Re: Planned "Sound Settings" improvements

[David Henningsson <david henningsson canonical com>]

On 11/16/2011 05:00 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 16:41 +0100, David Henningsson wrote:
> > On 10/25/2011 08:40 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2011-10-25 at 20:00 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > Btw, just a quick question so I know the limitations: What are the
> > > > maximum size (in pixels) of the sound settings dialog? Are we designing
> > > > for 1024x768, 800x600 or even less?
> > >
> > > https://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings#UI_Patterns
> >
> > Hi again!
> >
> > Apart from working on the PulseAudio side, I've made a new mockup, here:
> >
> > http://people.canonical.com/~diwic/sound-settings/sound_settings_mockup_diwic2.png
> >
> > Comments about the mockup:
> >
> > First remember, I'm not a designer (the previous mockup was not made by
> > me), so please don't laugh about left margins not being pixel aligned
> > and such. Also, out of laziness I started off with a screenshot from my
> > current system, so if there's some Ubuntu theming in there, just ignore
> > that. :-)
>
> Well, disregarding the Ubuntu theme, and such, but could you base it off
> the current development version of gnome-control-center, rather than the
> GNOME 3.2 version?
>
> The order of the tabs has changed, as have the mute checkboxes.

Once we start the upstreaming process towards GNOME, we'll base that off 
what that is the current development version at that point. We'll make a 
Sound Settings version for Ubuntu 12.04 first, and I assume we'll base 
that off GNOME 3.2, as the rest of 12.04 will be based off GNOME 3.2.

> > The names in the left pane is the actual names we get out of PulseAudio
> > today. I'd probably submit a PA patch to remove some of the "Analog" and
> > "Audio" in the names, as I find them mostly superfluous.
> >
> > Fade will be hidden for profiles with less than four channels and
> > Subwoofer will be hidden if there is no LFE channel.
>
> This is already the case. We check with PulseAudio whether Fade and LFE
> are available.

Yes, so no difference there.

> > The "Volume Boost" can be debated until we all fall down dead, I left it
> > out for now as I personally don't think +11 dB fits all. I guess there
> > will be some space available if the debate ends up with  implementing it.
>
> You can try adding it later. But I'm not interested in bundling
> something I don't want to see along with other changes. Trying to sneak
> it in is unlikely to make me very cooperative, to say the least.

I don't know if we're ending up having a "Volume Boost" in the Ubuntu 
12.04 version of the sound settings or not. That might not be relevant 
to you either.

I'm assuming that when we start upstreaming stuff, there might be things 
you don't agree with, and if so, that you (or someone else from upstream 
GNOME) will then be reasonably helpful - we'll help each other to sort 
those things out and fix things up. Does that make sense?

> > And finally a question:
> >
> > I tried hard to fit the pixel margins of 675x490 in the mockup. But may
> > I ask what hardware we're actually targetting here? It seems like most
> > netbooks [1] are either 800x480, in which case 675x490 won't fit, or
> > 1024x600, in which case there should be plenty of more, at least on the
> > width side? Or am I missing something?
>
> As I mentioned in:
> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnomecc-list/2011-October/msg00018.html
> the target size is mentioned in:
> https://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings#UI_Patterns
>
> "675x530px" though probably below 490px in height to fit on all netbooks
> (except the original Asus eeePC, but really).

Yes, both 675x530px and 675x490px is taken from the page you just 
quoted. My point is that I don't understand what screen resolution that 
would match? On the height it seems to match against 600 pixels of 
screen resolution, but according to this page:

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Comparison_of_Netbooks

...all netbooks which have 600 pixels height also have 1024 pixels 
width. Which should leave a lot more width to the system settings 
application than just 675 pixels. Could explain where the "675" number 
comes from?


--
David Henningsson, Canonical Ltd.
http://launchpad.net/~diwic