bcooksley wrote:They can't do any plasma config in System Settings because of the way the config is currently exposed & handled. They also want to keep the Plasma configuration simple. Perhaps if a D-Bus call is ever added to reload configuration to Plasma then one might appear, but it might not work too well ( currently plasma config's itself and reacts appropriately )

so more or less some kind soul neads 2 make a modified plasma and systemsetting:/

Well just one more thing that in my mind shows that their trying to simplify things 2 mouch in kde4:/

A modified plasma isn't needed. they just need to make it so that Plasma can have it's settings changed either directly through D-Bus or indirectly through config files and instructions to reload the config ( i would go for the direct route myself ). At the moment the plasma developer's are just a little bit busy trying to bring back functionality while still keeping things uncomplicated ( even power users couldn't use all the available functionality in KDE3 because it was so complicated ) and hackish. They might get around to a configuration D-Bus API one day, especially if a contributor steps up. hint, hint.

bcooksley wrote:A modified plasma isn't needed. they just need to make it so that Plasma can have it's settings changed either directly through D-Bus or indirectly through config files and instructions to reload the config ( i would go for the direct route myself ). At the moment the plasma developer's are just a little bit busy trying to bring back functionality while still keeping things uncomplicated ( even power users couldn't use all the available functionality in KDE3 because it was so complicated ) and hackish. They might get around to a configuration D-Bus API one day, especially if a contributor steps up. hint, hint.

a configfile would work 2 cause then some one only neads 2 make a frontend 2 the file and i do think ther ppl around who can do souch things..

But 4 the moment im considering it a showstopper 4me,one rather important one,4 changing panels and borking around the way it is when the comp is allredy bottherd by other usage:/ as my comp is,the kde3 wersion dident take almoust any system resourses and was wery acurate....

of_darkness wrote:I haved said the you cant have several panels, im only saing its esier and better in my mind 2 have a central point 2 change the setup of the panels.

If you are in your desktop, and want to adjust the panel, why would you have to first launch system settings, and then find the relevant configuration-area, as opposed to simply adjusting the panel right away from withing the panel itself? Why should this be made more complex than it needs to be?

Maybe this goes under power user tools,but 4 me its a point of serius irritation as i find that dragging and working whit panels that way is for "regualar" users that arent familiar whit the options and controls.

There's nothing "power-usery" in adjusting the panel-size down to individual pixels. What it is, is insanity. What matters is that can you make the panel the size you want. Yes you can. And simply dragging it to desired size is a lot more elegant solutions that messing around with pixels. Besides, "pixel" is a measurement-unit that is not really understandable to people. To them, it's just an arbitary number with no meaning.

I must beg to differ. i realy find that incresing or setting a number as in kde3 is realy easy and handy.

Not really. Like I said, "pixel" is an arbitary figure to user. Sure, they know that 31 is more than 30, but that's about it. It'a quite hard for users to understand just how big (or small) a 30 pixel panel is.

Why exactly are you against dragging the panel? Because it doesn't give you pixel-precision when it comes to panel-sizing? Do you need that precision? You might think that you do, but fact is that you do not.

and when trying to make let say the fast program starter(snabbstartare in swedish) applet in kicker exactly use 3line, - or for that matter a multiline taskmanager, or any other plasmoid that has a hight changing ability.

I don't really understand what you are saying here.

and when defning my bottom panel thats alwys wisable i do realy nead to be able 2 fine tune the hight.

And you can. Just drag it to the desired size. You do not need pixel-precision. No, you really don't. What matters is that are you happy with the size of the panel. It does not matter AT ALL that is it 30 pixels high or 31 pixels high. What matter is whether you are happy with the size or not. If you are happy, fine. No changes are needed. If you are unhappy, you can make it bigger or smaller. What's the problem here? That you can't really make it three pixels smaller? Why would you want to? Instead of looking at the panel and thinking "I want it 3 pixels smaller", think "I need to make it smaller by a tiny amount". And you can easily achieve that by simply dragging.

It might APPEAR as being less configurable. But it isn't. And that's the beauty of it. It's simple, yet powerful and flexible.

and when doing your own startmenu icon you do it in xx*xx pixels.

you do it in SVG. But in anycase, creating artwork and coding might be something that requires such precision. Normal users do NOT need that kind of precision.

