8.0ß24 (x64): visual bugs on dialog buttons

[Supertroll]

Hello,

There is a difference in how buttons are displayed on the 32 and 64 bit version if a large dpi scaling is used, see images.

img692 imageshack us/img692/4953/tcmd802432bit.png
img714 imageshack us/img714/7246/tcmd802464bit.png

(Fill in missing dots, had to do this because of spam protection.)

(I'm using Win 7 64 bits with 200 % screen font dpi.)


PS, there is also the floppy icon missing in the 32 bit version.

[MaxX]

2Supertroll
Here's your links in normal view: 32, 64.
That really looks like bug, but:
1. what for do you use such a big font?
2. do you have such appearance in previous TC versions?

[Supertroll]

1. what for do you use such a big font?

For my eyes, I suppose.

2. do you have such appearance in previous TC versions?

7.57a 32 bit looks exactly the same as 8.0ß24 32 bit; even the icon is missing, too.

[MaxX]

2Supertroll
1. And what's your screen resolution?
2. In such dialogs hidden icon is normal.

[Supertroll]

1. And what's your screen resolution?

Why are you even discussing this?

2. In such dialogs hidden icon is normal.

Not in the 64 bit version, see the picture you linked.

[MaxX]

Why are you even discussing this?

Just interesting (do you have just big hi-res monitor or laptop with small pixels?), because, any non-100% dpi's cause too much problems with any program you can use.

Not in the 64 bit version, see the picture you linked.

x64 works some another way.

[Supertroll]

Why are you even discussing this?

Just interesting (do you have just big hi-res monitor or laptop with small pixels?), because, any non-100% dpi's cause too much problems with any program you can use.

I need my fonts big.

Any properly designed piece of software supports this; crapware (the kind that comes with your USB device/PCB device/inkjet printer etc.) doesn't.

Now, I don't feel like TCMD should become crapware.

x64 works some another way.

Yeah, both versions should work just the same. If the issue can't be fixed, I'll stick with the 32 bit version, don't really need the 64 bits anyway.

[umbra]

Hi, Supertroll. I agree that a good software should support non-default DPI correctly. However, so far I haven't seen a single such application - even Microsoft's own products have issues. Actually it's one of the main reasons why MS decided to partially abandon DPI settings in Windows 8. So I wouldn't call TC a crapware just because of this.
But yes, I can confirm, that the 64b version handles non-default DPI worse than the 32b version (the nag-screen is a nice example).

[Supertroll]

Hi, Supertroll. I agree that a good software should support non-default DPI correctly. However, so far I haven't seen a single such application - even Microsoft's own products have issues. Actually it's one of the main reasons why MS decided to partially abandon DPI settings in Windows 8. So I wouldn't call TC a crapware just because of this.

Hi, Umbra.

Well, I can't recall issues with Microsoft's own products here, the only exception being the icons which are sometimes badly resized (or don't exist in a larger size for every application). I still use Office 2003 and it works perfect.

Much has improved since Vista (Aero) IMO. You can now resize or even maximize many of the dialog windows that you couldn't be resized before.

I haven't tested Win8 yet. I need my PC for business.
But not being able to have my fonts big doesn't sound good.

But yes, I can confirm, that the 64b version handles non-default DPI worse than the 32b version (the nag-screen is a nice example).

The question is, why? Is it using different UI libraries?

[ghisler(Author)]

2Supertroll
Thanks for your report! Actually TC 64-bit does all the scaling by itself because Lazarus doesn't do any scaling. Apparently I missed this dialog. I also found problems in the dialog which appear when you try to switch to a drive letter with no medium (e.g. DVD drive with no disk), and when you click on "Drives" in the search dialog. There are also some problems in the main config dialog, and the copy progress dialog. I will fix them.

Please let me know if you find any other dialogs which are incorrectly scaled.

[umbra]

2ghisler(Author)
It looks better in beta 25. However I found a few more issues:
1. In the Multi Rename Tool (in TCx64), the groupbox labels are overlapped by their contents.
2. Config->Color: Comboboxes for color have different height in the 32b and the 64b versions.
3. Config->Log File: Number of log files and its label are misaligned in TCx64.
4. Lister menu in TCx64 has pixelated icons (the dot icon and the check icon).

edit:
Should we report all scaling issues in this topic or create a new topic for each one?

[ghisler(Author)]

1. Sorry, I couldn't find any solution for that.
2. Sorry, I could only change that in the 64-bit version. The 32-bit version refuses to accept the new heights.
3. NOT confirmed
4. Cannot reproduce - screenshot please!

[umbra]

2ghisler(Author)
1. It might help if you found a way to shift all contents inside groupboxes a few pixels down. There is a lot of space at the bottom of those groupboxes. (this applies to all dialogs, it's just more visible in the MRT, because of the overlapping) Image: http://i1057.photobucket.com/albums/t399/uumbra8/TC/bugs/13-4-overlapped.png
3. Now I see it's just a few pixels, but for some reason I noticed it immediately. Image: http://i1057.photobucket.com/albums/t399/uumbra8/TC/bugs/13-4-misaligned.png
4. Image: http://i1057.photobucket.com/albums/t399/uumbra8/TC/bugs/13-4-pixelated.png

[ghisler(Author)]

1. Unfortunately it's not that simple - if you look at the controls in 96dpi mode, they look perfectly OK. When I scale the coordinates, they seem to move more and more up.

3. OK I can move it down a bit, but it's not possible to set the text base line (that's set by Windows after setting the top position).

4. Looks like the images get scaled.

[ghisler(Author)]

This should look better now in RC1, please test it!