Ubuntu Minimum Supported Resolution

[Bryce Harrington]

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 09:26:14PM -0400, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> Desktop bare minimum = 640x480
> Desktop recommended = 1024x768
> 
> Netbook Remix bare minimum = [not listed]

The original Asus Eee PC was 800x480.  Don't think I've heard of
anything smaller in the netbook category.

> Netbook Remix recommended = 800x600
> 
> This information is not entirely clear to me.  In my opinion "bare minimum"
> system requirements mean that Ubuntu's operation will be non-optimal but
> still functional.  If an application window or dialog does not properly fit
> in the bare minimum resolution then, in my opinion, this application or
> dialog is not functional because a user will only be able to properly
> interact with the program though the use of clever and non-obvious
> workarounds.  However, I've seen multiple dialogs that do not properly fit
> in 640x480 resolution.  This leads me to the following questions:
> 
> If Ubuntu Desktop has dialogs that do not properly fit in 1024x768 then
> certainly this must be a bug. Correct?
> Ubuntu Desktop has dialogs that do not properly fit in 640x480.  Is this
> okay or should it be considered a bug?
> If Netbook Remix has dialogs that do not properly fit in 800x600 then this
> certainly must be a bug as well. Correct?

I would think it to be at least a usability bug.  Many people don't know
the Alt+Drag trick, and even if they do it's quite irritating to have to
do.

When I worked on the screen resolution applet, I put a lot of effort
into ensuring it fit within 640x400.  I targeted 400 as the maximum
hight rather than 480 to account for the toolbars.  I figure if no other
dialog did, the screen resolution dialog at a minimum should fit since
after all it deals with resolution setting.  It looks like it's grown a
touch since then.

> If the publicly stated "minimum supported resolution" is 640x480 then
> shouldn't we either
> a) Ensure that all of the programs that we officially support in Ubuntu can
> operate correctly in 640x480?
> b) Raise the publicly stated "minimum supported resolution"?
> c) Maybe consider doing both? :)

With the growth of cell phones as computing devices, along with other
small scale devices, I personally think that even if netbooks no longer
care about sub-1024x768 resolutions, there's going to be new devices
that do.  So work to optimize applications for lower resolutions is not
going to go to waste.

Btw, a technique to consider.  Sometimes there are concerns that
reducing a dialog's size will squeeze out important functionality.
Most toolkits provide a way to identify the current screen resolution.
So you could check if the height is <640 and if so collapse or hide some
UI elements to make it fit.

A case in point would be the cairo draggable monitor layout in the
display preferences dialog.  This could be either shrunken or even
replaced with a simple dropdown if on a system of lower resolution.
The Screensaver Preferences dialog could be another case - by default
leave it at its current size, but if <640 have it omit the preview
window and reduce the height of the selection list.

Anyway, thanks for your work on this issue, it's always been a minor pet
peeve of mine.  :-)
Bryce