Janne wrote:

of_darkness wrote:I haved said the you cant have several panels, im only saing its esier and better in my mind 2 have a central point 2 change the setup of the panels.

If you are in your desktop, and want to adjust the panel, why would you have to first launch system settings, and then find the relevant configuration-area, as opposed to simply adjusting the panel right away from withing the panel itself? Why should this be made more complex than it needs to be?

well most often i have it open already. and jumping from one panel to the next is irritating and it tackes longer to do the same thing.

Maybe this goes under power user tools,but 4 me its a point of serius irritation as i find that dragging and working whit panels that way is for "regualar" users that arent familiar whit the options and controls.

Janne wrote:There's nothing "power-usery" in adjusting the panel-size down to individual pixels. What it is, is insanity. What matters is that can you make the panel the size you want. Yes you can. And simply dragging it to desired size is a lot more elegant solutions that messing around with pixels. Besides, "pixel" is a measurement-unit that is not really understandable to people. To them, it's just an arbitary number with no meaning.

i hate dragging things around and stuff, i have not the paitience whit souch stuff,numbers is easy for me,its like changing a font size or anything other..

I must beg to differ. i realy find that incresing or setting a number as in kde3 is realy easy and handy.

Janne wrote:Not really. Like I said, "pixel" is an arbitary figure to user. Sure, they know that 31 is more than 30, but that's about it. It'a quite hard for users to understand just how big (or small) a 30 pixel panel is.

nah you se the diffrence when increases and decreases the number.

Janne wrote:Why exactly are you against dragging the panel? Because it doesn't give you pixel-precision when it comes to panel-sizing? Do you need that precision? You might think that you do, but fact is that you do not.

Yeas i do nead it and i have not any patiance whit draging it,it just aggravates me. and dont give me any form of precision.

and when trying to make let say the fast program starter(snabbstartare in swedish) applet in kicker exactly use 3line, - or for that matter a multiline taskmanager, or any other plasmoid that has a hight changing ability.

Janne wrote:I don't really understand what you are saying here.

i want a panel that has 4lines of tasks in taskmanger but i should only exactly fit them not a pixel more as it alredy is over 80pixels high.

and the same thing whit the aplications applet where i want the hight to contain 3lines of icons in a set sice of icons.

and the panel can be gnome panel ,kicker,plasma or any other panel program.

Thats why pixel setting hight is important.

and when defning my bottom panel thats alwys wisable i do realy nead to be able 2 fine tune the hight.

Janne wrote:And you can. Just drag it to the desired size. You do not need pixel-precision. No, you really don't. What matters is that are you happy with the size of the panel. It does not matter AT ALL that is it 30 pixels high or 31 pixels high. What matter is whether you are happy with the size or not. If you are happy, fine. No changes are needed. If you are unhappy, you can make it bigger or smaller. What's the problem here? That you can't really make it three pixels smaller? Why would you want to? Instead of looking at the panel and thinking "I want it 3 pixels smaller", think "I need to make it smaller by a tiny amount". And you can easily achieve that by simply dragging.

uhm im saying it dosent give me a mesurment feadback,so i can sit traying to drag it 2 tthe perfect hight in hours as i dont know exatly wich hight im at.

Janne wrote:It might APPEAR as being less configurable. But it isn't. And that's the beauty of it. It's simple, yet powerful and flexible.

it is less configurable in the sens of hight. if it would be more then you would have an even smaler amount then pixel,but its pretty imposible:P

and when doing your own startmenu icon you do it in xx*xx pixels.

Janne wrote:you do it in SVG. But in anycase, creating artwork and coding might be something that requires such precision. Normal users do NOT need that kind of precision.

I dont understand svg format stuff,im happy whit modifing png pics. and then you use set size.

and moddifing exsting artwork in hight and width is nothing strange if you have non standard hights and width in things.

SVG format is a scalable vector format. This means that no matter what the size, it will not lose its high resolution. This makes it really great for icons.

Summary of above post:
"1) I don't like dragging the handles to change the height and width and would prefer to be able to edit it using a set measurement, such as pixels.
2) I want the plasma settings to appear in a new window because I think that's faster to use rather than settings just above the bar itself.
3) The task list only supports one row of tasks. I would like 4 rows, and I like to be able to make sure they just fit within the height of the bar, which I can only achieve by putting the height value to 80 pixels."

