. However, once the user has an existing
.gnubgautorc she'll override the default settings of gnubg. So the new
default settings will only apply to new users or users installing the
complete package without backing up their old .gnubgautorc.
Jørn
amni
about *40 percent of the AREA*. EG, if the your board height is 60 percent
of the screen height than the Area is 42 percent of the screen area.
Beside, in your 19'' screen the size of your board is by 25 percent
bigger than mine 17''.
amni
"qwerrk" <qwe...@spam-free.net> wrote in message news:<Iiyf9.169$Zi.5...@news1.news.adelphia.net>...
Kees van den Doel
amni <am...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>You are talking about *70 percents of WIDTH*, whereas I'm talking
>about *40 percent of the AREA*. EG, if the your board height is 60 percent
>of the screen height than the Area is 42 percent of the screen area.
It seems to be really hard for people to grasp the concept that the
percentage of the main window that the board occupies depends on the
screen resolution used.
Let's try this, it works for CNN:
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
THE PERCENTAGE OF THE MAIN WINDOW THAT THE BOARD OCCUPIES DEPENDS ON THE
SCREEN RESOLUTION USED!!!!!
Kees (En post more statistical properties are idiots but Seven is
proverbial!)
Ned Cross
using some kind of prescription pills, or perhaps wearing a patch to calm
the shakes? ...Share your secret, many of us need help!
"amni" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3504803.02091...@posting.google.com...
> I hate cooked graphic styles. I like to see the board in plain colors,
> again, because anything which is not plain strain the vision
> (if you play 2 hours daily this matters).
>
>
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Allen
Hello everybody,
My name is Allen and I'm a backgammon addict. I've been addicted to BG
off and on for 20 years... Lately I find myself playing appx 4 hours a
day, and 2 days/week I head down to the sports bar where chouettes are
played. I've talked to old-timers who say if possible they would play 8
hours/day 7 days/week and never get bored. I'm looking forward to being a
BG addict the rest of my life. I hope my wife and children will
understand.
>Really, you can survive on only 2 hours per day? How do you do it? Are
>using some kind of prescription pills, or perhaps wearing a patch to calm
>the shakes? ...Share your secret, many of us need help!
>
>
amni
Software should fit hardware used by mainsteam.
amni
"Bruce McIntyre" <oo...@shaw.ca.nospam> wrote in message news:<J8Bf9.290465$v53.15...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>...
Back4U2 BBL
> of most players. This was a response for those who advised
> me to change the font size via re-scripting.
Copy & Paste mabye ?
In the folder (installed)\themes you will find several themes.
blue - brushes - emacsdef - engines - flat - grey - mac - metal - .....
Copy the file (installed)\themes\grey\gnubg.gtkrc
(that is the only file in that folder)
to:
(installed)
Answer 'Yes' when Windows ask: Overwrite Yes or No?
Run GNUBg again and look at the 'Look and Feel' now
(installed)??
If you kept the default settings, (installed) would be:
C:\Program Files\gnubg
Nardy
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.385 / Virus Database: 217 - Release Date: 4/09/2002
Derek Ray
kvan...@xs4all.nl (Kees van den Doel) mumbled something about:
>In article <e3504803.02091...@posting.google.com>,
>amni <am...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>You are talking about *70 percents of WIDTH*, whereas I'm talking
>>about *40 percent of the AREA*. EG, if the your board height is 60 percent
>>of the screen height than the Area is 42 percent of the screen area.
>
>It seems to be really hard for people to grasp the concept that the
>percentage of the main window that the board occupies depends on the
>screen resolution used.
Because the math says it doesn't?
480/640 = .75
600/800 = .75
768/1024 = .75
960/1280 = .75
1200/1600 = .75
The only difference in actual board size will result from a bigger
monitor. Which is so obvious as to be blinding.
Conclusion: amni is just blind.
