Painter X.5 gains dual monitor support for Windows!

[Sandman]

Hehe, just saw this. X.5 has been out for a while, but one of the new
features is dual-screen support for Windows! Haha! Applications still
have to *support* dual screens on Windows?

Painter for Mac has naturally had dual monitor support since always. :)

--
Sandman[.net]

[STravis]

I have never used Painter (I have no use for it), but it it didn't
allow for dual support on a Windows machine, it must be a pretty crappy
app as Windows has had multi monitor support for years (all the way
back to win 98).

[Mayor of R'lyeh]

On 24 Dec 2006 07:11:40 -0800, "STravis" <steve....@gmail.com>
wrote:

A quick look in Corel's website shows that this 'support for dual
monitors' is nothing more than the ability to drag the various
palettes outside ofthe main window. This was always possible on
Windows. Core must be really desperate for 'new' features to list if
this is something they consider 'trumpet-worthy'.

--

Why settle for the lesser evil?
Cthulhu for president 2008

[Sandman]

In article <u37to2l0ei65cve4m...@4ax.com>,

Oh yeah, the curse of MDI, another Windows idiocy.

--
Sandman[.net]

[STravis]

You don't have to use MDI. Windows - actually MS - gave the
developpers the option (ability) to determine if they want to use MDI
or if they want to use independent forms on a page. Again, you're
blaming Windows for a decision that the third party developers made.

[Peter Bjørn Perlsø]

Sandman <m...@sandman.net> wrote:

Wow, that's just.... wild.

Not to mention a decade behind the Mac. :))))

--
regards , Peter B. P. - http://titancity.com/blog , http://macplanet.dk

"If guns kill, do pencils cause spelling errors?"

[Peter Hayes]

STravis <steve....@gmail.com> wrote:

With a bit of jiggery-pokery you could run a dual monitor setup under
DOS. Probably pre-dated Apple in this regard.

--

Immunity is better than innoculation.

Peter

[Sandman]

In article <1167053186.0...@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"STravis" <steve....@gmail.com> wrote:

What do you mean by "independant forms on a page"?

--
Sandman[.net]

[Snit]

"Sandman" <m...@sandman.net> stated in post
mr-59BA3C.20...@News.Individual.NET on 12/25/06 12:22 PM:

>>> Oh yeah, the curse of MDI, another Windows idiocy.
>>
>> You don't have to use MDI. Windows - actually MS - gave the
>> developpers the option (ability) to determine if they want to use MDI
>> or if they want to use independent forms on a page. Again, you're
>> blaming Windows for a decision that the third party developers made.
>
> What do you mean by "independant forms on a page"?
>

Independent windows... the meaning is clear in the context.

--
€ A partial subset is not synonymous with the whole
€ A person's actions speak more about him than what others say
€ Apple doesn't provide as many options as the rest of the PC industry

[STravis]

<http://www.programmersheaven.com/2/FAQ-WinForm-Winform-Apps-Explained>

[Lars Träger]

Peter Hayes <noti...@btinternet.com> wrote:

Sure, if you wanted your setup to actually work with a handfull of apps
and break with thousand others.
--
Lars T.

[Mayor of R'lyeh]

Actually STB offered dual card setups with the necessary software to
run dual monitors under DOS. It didn't break anything. Later on Matrox
did the same thing in the last of the Win3.1 days.

[Lars Träger]

Mayor of R'lyeh <mayor.o...@gmail.com> wrote:

Suuure it didn't break anything - only the things that didn't work with
them. And you still needed apps that were written to work with them to
get anything out of them.
--
Lars T.

[Mayor of R'lyeh]

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 00:01:58 +0100, Lars.T...@epost.de (Lars
Träger) wrote:

I can't speak for the STB setup but I never had any problems running
anything on the Matrox setup where I worked at the time.

I can't recall any complaints about STB's solution either. Of course
you must have scads of them or you wouldn't be making this claim.
Don't be bashful. Go ahead and share them with us.