For some time now, I've been working on a series of GUIs. I use a Mac running OSX to write all of my code, and the problem I've encountered is that it there are deviations in appearance when the GUIs are used in windows, some of which are minor, and some of which are very significant.
1) The text in the windows version is substantially larger overall. This results in some of my button titles simply going off the button, or panel titles moving beyond the panel.
2) Axes appear to be different dimensions between Mac and Windows. i.e. An axis that appears square on my Mac will appear elongated or rectangular on windows, and vice versa.
3) Graphical displays are different. This is the real problem. Some of my GUIs use axes to display text and model chemical reaction animations. On the Mac, they look perfectly fine, but on the windows system, the sizing is completely off.
I've set all "Units" to "characters" as suggested by the Mathworks help page, and I do not specify any fonts to allow each system to use its default. I have however, specified font sizes, but apparently, 12 point font on windows appears very different from 12 point font on mac.
Are there any ways around these problems? I thought setting a specified font size and allowing for use of default fonts would fix this, but it hasn't, and I'm a little dry for ideas at this point.
Try working in 'pixels' or absolute size units instead of 'characters', and apply a scaling factor to your font sizes.
Setting 'Units' to 'characters' is probably the wrong way to go for portability, and could be the main cause of your display sizing issues. Which specific Matlab page recommended that you do so? Was it talking about cross-platform portability? The characters unit is very convenient to work with, but it is tied to the font metrics for the default system font. (See the doco for Units property at http://www.mathworks.com/help/matlab/ref/axes_props.html). That's going to differ between different operating systems. Working with 'pixels' or inches/centimeters/points, which are absolute, will probably give you more uniform results across operating systems.
And you're not wrong: OS X tends to display fonts of a given size on screen smaller than Windows does. (Generally; YMMV depending on your display DPI and system settings and other things.) For example, I run my terminals and text editors at 10 or 12 points in Windows, but 14 point or larger on Mac. So apply a scaling factor to the font sizes you set in your GUI. Figure out what looks good on Mac, and then scale it in your code to something like windows_font_size = floor(mac_font_size * 0.8) and see how it goes.
If you want to be more precise in scaling, you could grab the ScreenPixelsPerInch and ScreenSize root properties with get(0,...). You may also be able to call down in to Java code to get precise font metrics info to help with font scaling choices.
Either way, you're going to have to test your code on both systems instead of just expecting it to work portably. If you don't have ready access to a Windows development system, consider setting up a Windows VM on your Mac. With file sharing between the two sides, you'll be able to try your code out on both platforms right as you work with it.
I encountered this problem as well.
Calling this function within the FUNCTIONNAME_OpeningFcn might alleviate your issues:
function decreaseFontSizesIfReq(handles)
% make all fonts smaller on a non-mac-osx computer
persistent fontSizeDecreased
fontSizeDecreased = [];
if ~ismac()
% No MAC OSX detected; decrease font sizes
if isempty(fontSizeDecreased)
for afield = fieldnames(handles)'
afield = afield{1}; %#ok<FXSET>
try %#ok<TRYNC>
set(handles.(afield),'FontSize',get(handles.(afield),'FontSize')*0.75); % decrease font size
end
end
fontSizeDecreased=1; % do not perform this step again.
end
end
Related
So I have a big 32 inch display with a resolution of 1440p, and I want to set the DPI scaling to 75% instead of 100%. But I can't find any way to do so on multiple monitors.
I currently have:
Display 1 [2560 x 1440] (Main display I want to change)
Display 2 [2560 x 1440] (This one is 27 inches so it's fine as is)
Display 3 [3840 x 2160] (Set to 100%, fine as it is)
This trick (click me) changes DPI scaling via some registry keys (LogPixels & Win8DpiScaling), but when I use that trick it downscales display 3 instead of display 1.
Is there a way to get this to work? I see no reason for Microsoft to limit the scaling in displays.
