View Single Post
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 10-17-2009, 03:22 PM
klaus's Avatar
klaus klaus is offline
Basic4ppc Expert
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fully, Switzerland
Posts: 4,458
Awards Showcase
Forum Contributer Beta Tester Competition Winner 
Total Awards: 3
Default

Quote:
1) For the time being I think I should proceed as follows:
Set in the PC IDE the screen size to 400 *240, landscape.
Lay out in the IDE the controls as wanted.
Compile with auto scale.
Yes

Quote:
I assume that scaling the height is independent from scaling the width.
The control in the IDE with W=80, H=20, L=240, T= 100 is displayed on the device with W= 200, H=40, L=600, T=200
Is that correct?
No ! ScreenScaleX=2 and ScreenScaleY=2 there is NO stretching

The control in the IDE with W=80, H=20, L=240, T= 100 is displayed on the device with W= 160, H=40, L=480, T=200

Quote:
2) In my programs I make use of adding controls ( buttons, tables and image controls) at runtime.

These added controls, are they auto scaled also? Some of those added controls should keep ( or end up) the aspect ratio 4:3.
The controls added at runtime are also AutoScaled, the ratio remains 4:3

With AutoScale there are no problems with Fonts.

The difference between the 480/640 and 480/800 screen size is that in the second one you have more space (160 pixels) to place controls. The pixels are still square.

If you compile with AutoScale, you set the controls on the screen with the 240/320 or 240/400 resolution and on the device display positions and sizes are doubled and the dislay looks like the QVGA display.

If you want to take advantage of the higher resolution you must set the screen size in the IDE to 480/640 or 480/800, place your controls as you want them but double size.
The only problem is that on the desktop IDE the fonts are smaller, half size.

Best regards.
__________________
Klaus
Switzerland

Beginner's Guide / User's Guide
Reply With Quote