Hmmm, RG works quite well on my budget laptop's 1280x800 display. As
does Ardour 2. Haven't tried Ardour3. For comparison, the K CD Ripper
app on my system always opens its window about 1800px wide and is not
resizable.
The Zyn UI is a whole 'nother matter - it works fine, but you can't
resize it, can't fix the font size issues (text chars too big to fully
display). I understand the issue there is the developer of Zyn likes it
that way and sees no reason to change it. Similar to why Cal forked Zyn
as Yoshimi: Zyn developer sees no reason to change things that Cal
considered important.
I doubt that "most" people on this list use ecasound. ;-) But GUIs are
NOT the perfect UI for everything!
IDEALLY, your program is split in 2 parts. One part is the back end that
does the work and has a complete, cleanly-defined and well-documented
API callable from multiple languages. The other part is the UI. If the
backend's API is good, the UI can be completely separate from the
backend. If someone doesn't like the UI (it's too cluttered, too heavy,
too little) they can roll their own. If someone needs a text UI, they
can write one, too.
That way, "non-UI-design"-focussed programmers can make a great back
end, while those more interested in UI design can make a great front end.
allcoms wrote:
I'm surprised Alex included RG in that list as to be honest, powerful
and fully-featured program as it is, I think RG is really let down by
its clunky (mainly too big) GUI and I was hoping for a complete overhaul
when it got ported to QT4 but sadly that didn't happen. Attractive GUIs
are definitely great but are always secondary to functionality and
stability, Besides, most people on this list are quite happy to work
with apps that have NO gui ie ecasound or minimal, archaic GUIs ala PD.
For me, the biggest turn off in a GUI is if its too big- ZASFX/Yoshimi,
RG and to a lesser extent Ardour all suffer from GUI's that are a
nightmare for smaller displays such as netbooks and older/budget
laptops. I do like the look of Ardour but I still believe it needs to go
on a bit of a diet. There are still many perfectly good laptops (Core 2
Duos etc) that can't do any better than 1280x800 but I'd encourage devs
to try and get their apps to fit nicely onto 1024x768 to be even more
inclusive.
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:10 PM, <fons@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:fons@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 07:27:55AM +0300, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
> Speaking of pretty interfaces, both MusE and OOM2 need a revamp. OOM2
> is a step in the right direction, but it's still in late 90s (as well
> as way too many other apps). Sadly, there is only one Thorsten Wilms,
> and whoever did Wired is not around anymore. IMO, only Calf from Git
> has state of the art UI today, with Ardour 3 next to it and
Rosegarden
> trotting along.
I'd be interested to know what, in your opinion, makes a GUI 'state
of the art' as opposed 'late 90s'. In other words, a list of features,
properties etc. as opposed to just an example to look at.
P.S. I'm not trolling. I really want to know.
Ciao,
--
FA
--
David
gnome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
authenticity, honesty, community
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