Jørn Thyssen
> In message <3d7f0699$0$34784$e4fe...@dreader3.news.xs4all.nl>,
> kvan...@xs4all.nl (Kees van den Doel) mumbled something about:
>
>
>>In article <e3504803.02091...@posting.google.com>,
>>amni <am...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You are talking about *70 percents of WIDTH*, whereas I'm talking
>>>about *40 percent of the AREA*. EG, if the your board height is 60 percent
>>>of the screen height than the Area is 42 percent of the screen area.
>>
>>It seems to be really hard for people to grasp the concept that the
>>percentage of the main window that the board occupies depends on the
>>screen resolution used.
>
>
> Because the math says it doesn't?
>
> 480/640 = .75
> 600/800 = .75
> 768/1024 = .75
> 960/1280 = .75
> 1200/1600 = .75
>
> The only difference in actual board size will result from a bigger
> monitor. Which is so obvious as to be blinding.
I don't agree.
As I stated somewhere else in this huge thread the sizing occurs in
steps of 108x72.
So the available board sizes are:
108x72
216x144
324x216
432x288
540x360
648x432
756x504
864x576
972x648
1080x720
1188x792
1296x864
1404x936
1512x1008
So the maximum board size available for running at 800x600 is 756x504,
which would give you a screen usage of approximately 80%. However, the
Windows taskbar, window decorations, gnubg menus, plus the stuff below
the board takes up more than the 96 pixels available (600 - 504), so the
board size at 800x600 is actually 540x360, which gives a screen usage of
42% close to the 40% Amni claims!
Since the pixels used for the Window taskbar, window decorations, etc.
is fairly constant with respect to screen resolution the problem get
smaller and smaller. For example, at 1280x1024 you can easily get a
board size of 1188x792 which gives a screen usage of 72%. At 1400x1050
(my screen resolution) I can get board size of 1296x864 which gives a
screen usage of 76%.
Screen resolution Actual board size Screen usage
640x480
432x288 40%
800x600
540x360 42%
1024x768
972x648 63%
1200x1024
1188x792 72%
1400x1050
1296x864 76%
1600x1200
1512x1008 80%
As Zorba mentioned elsewhere work is in progress to improve the layout
for smaller screen resolutions.
Jørn
Kees van den Doel
Derek Ray <lor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>You are talking about *70 percents of WIDTH*, whereas I'm talking
>>>about *40 percent of the AREA*. EG, if the your board height is 60 percent
>>>of the screen height than the Area is 42 percent of the screen area.
>>It seems to be really hard for people to grasp the concept that the
>>percentage of the main window that the board occupies depends on the
>>screen resolution used.
>Because the math says it doesn't?
>480/640 = .75
>600/800 = .75
>768/1024 = .75
>960/1280 = .75
>1200/1600 = .75
However you forgot to consider that:
12/4 = 3
999/3 = 333
1/0 = NaN
overflowing toilet = mess
>The only difference in actual board size will result from a bigger
>monitor. Which is so obvious as to be blinding.
Are you posting on behalf of the flat-earth society or are you inventing
these opinions yourself?
Kees (My wife will post to draw your list, which Hagar out USENET DEATH
PENALTY?)
Zorba
And the main window size. (repeat ad lib)
--
_
/
_ orba (never a dull moment)
Simon Woodhead
> Majority of people either don't use 19'' monitor or 1600x1200 resolution.
True, most people have larger screens with higher
resolutions..
> Software should fit hardware used by mainsteam.
To some degree, yes. GUI designers have a constant
struggle to design for the considerable variety of
monitor size, resolution, colour depth etc, let alone
the vagaries of different browsers. So designers aim
to satisfy what the majority of users have. 800X600
was left behind some time ago as a resolution in
common use.
There are not many applications (games or commercial)
that look good at 800X600 and many won't work at all.
You haven't told us why you are running at such low
resolutions - is there a reason ? Don't you have
this same problem with just about every piece of
software you run ?
-Simon.
Sydney Backgammon
http://www.sydbg.uniq.com.au/
Derek Ray
Jørn Thyssen <j...@NOSPAMchem.sdu.dk> mumbled something about:
>I don't agree.