Is that a clear summary of what you are trying to say?

Moult wrote:SVG format is a scalable vector format. This means that no matter what the size, it will not lose its high resolution. This makes it really great for icons.

Summary of above post:
"1) I don't like dragging the handles to change the height and width and would prefer to be able to edit it using a set measurement, such as pixels.
2) I want the plasma settings to appear in a new window because I think that's faster to use rather than settings just above the bar itself.
3) The task list only supports one row of tasks. I would like 4 rows, and I like to be able to make sure they just fit within the height of the bar, which I can only achieve by putting the height value to 80 pixels."

Is that a clear summary of what you are trying to say?

yeah i known that the are scalable grapics but not morte and so, and in my mind thats omthing strange that is left to artist who make orginal content.. i can dabble around a little whit simple png-pics like cut and paste and recize..

Yeah pretty mouch so yeah. (and sorry if im unclear in my posts:/ i try to be clear:/)

of_darkness wrote:well most often i have it open already.

Most people do NOT keep system settings open all the time.

i hate dragging things around and stuff, i have not the paitience whit souch stuff,numbers is easy for me,its like changing a font size or anything other..

Dragging the panel is a lot faster than adjusting pixels with a spinner.

This is like complaining that if you want to move or resize the windows, you have to drag them, as opposed to using a spinner to determine how many pixels you want to move the window. I mean, if you want to move the window 5 pixels to the left, you can't really do it, now can you? But for some reason that is not a problem for anyone (you included). Then why is resizing the panel such a problem?

nah you se the diffrence when increases and decreases the number.

Sure, but they can see the difference even faster by dragging, and they get direct feedback. They see it instantly what size the panel will be. When the change the size of the panel from 30 to 40 pixels, they might have a vague idea what the new size will be, but there is a delay. Delay which does not exist with dragging. With dragging, the feedback is direct and instant.

Yeas i do nead it

Why do you think that you need pixel-precision?

and i have not any patiance whit draging it

Dragging is a lot faster than messing around with pixels.

and dont give me any form of precision.

Sure it does. You are completely free to make it as big (or small) as you wish. If it only supported some predefined sizes, then you would have a point. But it doesn't. Resizing is completely smooth.

i want a panel that has 4lines of tasks in taskmanger but i should only exactly fit them not a pixel more as it alredy is over 80pixels high.

Currently KDE4 does not support multi-row taskmanager, but it is coming. I can't really comment how it is implemented in KDE4, but I fail to see why you couldn't achieve what you wish by dragging the panel.

Thats why pixel setting hight is important.

You can achieve the same with dragging.

uhm im saying it dosent give me a mesurment feadback,so i can sit traying to drag it 2 tthe perfect hight in hours as i dont know exatly wich hight im at.

You don't need to know the exact height. Like I said: does it matter that is it 30 pixels or 31 pixels high? No. What DOES matter is that are you happy with the size of the panel. If you are, then what does it matter how many pixels high it is? Seriously?

it is less configurable in the sens of hight.

No it isn't. It can be as high as you want it to be, and resizing is completely smooth (that is, it's not limited to predefined sizes (like Windows XP's panel is for example).

and moddifing exsting artwork in hight and width is nothing strange if you have non standard hights and width in things.

98% of users never ever modify the artwork. they might change the theme, but they will not modify it.

Janne wrote:

of_darkness wrote:well most often i have it open already.

Most people do NOT keep system settings open all the time.

well i start one program and i may nead it somtime later then i dont close it.

of_darkness wrote:i hate dragging things around and stuff, i have not the paitience whit souch stuff,numbers is easy for me,its like changing a font size or anything other..

Janne wrote:Dragging the panel is a lot faster than adjusting pixels with a spinner.

It my be faster in the sence of changing height,but to get the _perfect_hight_ would then take alot longer and would be werry irritating.

Janne wrote:This is like complaining that if you want to move or resize the windows, you have to drag them, as opposed to using a spinner to determine how many pixels you want to move the window. I mean, if you want to move the window 5 pixels to the left, you can't really do it, now can you? But for some reason that is not a problem for anyone (you included). Then why is resizing the panel such a problem?

