Problem with fonts in v.10.0 (build 2740)

[Slava]

After updating MC to v.10.0 (build 2740) fonts in certain areas became either too big or too small (unreadable). This problem didn't exist in the prior versions. Is there a way to fix it?
Examples in 2 attached files.

[Mathias (Author)]

It will auto scale the font in freespace area so you can just make it smaller in settings.
But it fails to scale it in copy to dialog, strange, I'm not able to recreate that.

What screen resolution do you have and what Windows scaling factor do you have ? 300%

[Slava]

Hi, Mathias!
Thanks a lot for your reply.

> What screen resolution do you have and what Windows scaling factor do you have ? 300%
It's 250% (as recommended by the notebook manufacturer).

Yesterday's MC version (Dec 4, '20, v.10.1.0.2743, portable x64) seems to fix the problem with "font in freespace area" - now it looks much better.
But in Copy/Move dialog it changed to the opposite - now the font is too BIG (see attached "Copy-Files-and-Folders.jpg").
Do I have an option to control this font somehow? I looked through all settings, but couldn't find the place where it can be :-(.

Thanks,
Iaroslav

[Mathias (Author)]

Hi, Mathias!
Thanks a lot for your reply.

> What screen resolution do you have and what Windows scaling factor do you have ? 300%
It's 250% (as recommended by the notebook manufacturer).

Yesterday's MC version (Dec 4, '20, v.10.1.0.2743, portable x64) seems to fix the problem with "font in freespace area" - now it looks much better.
But in Copy/Move dialog it changed to the opposite - now the font is too BIG (see attached "Copy-Files-and-Folders.jpg").
Do I have an option to control this font somehow? I looked through all settings, but couldn't find the place where it can be :-(.

Thanks,
Iaroslav

250% Hmm 4k screen on small laptop screen ?

Yes the font for filter and target path should be the same and be larger the the other, that is by design.

[Slava]

Yoga-900 notebook has 3200x1800 screen resolution.
Yes, it's little less than 4k standard (3840x2160), but close enough and, I assume, that's why 250% is recommended by the Lenovo. After trying several other settings, when I just got Yoga few years ago, I agree with 250% as the best one for vast majority cases (except some tools/programs/apps that still do not handle such DPI properly). MultiCommander prior to v.10.x didn't have any such problems too.

> Yes the font for filter and target path should be the same
> and be larger the the other, that is by design.
In prior version (v.9.7, build 2590) "by design" it was looking differently - as all other text fields/labels: not lager, not smaller (see attached snapshot "Copy-Files-and-Folders (v9.7).jpg").
So, to me as a user "old design" was better than a "new" one.
And something tells me (having 40+ years of experience in computer science and programming) that actual reason for that font size - being first too small in v.10.0 and then, few days later, too big in v.10.1 - has nothing to do with a particular design :-)...

Anyway, thank you.

[Mathias (Author)]

Before v10 many places did not scale at all in MC. Some parts did but many places did not.

And as you see in the old version their is a lot of extra space under the selected text in the "copy to" text box.  the text is aligned to the top (it can't be changed in standard windows edit box).
So there is lots of extra space not being used.

Also the Target path and filter are the most important boxes there, so making them a little bigger will make them stick out more and also use the full height of the edit box.

With 100% scaling it looks like this.
Doing scaling in old Windows UI apps is very messy. The OLD UI (GDI) is old and is not designed around a scalable UI. High DPI support was added for it as a workaround. And it is not automatic.

[Slava]

Hi, Mathias!

Thanks for your attempt to explain new MC behavior and design, but it seems to me this topic must be put to sleep, cause, sorry, but it reached the point where I really don't follow the logic anymore.
You say "as you see in the old version their is a lot of extra space under the selected text in the "copy to" text box", but I do not see any "extra space" anywhere. I see only three following differences (between old and new "Copy to" screens):
 1) Font size and
 2) "Options" button that existed in v.9.7, but disappeared in v.10.
 3) Little "recent destinations" button ("<") at the very right of "Copy files to..." field.
Maybe on some other monitors "a lot of extra space" exists, but not on mine. And you can see it yourself, if you compare two screenshots attached to my earlier posts ("Copy-Files-and-Folders.jpg" and "Copy-Files-and-Folders (v9.7).jpg").
Anyway, thank a lot for your time and good luck!

[Mathias (Author)]

Hi, Mathias!

Thanks for your attempt to explain new MC behavior and design, but it seems to me this topic must be put to sleep, cause, sorry, but it reached the point where I really don't follow the logic anymore.
You say "as you see in the old version their is a lot of extra space under the selected text in the "copy to" text box", but I do not see any "extra space" anywhere. I see only three following differences (between old and new "Copy to" screens):
 1) Font size and
 2) "Options" button that existed in v.9.7, but disappeared in v.10.
 3) Little "recent destinations" button ("<") at the very right of "Copy files to..." field.
Maybe on some other monitors "a lot of extra space" exists, but not on mine. And you can see it yourself, if you compare two screenshots attached to my earlier posts ("Copy-Files-and-Folders.jpg" and "Copy-Files-and-Folders (v9.7).jpg").
Anyway, thank a lot for your time and good luck!

The Extra space is shown in the picture you included above. in the "target path field" the text is not vertical centered. (edit box cannot do that)
Lots of extra space in the editbox until the bottom of the edit box

[Slava]

You confused me even more.
What is not vertically centered and why this "what" must be centered???
Do you mean the text in the field right under "Copy file to..." label?
It so minor "displacement" that there is nothing even to talk about.
And if you decided to "correct" such places/fields, shouldn't it be done everywhere?
For example, similar field in "Find opened/locked Handle" still demonstrate same vertical displacement (see attached "Find-opened-locked-Handle.jpg")

And still the main question/issue remains.
There is no really any significant difference in "Copy" dialogs in old and new MC versions - except font size.
From all points of view - practical usability (1) and pure esthetics (2) - font in old version is much better.
(1) With the regular font (which is smaller than the one currently used in new version) the user can see more characters in the destination path.
(2) Different font sizes unnecessarily disturb eyes (at least mine) by adding artificial disbalance. And if in the "path" field it can be somehow justified ("make them stick out" as you say), there is no any such need for "Filer" field.
Anyway, this is my personal opinion as a very grateful and loyal MC user for several years.
And my only intent is to help in making MC even better.