*snip*
>So the maximum board size available for running at 800x600 is 756x504,
>which would give you a screen usage of approximately 80%. However, the
>Windows taskbar, window decorations, gnubg menus, plus the stuff below
>the board takes up more than the 96 pixels available (600 - 504), so the
>board size at 800x600 is actually 540x360, which gives a screen usage of
> 42% close to the 40% Amni claims!
>
>Since the pixels used for the Window taskbar, window decorations, etc.
>is fairly constant with respect to screen resolution the problem get
>smaller and smaller. For example, at 1280x1024 you can easily get a
>board size of 1188x792 which gives a screen usage of 72%. At 1400x1050
>(my screen resolution) I can get board size of 1296x864 which gives a
>screen usage of 76%.
However, if you leave the Windows taskbar, decorations, etc. at the same
"font" size when switching from 640x480 to 1600x1200, you may find that
you can't read the title bars/menu resolution, etc. very well at all. I
am assuming that one would logically resize the rest of the "toys" to a
minimum readable state on a 17" monitor... meaning that you still end up
with the same situation.
Of course, the fonts in gnubg don't use any Windows defaults, so those
WOULD stay the same, although the rest of the Wintoys will end up
resizing. So you would actually gain some "space" available by
increasing resolution... which, at 800x600 on a 17" monitor, he should
have plenty of room for at least 1024x768. I still have little
sympathy, since I run at 1280x1024 and don't use anywhere NEAR a full
window -- significantly less than 40% of the screen, a lot closer to
25%.
>As Zorba mentioned elsewhere work is in progress to improve the layout
>for smaller screen resolutions.
The dead space below the board IS sort of a bad thing. However, the
user interface has been, is and should be the last thing to get
configured in ANY program -- functionality should always rate before
pretty.
Oh, and Keys (sic): good job with the incoherent foot-stamping. Keep it
up; maybe you can get the Silver Rattle Award this year.
Bruce McIntyre
> amni wrote:
> > It is a *torture* to move the pieces in my installed GNU.
> > Also, I miss *permanent* additional info like PIP-COUNT or
> > instruction COMMENTS.
> >
> > Also, the board of my installed GNU is terribly small, at most 40
percents
> > of the screen. Also, their fonts are terribly tiny.
> > So, my eyes are tearing and my back is in pain
> > after playing more that an hour with my installed GNU.
>
>
> The sizing of the board in gnubg is discrete: board size: 1, 2, 3, ....
>
> To get a reasonable usage of your screen real estate you need a window
> size of (depending on your font settings):
>
>
> 440 x 500 (board size 4)
> 550 x 570 (board size 5)
> 650 x 650 (board size 6)
> 760 x 730 (board size 7)
> etc etc
>
> Unfortunately none of these matches the standard setups of 640 x 480,
> 800 x 600, ...
>
Maybe the solution is for the "board" to include 1) the board and 2) the
match score and other information below. The two combined could be designed
to work at discrete sizes that all have the same aspect ratio, something
near to 1.4 to 1. You can see that the aspect ratio of the board sizes
above varies. Most Windows systems run on screen resolutions of 1.33 or
occasionally higher when you take into account the taskbar or the title bar
and menu bar above.
What has made this thread so long is the title. Amni's complaint is that
the board should take up more of the screen area, but he titled the thread
"awful graphical interface." I must say I love the GUI of GNUBG. The
pieces look like translucent Go pieces, which would be horrible to play with
in real life, but placed perfectly on a computer screen they are quite
striking, especially when you take a few minutes to try out various levels
of colour combinations, opacity levels, diffuse vs specular levels,
dull/shiny, and other settings available in Settings|Appearance. You can
get great effects by using the smooth-speckled bars for the board and
points. I suspect that if you wanted to make the pieces look like checkers
instead of Go pieces you could, but why? On this board they look great.
