Just to satisfy my curiosity, how many users have more than one monitor
open simultaneously? And, if you do use more than x0, how frequently do you
do this?
Thanks,
Rich
Dr. Richard B. Shepard, President
Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc. (TM)
Making environmentally-responsible mining happen. (SM)
--------------------------------
2404 SW 22nd Street | Troutdale, OR 97060-1247 | U.S.A.
+ 1 503-667-4517 (voice) | + 1 503-667-8863 (fax) | rshepard@appl-ecosys.com
I have rarely more than x0 open. Sometimes when I have to prepare maps, I open an extra big x1 on one of the other desktops, and use x0 as my pre-test monitor, or the experimental monitor.... Or there are cases when I need to compare various different maps together, I place them on small x1..x4 monitors, but this happens once in a month. However I use a lot the CELL driver.
Cheers
Bernhard Sturm
At 16:52 23.02.01 -0800, you wrote:
Just to satisfy my curiosity, how many users have more than one monitor
open simultaneously? And, if you do use more than x0, how frequently do you
do this?
Thanks,
Rich
Dr. Richard B. Shepard, President
Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc. (TM)
Making environmentally-responsible mining happen. (SM)
--------------------------------
2404 SW 22nd Street | Troutdale, OR 97060-1247 | U.S.A.
+ 1 503-667-4517 (voice) | + 1 503-667-8863 (fax) | rshepard@appl-ecosys.com
On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 04:52:09PM -0800, Rich Shepard wrote:
Just to satisfy my curiosity, how many users have more than one monitor
open simultaneously? And, if you do use more than x0, how frequently do you
do this?
Almost never... But if GRASS had a different architecture, I could see
the utility...
I have found myself running as many as three monitors at a time. Not
that I wanted to. It happened because every now and then GRASS will
lose track of a monitor; it can't be used, can't be selected and can't
be stopped. When I'm running over a slow link (serial modem) then it's
easier to just start another monitor than it is to fix the problem with
the old one.
Roger Miller
Lee Wilson and Associates
Rich Shepard wrote:
Just to satisfy my curiosity, how many users have more than one monitor
open simultaneously? And, if you do use more than x0, how frequently do you
do this?
Thanks,
Rich
Dr. Richard B. Shepard, President
Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc. (TM)
Making environmentally-responsible mining happen. (SM)
--------------------------------
2404 SW 22nd Street | Troutdale, OR 97060-1247 | U.S.A.
+ 1 503-667-4517 (voice) | + 1 503-667-8863 (fax) | rshepard@appl-ecosys.com
On Sat, Feb 24, 2001 at 08:46:30AM -0800, Rich Shepard wrote:
On Fri, 23 Feb 2001, Eric G. Miller wrote:
> Almost never... But if GRASS had a different architecture, I could see
> the utility...
Go on, Eric. What do you mean?
If grass had something closer to a "normal" GUI, I could see the utility
of having various views of data up simultaneously. Like, maybe one view
has a broad area view, while another has a zoom window. Or possibly
you'll want to look at a surface rendering side-by-side with a plan
view, with possibly the plan view having a box displaying the currently
shown view in the surface rendering.
I argued a while back that we should consider ditching the whole
monitor/module separation for display since it was designed to overcome
the widely varying display architectures way back when. Since X is
pretty much the standard for unix boxen, we could move to having an
interface with a much higher level of functionality. Actually, upon a
little research, I think Tk could be used for some windowing system
independence (NVIZ already does, though isn't the best UI). Anyway,
I think a lot could be done in this area. The main argument against was
the ability to script output to things like the D_cell driver. IMHO, if
we also spent some time improving the ps.map system, then we'd still
have scriptable "image" output. There are plenty of utilities for
converting PostScript to other formats (PDF, PNG, etc...). The
postscript rendering model should be able to produce much better output
than something like D_cell could ever do. Tk also has hooks for
producing PostScript, so the infrastructure is there... I'm blown away
how good a little program like Sketch (Python and Tkinter) is, for
instance (and it's only at like version 0.6).
That's enough rambling...
--
Eric G. Miller <egm2@jps.net>
On 02/24/01, at 11:12 AM, "Eric G. Miller" <egm2@jps.net> said:
I argued a while back that we should consider ditching the whole
monitor/module separation for display since it was designed to overcome the
widely varying display architectures way back when. Since X is pretty much
the standard for unix boxen, we could move to having an interface with a much
higher level of functionality. Actually, upon a little research, I think Tk
could be used for some windowing system independence (NVIZ already does,
though isn't the best UI). Anyway, I think a lot could be done in this area.
The limitation that I have encountered with the present system is the size of rendered images. Both a standard GRASS monitor and an NVIZ window are effectively limited to the size of the physical display. NVIZ produces beautiful 3D images, but even though I might have a raster region size of 2000 x 3000 pixels, for example, I cannot produce a rendered image anywhere near that size, simply because it will not fit on my screen.
Barring a major architectural change, if there existed a way to save rendered images directly as files, then for me that would be an acceptable solution.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Carl Brown cbsled@ncia.net
-----------------------------------------------------------
We are convinced by things that show internal
complexity, that show the traces of an interesting
evolution. Those signs tell us that we might be
rewarded if we accord it our trust. An important
aspect of design is the degree to which the object
involves you in its own completion.
-- Brian Eno, rock musician and avant-garde artist
on design