(In reply to Kirk Steuber (he/him) [:bytesized] from comment #60) > > FWIW, the Lenovo Yoga C630 has a resolution of 1920x1080 and defaults to 150% scaling (Windows 10). > > I believe this works out to `1080px/1.5 = 720px` in available height. Comment 1 indicates that Windows has a taskbar height of 40px. I believe that this leaves 680 pixels of usable height. This is substantially less than the 768 pixel minimum height that the user story says that we are planning to optimize for. This begs the question whether we need to reduce vertical space consumption with normal density. Proton makes us consume significantly more space than competitors, see attachment 9204237 [details]. If this was done based on the same shaky data that led to 1693028 bug (see bug 1693028 comment 53), that's a problem; it means we've optimized for a fictive user population.
Bug 1698244 Comment 0 Edit History
Note: The actual edited comment in the bug view page will always show the original commenter’s name and original timestamp.
(In reply to Kirk Steuber (he/him) [:bytesized] from bug 1693028 comment #60) > > FWIW, the Lenovo Yoga C630 has a resolution of 1920x1080 and defaults to 150% scaling (Windows 10). > > I believe this works out to `1080px/1.5 = 720px` in available height. Comment 1 indicates that Windows has a taskbar height of 40px. I believe that this leaves 680 pixels of usable height. This is substantially less than the 768 pixel minimum height that the user story says that we are planning to optimize for. This begs the question whether we need to reduce vertical space consumption with normal density. Proton makes us consume significantly more space than competitors, see attachment 9204237 [details]. If this was done based on the same shaky data that led to 1693028 bug (see bug 1693028 comment 53), that's a problem; it means we've optimized for a fictive user population.
(In reply to Kirk Steuber (he/him) [:bytesized] from bug 1693028 comment #60) > > FWIW, the Lenovo Yoga C630 has a resolution of 1920x1080 and defaults to 150% scaling (Windows 10). > > I believe this works out to `1080px/1.5 = 720px` in available height. Bug 1693028 comment 1 indicates that Windows has a taskbar height of 40px. I believe that this leaves 680 pixels of usable height. This is substantially less than the 768 pixel minimum height that the user story says that we are planning to optimize for. This begs the question whether we need to reduce vertical space consumption with normal density. Proton makes us consume significantly more space than competitors, see attachment 9204237 [details]. If this was done based on the same shaky data that led to 1693028 bug (see bug 1693028 comment 53), that's a problem; it means we've optimized for a fictive user population.
(In reply to Kirk Steuber (he/him) [:bytesized] from bug 1693028 comment #60) > > FWIW, the Lenovo Yoga C630 has a resolution of 1920x1080 and defaults to 150% scaling (Windows 10). > > I believe this works out to `1080px/1.5 = 720px` in available height. Bug 1693028 comment 1 indicates that Windows has a taskbar height of 40px. I believe that this leaves 680 pixels of usable height. This is substantially less than the 768 pixel minimum height that the user story says that we are planning to optimize for. This begs the question whether we need to reduce vertical space consumption with normal density. Proton makes us consume significantly more space than competitors, see attachment 9204237 [details]. If this was done based on the same shaky data that led to bug 1693028 (see bug 1693028 comment 53), that's a problem; it means we've optimized for a fictive user population.