I usaly dont resize windows,and i hate botthering doing it,so i normaly only use maximized windows.
And thats why i nead my bottom taskbar 2 be so loow as possibel while still having enough space for the tasks, and in kicker taskbar i nead 4tasks in hight (22 diffrent windows atm)

of_darkness wrote:nah you se the diffrence when increases and decreases the number.

Janne wrote:Sure, but they can see the difference even faster by dragging, and they get direct feedback. They see it instantly what size the panel will be. When the change the size of the panel from 30 to 40 pixels, they might have a vague idea what the new size will be, but there is a delay. Delay which does not exist with dragging. With dragging, the feedback is direct and instant.

But you stil dont know how mouch you dragged it,youl know if youre happy ore not, for me i would be:drag upp to mouch then drag back 2 little then drag upp 2 mouch then drag down to littel then drag down to mouch and so on.

of_darkness wrote:Yeas i do nead it

Janne wrote:Why do you think that you need pixel-precision?

cause i want my panels 2 be exactly only so big as i just can do what i want them 2 do. im wherry petty about it, but for me linux is all about having the option of perfect controll where you want it.

of_darkness wrote:and i have not any patiance whit draging it

Janne wrote:Dragging is a lot faster than messing around with pixels.

se my previus statement.

of_darkness wrote:and dont give me any form of precision.

Janne wrote:Sure it does. You are completely free to make it as big (or small) as you wish. If it only supported some predefined sizes, then you would have a point. But it doesn't. Resizing is completely smooth.

No precision is in having an ecakt size thats mezurable. and setting a pixel value is esier than putting a rule on the screan and try dragging the panels to exakt size.

of_darkness wrote:i want a panel that has 4lines of tasks in taskmanger but i should only exactly fit them not a pixel more as it alredy is over 80pixels high.

Janne wrote:Currently KDE4 does not support multi-row taskmanager, but it is coming. I can't really comment how it is implemented in KDE4, but I fail to see why you couldn't achieve what you wish by dragging the panel.

did you miss the word exactly? and by it i mean not a pixel more than it absolutly neads.

of_darkness wrote:Thats why pixel setting hight is important.

Janne wrote:You can achieve the same with dragging.

of_darkness wrote:uhm im saying it dosent give me a mesurment feadback,so i can sit traying to drag it 2 tthe perfect hight in hours as i dont know exatly wich hight im at.

Janne wrote:You don't need to know the exact height. Like I said: does it matter that is it 30 pixels or 31 pixels high? No. What DOES matter is that are you happy with the size of the panel. If you are, then what does it matter how many pixels high it is? Seriously?

for me it does matter as i already said.

of_darkness wrote:it is less configurable in the sens of hight.

Janne wrote:No it isn't. It can be as high as you want it to be, and resizing is completely smooth (that is, it's not limited to predefined sizes (like Windows XP's panel is for example).

No it still can be only some pixel hights as the computer only think in pixelsr but now you dont know when its at the diffrent pixel hights.

of_darkness wrote:and moddifing exsting artwork in hight and width is nothing strange if you have non standard hights and width in things.

Janne wrote:98% of users never ever modify the artwork. they might change the theme, but they will not modify it.

well but then who many do change the hight and width? i would geuss that they also change and moddify artwork.

of_darkness wrote:cause i want my panels 2 be exactly only so big as i just can do what i want them 2 do. im wherry petty about it, but for me linux is all about having the option of perfect controll where you want it.

If you want that level of detailed control logout and edit the relevant config files in ~/.kde4/share/config/plasma-appletsrc directly, it doesn't get any preciser than that.

Furthermore I'm absolutely positive you will not see the difference between a panel with 80px height or one with 79px. It's a computer screen we're talking about, not printed stuff - where you won't spot the difference easily as well.

of_darkness wrote:well i start one program and i may nead it somtime later then i dont close it.

But fact remains that system settings is such a program that the user does not constantly open it. Not even once a week.

Besides, it's starting to seem that your usage-habits are so peculiar that designing KDE around them would be quite counterproductive .

It my be faster in the sence of changing height,but to get the _perfect_hight_ would then take alot longer and would be werry irritating.