Somebody did a nice job making the GNU board look (potentially) different
from most of the rest I've seen and this thread has trashed a fine effort.
jthyssen
> What has made this thread so long is the title. Amni's complaint is that
> the board should take up more of the screen area, but he titled the thread
> "awful graphical interface." I must say I love the GUI of GNUBG. The
> pieces look like translucent Go pieces, which would be horrible to play with
> in real life, but placed perfectly on a computer screen they are quite
> striking, especially when you take a few minutes to try out various levels
> of colour combinations, opacity levels, diffuse vs specular levels,
> dull/shiny, and other settings available in Settings|Appearance. You can
> get great effects by using the smooth-speckled bars for the board and
> points. I suspect that if you wanted to make the pieces look like checkers
> instead of Go pieces you could, but why? On this board they look great.
> Somebody did a nice job making the GNU board look (potentially) different
> from most of the rest I've seen and this thread has trashed a fine effort.
No I wont :-) I'm not touching the setup of colors, board etc. I've
just optimised the layout of the stuff below the board, and I plan to
make some of the stuff optional (e.g., position ID and match ID), so
people with low screen resolutions can get the biggest board size
available.
Jørn
amni
Font size at higher resolution are too small in 1024x764 resolution.
I guess that that I would have used 1024x764 if my monitor was 19''.
Note also that LCD monitors won't be more than 17'' in the near future,
because of price.
Simon Woodhead <si...@uniq.com.au> wrote in message news:<3D7FCB67...@uniq.com.au>...
Morten Wang
> Font size at higher resolution are too small in 1024x764 resolution.
then change the font size.
Morten!
--
"God does not deduct from our alloted life span
the time spent playing backgammon."
amni
I'm talking on the *whole* font system of WINDOWS.
My long experience with them(and I have very long experience)
with WINDOWS, shows that only the default size
(more or less) enables convenient reading of text
(if one reads a lot of text).
I'll say it again: for one who reads a lot of text, in general,
it is convinient to use reoloution "> 800x600" only
if his monitor is > 17''.
Morten Wang <warn...@online.no> wrote in message news:<m3vg5ar...@tigger.plaindog.no>...
Morten Wang
> I'm talking on the *whole* font system of WINDOWS.
I'm talking about that too.
> My long experience with them(and I have very long experience)
> with WINDOWS, shows that only the default size
> (more or less) enables convenient reading of text
> (if one reads a lot of text).
then our experiences differ. I've been running Windows for way too
long, and I do not share your opinion on this matter:
> I'll say it again: for one who reads a lot of text, in general,
> it is convinient to use reoloution "> 800x600" only
> if his monitor is > 17''.
I disagree completely. if the 17" can handle 1024x768 (or higher) at
75Hz or higher, then up the resolution and the font size (if you
prefer a larger size than the default). you gain actual resolution so
your fonts look better, and you gain screen real estate. I've tried
several different 17" monitors through my career and they all had no
problem running such a higher resolution while keeping the readability
at a good level.
amni
I'll not repeat the reasons why your "clever" advices
are not relevant. I don't waste my time on people
who consider themselves "smart" .
And by the way, many of the people agreed to my complains
about the size of the board.
One of them is a writer of the program which
tries to give a solution for monitors with low resolution.
Adrian Pitt <ap...@nectar.com.au> wrote in message news:<hlbnnuom47haas574...@4ax.com>...
> AMni,
>
> Seriously...you should go and see an eye doctor. You must be the ONLY
> one complaining about not being able to see board, even though we have
> all told you how to resize it. I run my screen at 1600x1200 so the
> fonts generally are very tiny. The opening board size is tiny. So
> what? I simply resize it just like we do for EVERY OTHER WINDOWS
> PROGRAM!! So go and get your eys checked out and while your out by a
> basic book on using Windows.
>
> Adrian
>
> On 8 Sep 2002 03:32:43 -0700, am...@hotmail.com (amni) wrote:
>
> >I don't see what is hard in designing bigger board, or bigger fonts.
> >I t seems to me that this involves only changing several numercal values.
