Originally used version 9.0.2? (not really sure about actual version number). Downloaded version 9.0.6. The line and text tools in the right hand tool bar are missing. I see version 9.0.7 has been published so I downloaded it. Same problem. Screen shot is below.
Running Windows 11.
Whilst running the install program I read a note saying I should uninstall the previous version of the program but when I ran the windows uninstall program it said it was already running. Found that a little confusing and may or may not be part of the problem. Any help is most appreciated.
Most likely your screen doesn’t have enough vertical pixels to show the icons for those tools. But you can still access them from the Place dropdown menu.
That being said, wxwidgets should do a better job of handling cases like this. Either displaying a second run of icons next to the first in a palette style or enabling some sort of scrolling.
The first screenshot is 878 pixels high, and that’s quite low. (Assuming the screenshot itself is not scaled.)
The icons in the screenshot are also quite big. By reducing icon size, you can fit more icons in the toolbar. Icon scaling is in: Schematic Editor / Preferences / Preferences / Common / User Interface / Toolbar icon size. In KiCad V8.0.9 this has the settings “Small”, “Normal” and “Large”. I think that most OS’es also have built in functions for icon scaling. That became a thing when monitors started to appear absurdly small pixels. I never bought such a monitor, so never had to fiddle with that. (My 4k monitor has 107cm diagonal, so still a normal pitch (945/3840 = 0.246mm))
Another complicating factor is picture scaling by both this forum software, and by web browsers. On my pc, the original screenpost is nearly identical in size as my real schematic editor, but it’s scale by the discourse forum software. when viewed in “original size” there is a significant difference.
Exactly. My icons were set to normal. Selected small and they all showed up. Using a laptop with a rather small display. Thank you to everyone for your sage advice. The help is truly appreciated.
In the comparison screenshot I made, my icon size was also set to normal in KiCad, and they are 32 by 32 pixels, while yours seem to be 48 by 48 pixels in “normal” size, so apparently something else is also scaling pixels.
As I look through my display settings I see scale - change the size of text, apps and other items is set to 150%. 150% of 32 pixels = 48 pixels. This is the recommended setting. i must admit my laptop display has always been a little strange. Kicad tool bars appear to be working. I think I will leave well enough alone.
I’d find that a strange recommendation for such a low resolution display. These “display settings” probably influence all other programs too. Setting this general setting to 100% and leaving KiCad at “normal” makes more sense to me. But it’s your hardware and your mental state
Yes, sounds strange to me as well. Makes no sense. I have a five year old Dell Inspiron 13 7000 Laptop. 13.3” screen as measured diagonally set to the recommended 1920 x 1080 resolution. If I select 100% in the display settings the text shows up as circa 7 pica. Even with glasses it is essentially unreadable for this 76 year old man. So 100% is too small, 150% doesn’t show the bottom of the pcb editor tool bars. As far as I can tell 125% is readable with a little squinting and appears to show complete tool bars, so I will use 125%. Am not going to spend a lot of time on it as I’m overdue for a new computer. Just need to get the immediate task of making a pc board out of the way first.
What about the magnifying glass function that comes with the OS?
Personally, I’d like KiCad developers to take into consideration people who only have physically small pixels.
At 1280x800, the number of areas where the screen is missing is increasing with each new feature addition and improvement.
In v9.99 (which will be published as v10 within a couple of months) it’s possible to customize the toolbars in Preferences → e.g. Schematic Editor → Toolbars. You can remove those icons which you don’t use. It gives more room and the Toolbar icon size in Common preferences can be made Large.
In my opinion the default set of icons there should be smaller. Come on, how many of you add for example barcodes in your PCBs so often that you need the icon there? Or draw bezier curves in a schematic?
Not trying to be funny, but you need new glasses. So do I, my right eye has degraded a little in the last 12 moths for reading so I’ll be getting new lenses soon.
I’m also using reading glasses for a year of two now, but I never use them for PC work. Only for reading books, and for fine mechanical work. For soldering electronic stuff, I’ve got a binocular microscope and don’t need the reading glasses. For PC work I bought a monitor with a 107cm diagonal. Plenty of room for bigger text and big icons. These days I rarely use my vernier calipers, as I do need glasses for those. Instead I use the digital calipers.
I decided to buy a regular 32-inch TV. They’re inexpensive these days, and some have IPS panels.
You can connect a panel to any laptop, even a 10-year-old one, instead of staring into a bowl for hours.
Ive been wondering about why people have so tiny monitors and the reason seems to be that some people are consulting others, therefore they are very mobile. While a full time designer probably is sitting in the same office (or several) all day long.
So the unfortunate fact is that mobile people tend to have a bit non optimal hardware for design work, where indeed screen estate is king. Its a tradeoff. Since my work is not so mobile i have more screen estate that I need at any instant. But nice to have when i need switch between tasks repeatedly.
At my workplace the rule is everybody should have 2-3 monitors, because having too small screen has a very negative effect on productivity. Even mobile users have locations where they can plug their laptop to 34 inch wide monitors or 2x24-.27 inches.
This is due to a shortage of designers and a generational shift that doesn’t want to sit and work for hours. Then comes SMD soldering with a soldering iron instead of SMT technology, and design on 13 monitors, preferably at home or in a basement without electricity. I’ve been watching the decline of 3D printing for a long time. People think that buying 100 printers will replace a factory, and there are actually people buying them and trying to do just that. Also, on GitLab, requests periodically appear like how can I insert a picture into a board and transfer it to 3D and immediately put it into production) or a router from AI))
3D printing comes in many forms, and it can’t and won’t replace all other technologies. Every detail comes at a cost, including time (speed), quality, and cost. For example, printing aluminum for spacecraft is quite good, but for regular items, it’s very expensive. But aren’t we the smartest? We take plastic wire and make a housing out of it, calling it cool. But when the question arises of how to make 100 or 1,000 of these housings a day, everything ends.