It doesn't take one bit longer. Just drag it to make it smaller or bigger. You might think that you need pixel-precision, but you really do not. It does not matter at all how many pixels the height of the panel is. No, it really doesn't. What matters is that do you think the panel is as big as you want it. If it is, then it does not matter at all how many pixels high it is.

Don't stare at the pixels, stare at the panel. You do not use the pixels, you use the panel.

And thats why i nead my bottom taskbar 2 be so loow as possibel while still having enough space for the tasks, and in kicker taskbar i nead 4tasks in hight (22 diffrent windows atm)

There's nothing in KDE4 that prevents you from doing the same.

But you stil dont know how mouch you dragged it,youl know if youre happy ore not, for me i would be:drag upp to mouch then drag back 2 little then drag upp 2 mouch then drag down to littel then drag down to mouch and so on.

It's the same thing with pixels. Make it few pixels bigger. Make it again few pixels bigger. Make it few pixels smaller. Repeat until you are done.

At least with dragging, you get instant feedback on what the size of the panel will be. You are not walking with your eys shut (like you do with pixels), since you see it ALL THE TIME what size the panel is and what size it's going to be.

And why is this such a big problem for you? You probably adjust the panel once. So why all this complaining over something that you do once, maybe twice?

cause i want my panels 2 be exactly only so big as i just can do what i want them 2 do.

And you can achieve that with dragging. I REALLY don't see the problem here.

im wherry petty about it, but for me linux is all about having the option of perfect controll where you want it.

You do have perfect control. You are not forced to use panels of certain size, you can smoothly and effortlessly adjust their size and location. Like I said, I really don't see the problem here.

No precision is in having an ecakt size thats mezurable.

Why do you want to measure it? Either the panel is of suitable size, or it isn't. If it IS suitable, it does not matter one bit how many pixels it happens to be.

It seems to me that you are approaching this from the wrong end. To you, the actual size of the of the panel is not important. What matters is it's size in pixels. But understand that the pixels are just a means to an end. And what is that "end"? It's making the panels as big or small as you want it to be. And you can achieve that with dragging just fine.

and setting a pixel value is esier than putting a rule on the screan and try dragging the panels to exakt size.

You sure have weird ways of using and setting up your computer.... Why would you have to use a ruler?

did you miss the word exactly? and by it i mean not a pixel more than it absolutly neads.

And you can achieve that with dragging. Seriously: this is complaining about nothing.

of_darkness wrote:uhm im saying it dosent give me a mesurment feadback,so i can sit traying to drag it 2 tthe perfect hight in hours as i dont know exatly wich hight im at.

Again: why do you need to know the exact size of the panel? I mean, if it is of suitable height, then it does not matter at all how many pixels the panel is. Why are you staring at the pixels, when you should be staring at the panel and asking yuorself "does that panel do what I want it to do?".

You are focusing on the wrong issue here. Pixels are not important, the panel is.

for me it does matter as i already said.

Why? Your insistance of staring at the pixels reminds me of some kind of compulsive behavior. The number of pixels is irrelevant. What matters is that is the size of the panel suitable for you or not.

No it still can be only some pixel hights as the computer only think in pixelsr but now you dont know when its at the diffrent pixel hights.

The computer thinks in pixels, but that doesn't mean that the user should think in pixels as well.

well but then who many do change the hight and width? i would geuss that they also change and moddify artwork.

Lots and lots of people modify the size of the panels. And 98% of them never touch the artwork at all.

And I would really appreciate if you paid more attention to your spelling. It would make it a lot easier to read your comments.

If you are that concerned about pixels, open KRuler, set its orientation to north, move your mouse to whatever pixel length you want from the top, drag it all the way to the bottom of your screen (so only that length of pixels are showing) and then drag your panel to that height.

jrick wrote:If you are that concerned about pixels, open KRuler, set its orientation to north, move your mouse to whatever pixel length you want from the top, drag it all the way to the bottom of your screen (so only that length of pixels are showing) and then drag your panel to that height.

