v3 taking much more screen space away for toolbar than v2 (same Qt, dpi, …) and ignores global Qt theme/styling

• Feb 13, 2019 - 15:50

I’m attaching two full-screen screenshots from my laptop (yes, this is literally all the display size I have, and yes, my window manager really only draws a one-pixel border around windows and that’s it) running MuseScore 2.3.2 and 3.0.2 “side by side” (started at the same time, but on different virtual desktops).

I’ve tried to position the mouse pointer into the same place for both screenshots, for comparison (or go measure pixels in gimp or something), and I’m showing the settings so you see the pixel icon size is the same.


… versus…


xrandr says: LVDS-1 connected primary 1024x768+0+0 (normal left inverted right x axis y axis) 246mm x 185mm (that is about 105.73×105.44 dpi) which (just tested with a ruler) indeed fits.

xdpyinfo, though, says:

screen #0:
  dimensions:    1024x768 pixels (270x203 millimeters)
  resolution:    96x96 dots per inch

That being said, if I run either xrandr --dpi 80 before MuseScore 3, or it with -D 80, the sizes become somewhat manageable (the upper bar still uses much too much space, but the lower bar shrinks, almost too much), but the score is much too small then; with forcing 96 dpi, the score looks manageable.

Hmm… indeed, changing the DPI changes the icon sizes, but not the dropdowns, so it looks even more clunky.

And why is the style of the drop-downs different between these two, anyway? Shouldn’t that be taken from the global Qt theme? The background colour of the menus also differs (grey in 2.x, white in 3.x which is really not well distinguishable from the white of the score paper/background and massively sucks from a UI/UX perspective… it looks about as crappy as a GTK+3 application instead of like a proper Qt application). (In contrast to e.g. qasconfig, it also ignores -style motif.)


In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

No, they don’t, unless you use a packaging that ships Qt together with MuseScore (e.g. AppImage or Windows).

On a regular distribution build, they are, both versions, both compiled and run against, the system Qt5 version, which is 5.11.3 on Debian sid at the moment.

In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

Please step away from your Windows experience for one.

These are distribution packages of MuseScore for Debian sid, and they follow distribution guidelines. Both were compiled against the same Qt 5.11.3 version, without WebView and the other Web thingy I forgot, and both work fine with it. The Qt version is literally identical in that it uses the system Qt library from the exact same path.

The icons were re-designed as is the layout of the toolbars (I see you are in the Basic workspace for 3.0 and hence don't have as many buttons). For me, though, the position of the icons is virtually unchanged - if I place my mouse over the whole note in advanced workspace in 3.0 then Alt+Tab over to 2.3.2, it's still right over the whole note.

But I can easily believe if you've compiled against versions of Qt MuseScore was not intended to be compiled with, your results might vary. I can also believe they would vary according to screen resolution and scaling settings.

In reply to by Marc Sabatella

I tried Basic and Advanced. It really is caused by the two drop-downs (for zoom level and editing mode) not shrinking properly.

I’ve yesterday created my own workspace, in which I shrank down the amount of icons enough to fit them onto a single line. I guess this counts as workaround. Still feels clunky, as if it were made for Android users with big fingers, instead of mouse pointer somewhat precise clicking.

(I’ll share that workspace in a bit, in the Made with Musescore forum.) Edit: here it is: https://musescore.org/en/node/284154

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.