POLL: Hide graph by default?

[Jeremy Collake]

I am working on improving the graph, which I consider a sore on the overall GUI. It just isn't 'right'. I am working on other cosmetic improvements, but considered doing this until I rewrite the graph(s) so that they aren't so ugly, especially on certain displays.

[hanemach_gt]

I badly voted for yes, wanted NO. I mean registry setting that can be set up while installing program. Checkbox like Don't show graphs, unchecked by default.

[Jeremy Collake]

I voted for yes, but I mean registry setting that can be set up while installing program. Checkbox like Don't show graphs.

Good point, I could very easily add this in the config dialogs shown during install. I will do so when/if it gets disabled!

[Hotrod]

I actually like the PL graph just the way it is. The only time I find hiding necessary is on older slower systems, so i voted that way. One thing that is a problem for me is the uptime display at the bottom gets truncated by some video cards(I'm guessing). I have 3 machines on a KVM switch all using the same 19" wide screen at max resolution (1440X900) and one of them cuts off the system uptime display. This is something I use often since I have these setup to run automatic tasks continuously 24/7 and this lets me know when to reboot and get a fresh start since XP seems to slow down gradually the longer it runs.

[edkiefer]

yes, I don't find anything bad with the graph . I have it set off but that is only after i know whatever is installed is working ok .
New app and I check with graph .
I don't see a problem either way as long as its easy to turn on in GUI .
I guess the default should be off, as most apps/task-manager have graph off, you need to toggle them .

[Jeremy Collake]

Thanks for the votes! It is long past time I at least starting cleaning that area up, in addition to making this decision to possibly disable it by default, maybe only on some systems.

@Hotrod: Yes, the truncation is an issue. It normally depends on your screen resolution and font size setting. Looking at it, I can squeeze things together a bit more, but not enough to matter. Maybe I'll show this elsewhere, or re-arrange them since this is one of the more popular status bar metrics to view.

[Jeremy Collake]

Unless I hear a lot of objection, what I'm doing is disabling the graphs by default for (at *least*) smaller size screens, if not ALL screens. After all, with the press of a button they can be shown. I decided *not* to include another option in the configuration dialogs at install though, because it seems like adding more clutter when they can so easily be re-enabled the first run (and that change persists, it will start the next run with them open).

[airborne]

Why disable graph does it really has an impact on performance  because i cant see any difference enabled or disabled.
When looking in process explorer.

Kind regards

[Jeremy Collake]

It really doesn't impact performance much, no. The active listview, with all the metrics and updates every second is actually more more CPU intensive.

My primary concern is that it still doesn't look 'good' to me, AND on smaller devices it hogs too much room. I hope to redesign it soon, I for one am ready for a big change in the UI.

[airborne]

As some stated before i don't really think the graph is ugly. I quite like it.

Kind regards

[Jeremy Collake]

Thanks . It may be just me, I am little critical of my own stuff. That's a good thing though, keeps me improving on it