Comment # 8 on bug 1192148 from Stefan Hundhammer

Robert, I understand you, and in a use case such as yours it's not optimal;
fully agreed.

But I fear when we start tinkering in this area, for every user we make happy
(or let's say a little bit happier), there will be 5-10 that will become
unhappy instead with a changed behaviour.

We have to cover a lot of use cases. A very common one used to be laptop users
who connect an external monitor; some of them won't use the laptop display at
all when the external monitor is connected, some may use it, if only as a
secondary display for their IRC client or some similar secondary task.

If the laptop display has significantly less resolution, the user will probably
want to disregard it for this initial size calculation. Similar with smallish
displays for embedded devices (RasPI etc.) that also have an external monitor.

So it's not easy at all what to consider for those initial dimensions; we can't
simply iterate over all screens and limit our size to the smallest one (in both
dimensions, of course). We have to choose carefully which ones should influence
that decision and which ones should be disregarded.

Your use case is extreme; we could at least try to limit the size to a normal
aspect ratio: 9:16 (i.e. 16:9 in portrait orientation) with really large
resolution is not useful for any YaST module.

And then there are our friends, the HiDPI monitor users, who introduce yet
another completely different aspect into this equation: They do use insane
resolutions, and they need them to make fonts and icons big enough so they can
read anything and recognize the icons.

It's difficult; we are trying a one-size-fits-all approach here, and that's not
so easy if you have to consider dwarves as well as giants as well as normal
people. Or, as in your case, a Siamese twin consisting of a giant and a dwarf
at the same time. ;-)