On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 02:53:03PM +0200, Kjetil Svalastog Matheussen wrote: > Bad wordings. I ment that traversos interface is about efficiency, or at > least that the main focus is about efficiency. Thats how it appears > too me. It might be simple and intuitive too though, I haven't given that > much thought. :-) Some things it currently does sure seem very efficient. There are gaping holes in functionality, though. Not being able to do something at all is the least efficient ;) Note that I don't want to bash the Traverso project. It's young and promising and it being incomplete no surprise. Pitching it against Ardour is a bad joke, though. To add some substance: Editing gain and pitch via holding G and P are very nice. Fade in/out editing is very well doen, too. Zooming vertically / horrizontaly with Z is interesting. But I miss a zoom-to-all and zooming to a range / selection. There's currently no persistent / multiple selection, so you can't move several clips at once or split them all at the same position. There seem to be no crossfades and no automation tracks. Calling interfaces intuitive is highly problematic. If you only accept what humans are born with, pure instinct as a base for inuition, there's nothing that could be called intuitive in human computer interaction at all. If we add experience, things that work like what we already know would be intuitive. But maybe the interfaces we know are not that good? A better interface would be less intuitive, then. > Well, I would like for another daw to take over so that the good > programmers would work on that other daw instead. Unless; Ardour either > gets a significantly more efficient user interface, or it gets support for > an extension language so that it will be possible to customize it without > dwelling into thousands of lines of C++ code. Ardour is evolving. Throwing away many many man-years because some user thinks the interface is inefficient is a bad idea. Improvment step by step is a better idea. But of course, different concept ideas and preferences of different toolkits are always a fine reason for yet another project. -- Thorsten Wilms Thorwil's Design for Free Software: http://thorwil.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/linux-audio-user