Note: I have a 2070 super, all the displays are plugged into the GPU via displayport directly, with the latest avalible firmware at the time of writing (september 2021)
The tl;dr:
Technical limitations aside, there are very solid user experience reasons why this probably isn't allowed.
No, Windows will not let you set UI scaling below 100%.
(even if a stable workaround were to be discovered, most users would probably be quite unhappy with the results)
While I would love¹ to be proven incorrect, the implications of scaling at less than 100% are so fraught that this limitation is unlikely to change in the near future.
Background:
This has been the case for ages, likely since Windows first introduced the feature.
Compatibility with current software
The only ~purely technical~ reason I can think of:
The 100% scaling size likely uses the smallest base image (e.g. Explorer and Taskbar icons, mouse and text cursors) resources included in various existing Microsoft and 3rd-party applications.
User experience
Going below the 100% point may cause small UI text and icons, especially in application toolbars and the Taskbar to be blurred to the point of ambiguity.
Those fine lines in the taskbar 'Windows' menu icon? Blurred or gone.
Taken to the extreme, the UI ~might~ become so unreadable that the user is effectively prevented from being able to read the text even in the 'Settings' window and therefore is 'stuck': i.e. not able to navigate through 'Settings' to restore the original '100%' scaling mode.
(Luckily, Windows is never used to run any SCADA software where confusing two icons could theoretically cost money or lives.)
Performance:
Since those carefully-designed graphic assets don't exist, if sub-100% scaling were allowed, it would also likely cause extra CPU/GPU workload - that is why only certain fixed sizes of up-sampling are shown on the normal Display settings screen and why the Advanced scaling settings screen warns that custom scaling between 100-500% is "not recommended".
That might also apply to any fixed scaling option offered below 100%, and absolutely would for custom scaling sizes.
Some people enjoy reading:
Vector-based TrueType/OpenType fonts usually contain a ~lot~ of manual tweaking / hints to enable readable display of very small point sizes.
The marketing department & friends of the C-suite
Could they implement this at a limited range of options? 90%? 75%?
Perhaps - but it's extra testing for a horrible-looking edge case.
The existence of the option, even if only available as a registry hack, might cause some people to actually use it in kiosks and other public-facing displays; this risks the same sort of bad PR as when a BSOD is seen on the 'arrivals' screen at a train station or airport monitor.
Combined with the first example below, even a 90% option could cause trouble in some environments.
Example and tutorial:
Imagine how Windows might look displayed on one of those cheapo '1080p-supported' projectors that actually only contains an imager with a native pixel resolution of, say, 1024x576 (or even 480x234).
Windows thinks it can send 1080p, since that what the HDMI connection advertises, so it does: any text / vector content looks atrocious.
(At least in this case the user could normally² unplug the projector and reconnect to a normal monitor to restore functionality.)
See for yourself... while connected to any monitor (at that monitor's native resolution), with Windows set to 100% scaling:
Open Windows Notepad
Type or paste in any block of text
Now, use the Zoom Out command from the View menu³ five or more times in a row
While not an exact analogue, you may still see how hard it could be to read down-sampled text, even when very high-contrast (the best-case scenario).
¹: As someone currently typing this very answer on a 1080p connection to a 55" 4K television as a second monitor, I came across the question very much hoping this was possible. Sadly, logic intervened and killed my potential joy.
²: Unless the computer is actually stored somewhere locked or inaccessible, such as a NUC-style PC hidden above the false ceiling in a conference room.
³: Alternatively, press <CTRL>-<Minus> five or more times.
I'm using accessibility with the AccessibleObjectFromPoint function, and I'd like it to work correctly on a per-monitor DPI environment. Unfortunately, I can't get it to work. I tried many things, and the situation for now is:
My app is marked as per-monitor-DPI-aware in the manifest. (True/PM)
I use GetCursorPos and then AccessibleObjectFromPoint.
How can the problem be reproduced:
Have two monitors, one with 100% DPI, the other with 125%.
Run Chrome on the 125% monitor.
Use AccessibleObjectFromPoint on one of the tab names, it won't work.