> >
> >I use a mainstream monitor, 17'' 800x600 resolution
> >(higher resolution on non expensive monitor are often fuzzy or
> >flicker). I don't think that a software should expect the users
> >to have expensive hardware, if the software can easily solve the
> >problems for average hardware.
> >
> >Also, most users wouln't like to re-type data files
> >(like ".rc" files). Most users have no *minimal* programing skills.
> >
> >
> >
> >What do you think, my opinion about bad graphics are not a
> >legitimate feedback (which should be resolved) ?
> >
> >amni
> >
> >zo...@chello.nl (Zorba) wrote in message news:<8e504b59.02090...@posting.google.com>...
> >> am...@hotmail.com (amni) wrote in message news:<e3504803.0209...@posting.google.com>...
> >>
> >> > Graphic design is simple enough to be done *well* even in freeware.
> >>
> >> I don't think graphic design is "simple" at all. GNUBG has done a very
> >> reasonable job so far, IMO.
> >>
> >> Anyway, if your eyes aren't so good and you don't want to change a
> >> font in an .rc file, treat yourself a nice 17 or 19 inch monitor. I
> >> use 1152x864 on 17" and things look quite good here. 640x480 is hardly
> >> a standard resolution anymore nowadays; I can think of many programs
> >> that would look awful on such a screen (if they even run at all).
> >>
> >> Dragging chequers and setting up positions with GNUBG is very fast and
> >> convenient IMO, I think you might just be unaware of some features if
> >> you have trouble with it.
> >>
> >> One of the ideas about the current GNUBG is to get feedback from
> >> users, and these users might want to experiment a bit with the
> >> program. It's not a release yet.
> >>
> >> Hope you'll enjoy the program anyway (perhaps through some tips from
> >> others)
Ric
"amni" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3504803.02091...@posting.google.com...
amni
the default fonts in 1024x768 resolution are too small.
Maybe I use to look on the screen from more distance than you.
Also, the fonts are getting somewhat fuzzy (don't know why),
and the surface is not clean
("moever interference optic offect" or something),
this effect might not occur in the more expensive monitors.
I tried to use higher resolution and higher fonts and and alway
was confronted with fonts which looked bad and non pleasant moever effect.
In short, I did all the these banal options and they failed.
Morten Wang <warn...@online.no> wrote in message news:<m365xa8...@tigger.plaindog.no>...
amni
amni.
"Ric" <nos...@nospam.net> wrote in message news:<uckg9.2372$Zi.7...@news1.news.adelphia.net>...
Ric
failing or needs a trip to the technician... how about your video card, is
that up to date with drivers, is it behaving rudely?
"amni" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e3504803.02091...@posting.google.com...
Zorba
> just a thought, but if your fonts are getting fuzzy maybe your monitor is
> failing or needs a trip to the technician... how about your video card, is
> that up to date with drivers, is it behaving rudely?
>
> "amni" <am...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:e3504803.02091...@posting.google.com...
> > Let me rephrase what I said: the way *I* use the monitor of 17''
> > the default fonts in 1024x768 resolution are too small.
> >
> > Maybe I use to look on the screen from more distance than you.
> > Also, the fonts are getting somewhat fuzzy (don't know why),
> > and the surface is not clean
> > ("moever interference optic offect" or something),
> > this effect might not occur in the more expensive monitors.
Sounds like a bad monitor to me. Nowadays even inexpensive 17"
monitors should provide a clean view of fonts at 1024x768 or even
higher.
My 4 years old middle-of-the-road 17" CTX VL-710 is sharp and clear
upto 1280x1024, and still provides a very reasonable image at
1600x1200.
qwerrk
I run both a 17" and a 19" at 1024x768 with near perfect clarity of
the standard fonts and there is probably room to increase resolution
on both (certainly on the 19") if there was a need (haven't found one
yet).
Anyway, working on the basis of SCREEN AREA, the board on my very
recently downloaded GNUBg for Windows occupies MORE THAN 47% of the
available screen with the application maximized. Stating the obvious,
this is significantly closer to 50% that it is to 40%. I find this to
be ample at worst.
all4now
TR Hanlon