Ohh i newer ever thought about that app:P(another indication of that i have aloot of apps:P^^) shall try that trick..[hr]

jrick wrote:If you are that concerned about pixels, open KRuler, set its orientation to north, move your mouse to whatever pixel length you want from the top, drag it all the way to the bottom of your screen (so only that length of pixels are showing) and then drag your panel to that height.

tested just but stil not practical as the panel is not resicing in real time as you have to drag the conf bar and then reles it for it to take affect and the panel lenght bar underneath the hight draging bar is confusing specialy when tthe panel is not resicing in realtime.[hr]

Janne wrote:

of_darkness wrote:well i start one program and i may nead it somtime later then i dont close it.

But fact remains that system settings is such a program that the user does not constantly open it. Not even once a week.

Hmm strange im always loking at diffrent settings and tweking stuff..

Janne wrote:Besides, it's starting to seem that your usage-habits are so peculiar that designing KDE around them would be quite counterproductive .

haha maybe so but i cant realy be alone in my usage,that would be statisticly strange.. or?.. hmm..

of_darkness wrote:It my be faster in the sence of changing height,but to get the _perfect_hight_ would then take alot longer and would be werry irritating.

Janne wrote:It doesn't take one bit longer. Just drag it to make it smaller or bigger. You might think that you need pixel-precision, but you really do not. It does not matter at all how many pixels the height of the panel is. No, it really doesn't. What matters is that do you think the panel is as big as you want it. If it is, then it does not matter at all how many pixels high it is.

I just tested it but nah, i drag it way more then i want ,but im not that good in control of my mouse,and i do suck at computer games(and i do not men card or chess games..:P)

Janne wrote:Don't stare at the pixels, stare at the panel. You do not use the pixels, you use the panel.

And the pixels is a way 2 get feadback about what im doing. so it still about the panel. the pixels is just the measurment.

of_darkness wrote:And thats why i nead my bottom taskbar 2 be so loow as possibel while still having enough space for the tasks, and in kicker taskbar i nead 4tasks in hight (22 diffrent windows atm)

Janne wrote:There's nothing in KDE4 that prevents you from doing the same.

it is,and ~/.kde4/share/config/plasma-appletsrc is realy non understandable.. but haey if any one reading this would be kind enough to make some tutorial that explains the settings in there it maby would be a temporary sullution until somthing better is coded by some one..

of_darkness wrote:But you stil dont know how mouch you dragged it,youl know if youre happy ore not, for me i would be:drag upp to mouch then drag back 2 little then drag upp 2 mouch then drag down to littel then drag down to mouch and so on.

Janne wrote:It's the same thing with pixels. Make it few pixels bigger. Make it again few pixels bigger. Make it few pixels smaller. Repeat until you are done.

but i cant get it a few pixels, i get a whol bunch of pixel change in height when dragging,just as i said,to mouch then to little and so on.. and i just tested to drag whit a svn version from yeasterday.

Janne wrote:At least with dragging, you get instant feedback on what the size of the panel will be. You are not walking with your eys shut (like you do with pixels), since you see it ALL THE TIME what size the panel is and what size it's going to be.

nopp youre dragging a "bar" and then realising it to se where the real panel ends upp, and you get "big" jumps like 5-6pixels if i would take a guess abot the jumps i got when i tried to drag it.

Janne wrote:And why is this such a big problem for you? You probably adjust the panel once. So why all this complaining over something that you do once, maybe twice?

nah i often do test instalations and getting trubbel and nead to purge setting or reinstall,so thats like normal for me:/

cause i want my panels 2 be exactly only so big as i just can do what i want them 2 do.

Janne wrote:And you can achieve that with dragging. I REALLY don't see the problem here.

se my refering of my latest test to drag plasma panel.

of_darkness wrote:im wherry petty about it, but for me linux is all about having the option of perfect controll where you want it.

Janne wrote:You do have perfect control. You are not forced to use panels of certain size, you can smoothly and effortlessly adjust their size and location. Like I said, I really don't see the problem here.

No i dont have any real controll att all as it is not resicing the panel in real time it only moving the settings bar.

of_darkness wrote:No precision is in having an ecakt size thats mezurable.

Janne wrote:Why do you want to measure it? Either the panel is of suitable size, or it isn't. If it IS suitable, it does not matter one bit how many pixels it happens to be.

if i dont measure it i only get a feling of its to big ore its to small and sitt trying to "feal" it right and thats a nightmare,you dont go do things by feling,not i that way anyway.

