kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Dick Hollenbeck <dick@...>]

Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> Werner Almesberger wrote:
> > Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> >
> > > Let me call the "Minimum Recommended Screen Resolution" our MRSR.
> >
> > I think there are two or three resolutions that matter for users:
> >
> > 1) the minimum resolution at which the program is still usable, no
> > matter how painful. E.g., below this resolution, GUI elements may
> > disappear, dialogs may exceed the screen size, and so on.
> >
> > 2) the resolution at and above which the program can be used for
> > regular work, even if it may be incovenient or may require more
> > experience (e.g., to learn hotkeys)
> >
> > 3) the resolution at and above which the program is really
> > convenient to use
> >
> > I wonder if space permanently allocated to desktops also has to be
> > taken into account or if all of the major ones have a full screen
> > mode that gives the application the full physical resolution.
> >
> > I think 1) should be as small as possible. It's not the resolution
> > people should work at, but they may find themselves in an exceptional
> > situation where their work environment is very constrained. It's nice
> > it your tools don't fail you even then.
> >
> > I think it would be good if this resolution could be 640x480, which
> > seems to be the lowest common denominator for hardware that's likely
> > to run KiCad at all. I think requiring more than 800x600 as the bare
> > minimum would make KiCad a less flexible tool.
>
> FACT:
>
> Your 1) is determined the by the size of the existing dialogs. This 
> is a fact, not an opinion.
>
> Look at this:
>
> kicad/pcbnew/dialog_design_rules_base.fbp
>
>
> WISH:
>
> Then come back with a plan on how to revise all the dialogs to meet 
> your 640x480. My prediction is that there will be nobody willing to 
> invest that time.
>
> If that proves true, we come back to the fact that the size of 
> existing dialogs determines your 1).
>
>
> Dick

Qualified development time is not free. Qualified development time is 
time spent by a qualified developer. This person, if he/she is truly 
qualified, is valuable to somebody, therefore his/her time is valuable. 
If he/she were to work on Kicad during working hours, this is costing 
his/her employer money. If he/she is self employed and working on 
Kicad, then he/she is costing him/herself money by way of "loss of 
opportunity costs".

The cost of converting all the dialogs is far greater than the cost of 
buying a new computer. I estimate the cost for a qualified developer to 
go through every dialog in Kicad, reworking most including supporting 
C++ code, would be in excess of $100,000. Who wants to spend that? 
Which employer. Would it not be cheaper to buy software, or buy a computer?

Can somebody unqualified (not valuable) do the work? I suppose a 
university student who is transitioning from unqualified to qualified 
may be the only kind of person that can afford to do this.

These are economics, and the reality that will determine the likelihood 
of our wishes. Economics will rule reality, always has and always will.


At best we can put into place some recommendations for the development 
of future dialogs.


Dick