It works with some apps (DPI-aware, it seems, like explorer), but doesn't work with others. I tried several relevant functions, such as GetPhysicalCursorPos and PhysicalToLogicalPointForPerMonitorDPI, but nothing works.
It's worth noting that Microsoft's inspect.exe works as expected.
I’ve been struggling with this exact same problem for several weeks and can now tell you my findings. Unfortunately I can’t give you more than a hint of code, because the project I am working on, is proprietary.
The issue started at Windows 8.1. The problem did not exist on Windows 7 or Vista, because AccessibleObjectFromPoint always used raw physical coordinates, as documented here: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/dd317984(v=vs.85).aspx .
“Microsoft Active Accessibility does not use logical coordinates. The following methods and functions either return physical coordinates or take them as parameters.” This has not been true since Windows 8.1.
AccessibleObjectFromPoint now uses a flawed calculation that cannot always find the correct window for reasons similar to my question here: High DPI scaling, mouse hooks and WindowFromPoint .
My findings lead me to one conclusion: The API is broken. This does not mean it is not possible though.
Possible solutions I have partially tested that seem to work follow.
Prerequisites are that you
1/. Make your process per monitor DPI aware, NOT USING THE MANIFEST (more on that later).
2/. Determine the hWnd of the window you want to query (WindowFromPoint() variants)
3/. Determine the monitor DPI of the queried hWnd
4/. Determine the DPI of your process
5/. Determine the DPI of the queried hWnd
6/. Determine the monitor origin and offset for the queried hWnd (MonitorFromWindow() and GetMonitorInfo() )
Next, depends on your platform
Windows 10.0.14393+
Write a function that finds the IAccessible (AccessibleObjectFromWindow() ) from the top level window, and then recursively call IAccessible::accHitTest until you reach the bottom-most IAccessible and perhaps ChildID data. Return that as if you would call AccessibleObjectFromPoint.
To call it successfully, you will need to scale the (x,y) co-ordinates into the scale system of the queried hWnd, using the DPIs and co-ordinates fetched in the list above. Watch out for systems where monitors are not the same size or if monitors are partially offset, or above and below.
And now for the important part for 10.0.14393 – Set your thread to the same DPI_AWARENESS_CONTEXT of the hWnd you are querying. Now call your new function. Now revert your thread to monitor DPI aware, and voila, it works, even if the window is not maximised. This is why you must not use the manifest.
If you are on Windows 8.1 to 10.0.10586 you have a tougher task.
Instead of calling accHitTest, as above, you have to recursively call AccessibleChildren and iterate the call IAccessible::accLocation to determine if your test point is within each child. This is tricky and starts to get really messy when you get to e.g. combo boxes in products like Office, which is only system DPI aware.
That’s all I can give you for now.
To do it successfully on multi-platform (mine has to work from Vista to Windows-Current) the only really safe bet is to write a wrapper DLL in C++ that can determine at runtime which OS it is on and change code path accordingly. The reason you want to do it in C++ is to avoid passing IAccessible objects across the .Net/unmanaged marshalling boundary. You can call IUnknown::Release on objects you don’t need to return n the unmanaged side. You can do it all in .Net, but it will be slow.
P.S. also watch out for Chrome returning infinite trees where parents are children of their parents, some snity checks are required. Also, Chrome does not return accRole correctly, and will give you HTML tags instead of VT_I4.
Good luck
A fairly workable solution is as follows, in your IAccessible recursive function:
Use getwindowrect to capture the physical right on main window
Use accChild.accLocation in loop to capture left and Width on each Object
Add this simple test
If l > rct2r.Right And l > arrIACC.x2 Then
arrIACC.x2 = l + w
End If
if dpi = 100 then no Object is furter out than physical right
if dpi > 100 then closebutton is...x pix offset
Use the difference to rescale all values you are in use of Width
arrIACC.w1 = CInt(((-rct2r.Left + arrIACC.w1) / arrIACC.x2) * rct2r.Right)
This solution is from an Excel plugin I have developed, I was testing the Width of the quick access toolbar qat and my result was +- 5 pixels regardless of any DPI.