Janne wrote:It seems to me that you are approaching this from the wrong end. To you, the actual size of the of the panel is not important. What matters is it's size in pixels. But understand that the pixels are just a means to an end. And what is that "end"? It's making the panels as big or small as you want it to be. And you can achieve that with dragging just fine.

No the actual size is what matters.

of_darkness wrote:and setting a pixel value is esier than putting a rule on the screan and try dragging the panels to exakt size.

Janne wrote:You sure have weird ways of using and setting up your computer.... Why would you have to use a ruler?

to get feadback about how mouch you draged it.

of_darkness wrote:did you miss the word exactly? and by it i mean not a pixel more than it absolutly neads.

Janne wrote:And you can achieve that with dragging. Seriously: this is complaining about nothing.

No as i pointed out abowe i dont achieve that att all.

I just did a test right before i posted theis answer whit a svn checkout plasma that i checkedout just yesterday.

of_darkness wrote:uhm im saying it dosent give me a mesurment feadback,so i can sit traying to drag it 2 tthe perfect hight in hours as i dont know exatly wich hight im at.

Janne wrote:Again: why do you need to know the exact size of the panel? I mean, if it is of suitable height, then it does not matter at all how many pixels the panel is. Why are you staring at the pixels, when you should be staring at the panel and asking yuorself "does that panel do what I want it to do?".

and if i do that i would come nowere as i only would get upset and irritating ower the lack of perfect controll.

Janne wrote:You are focusing on the wrong issue here. Pixels are not important, the panel is.

of_darkness wrote:for me it does matter as i already said.

Janne wrote:Why? Your insistance of staring at the pixels reminds me of some kind of compulsive behavior. The number of pixels is irrelevant. What matters is that is the size of the panel suitable for you or not.

its the feadback i want,if its in i parts of a letter in a window when dragging a window ore in pixels in a pixel controll config ore just yousing kruler and milimeters is not intresting, the intresting part is getting a measurd feadback.

of_darkness wrote:No it still can be only some pixel hights as the computer only think in pixelsr but now you dont know when its at the diffrent pixel hights.

Janne wrote:The computer thinks in pixels, but that doesn't mean that the user should think in pixels as well.

Why not? its a defenitive mezurment and you know when you get it right and you get a valu on it and then you can change it over and over and alvays revert back to your favorite setting that youre comfortable width,that works for you.

of_darkness wrote:well but then who many do change the hight and width? i would geuss that they also change and moddify artwork.

Janne wrote:Lots and lots of people modify the size of the panels. And 98% of them never touch the artwork at all.

Then the cant have bean using kbfx,as the kbfx-thems comes whit set icon hights,and all other artwork is hight and width set as the them maker has made the them to fit a fixed set of hight and width, if you then like me want your menu to go from the panel to the top of the screen,then you realy have to paly around with the artwork that forms the theme. or the menu icon.

Janne wrote:And I would really appreciate if you paid more attention to your spelling. It would make it a lot easier to read your comments.

sorry but i cant realy spell,neither enlish or swedish(my native language). but i try to fix what i se. ,and to start a new draft in thunderbird for spellchecking is a bit owerkill and the spell checker is stupid 2. so sorry but no i cant.

mensch wrote:

of_darkness wrote:cause i want my panels 2 be exactly only so big as i just can do what i want them 2 do. im wherry petty about it, but for me linux is all about having the option of perfect controll where you want it.

If you want that level of detailed control logout and edit the relevant config files in ~/.kde4/share/config/plasma-appletsrc directly, it doesn't get any preciser than that.

Furthermore I'm absolutely positive you will not see the difference between a panel with 80px height or one with 79px. It's a computer screen we're talking about, not printed stuff - where you won't spot the difference easily as well.

well to do that i would need a tutorial in doing that as its like pure greek to me(a swedish saying for when the language is alien to your eyes), but if any one provided a explantion/tutorial to it then it would be a viable temporary sullotion until somthing better comes around.

But withoutit i realy cant understand it even less know what 2 eddit..

Because you can't find the toilet or it overflowed on you do you go pee on the living room walls? That's what your rant was like. It adds no light, but plenty of heat, and seems designed to create a stink to driver others out of the house.

http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid= ... 1522818645