Environment: Mac OS El Capitan; MBP 2012-Mid 15'.
Same problem on both built-in LCD and external LCDs. I have tried with 3 external monitors. Also same problem on another MBP with Retina internal LCD. Also, same problem occurs no matter the resolution is scaled, not scaled, or HiDPI.
As the screenshot shows, same font name + same font size + same text + same screen has different visual width in different text editors. I have tried to tune one of the font size to be like 14.1/13.9/etc, but not works, the text is either too small/narrow or too big/wide; what's more, some editors cannot use fraction font size.
Q1: How to show exactly same visual size for same font size?
Q2: Looks like there are two font rendering engines in the OS? If yes, how to specify which one to use for specified app or for all apps?
Thanks a lot.
We are having an application ported from Windows to Mac OS, and colors are being displayed differently on both platforms. Here's an example:
In this case, we're telling the application to use green 0,140,0 and blue 25,0,75. On windows, this works great (top image). On the Mac, apparently OS X decides to "reinterpret" the colors and displays them differently (bottom image).
Is there something we can do to tell the operating system to stop being creative with our color definitions? It's going to be hard to make things look good on both platforms if the mac arbitrarily changes our color definitions by ~10%.
Edit: Here's an example of the code we're using to set the color for the blue used above:
m_colour = CGColorCreateGenericRGB(25 / 255.0, //r
0 / 255.0, //g
75 / 255.0, //b
1.0); //a
Thanks.
The Mac uses a complex colourspace system called ColorSync to ensure colours appear identical on different devices. As a result, colours may sometimes be shifted slightly in the RGB space so that they appear to the eye identical on properly calibrated displays, printers, etc.
If you show us the code you use to generate that shade of green, we can show you how to modify it to avoid this colour correction. However, unless there's a pressing reason why you want to avoid it, it's usually better to let it happen, as you do not have a wide range of display models to test against.
Edit: CGColorCreateGenericRGB() creates a colour in the generic RGB colour space, so it's going to end up shifting slightly depending on your display calibration. Unfortunately for you, it is no longer possible (as of Mac OS X 10.4) to create an instance of CGColor that is device-dependent (and therefore not subject to calibration.) You can, however, create a CGColor in the colour space of the target drawing context--that will tell Quartz that no conversion is necessary.
If you've created the context yourself, you should keep a reference to the colour space you used (of the type CGColorSpaceRef.) If it's at the Cocoa level (such as the context created by -[NSImage lockFocus] or by -[NSView drawRect:] then you should use the relevant NSColor APIs instead of the CGColor APIs (i.e. +[NSColor colorWithDeviceRed:green:blue:alpha:].)
If you must use Quartz drawing, you can call CGContextSetRenderingIntent() to tell the context how you want to have colours converted, but there is no guarantee that a conversion will not take place.
We have standard flex 3 project, and We have left everything as default, no change in style at all, and we deployed our project and noticed that on Mac the character spacing is very bad and overall look and feel is not as clear as that of windows.
Here is the difference, left one is Windows and right one is Mac.. the default flex font chosen by Adobe is "Verdana", the left one looks pretty, but right one looks as its width and character spacing, everything is incorrect. I assume verdana font may not be available on Mac, but in that case I supposed adobe should have given default standard font of good quality.
alt text http://akashkava.com/images/MacFlashFontProblem.png
What can we do to resolve this? Will embedding Verdana font in flex project style will help?
Mac OS X and Windows have different text rendering engines. I've heard it said that Mac OS X tries to preserve the character shape while Windows tries to align with screen pixels at small sizes.
That's going to result in differences between how fonts are rendered, and there's really no way to work around it.
Personally, I think the example on the right looks much nicer; the one on the left looks square, like it's being rendered at too small a size, while the one on the right looks more like the font is supposed to look.
It's not a solution, but Verdana is available on every OS X box. See this Apple doc for 10.5; I couldn't find one on 10.6 but there is one.