Well I guess you can't please all the people all the time. I think the whole point of skins is that *any* look *is* possible. I can definitely say that CPU usage is on the rise with these changes. On my single core machine, CPU usage on Pretty Betty is 30% higher (on average) than it was with version 1.10. In fact that makes 192Khz nearly unusable now. But - computers become outdated, newer software relies on faster machines and more cores. Now I have a good reason to stimulate the economy and get a new Intel i7 machine.
-Scott WU2X On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Duane - N9DG<[email protected]> wrote: > > > --- On Wed, 6/17/09, Brian Lloyd <[email protected]> wrote: > >> .... Contrast and edge-definition >> makes the >> controls easier to spot with your eyes. Also anything that >> leaves more >> processing power to the radio functions is strongly to be >> desired. I >> don't want to give up a single CPU cycle to "eye-candy" if >> I don't have to. > > Yes I 100% agree. And the comment about "contrast and edge-definition" > squarely hits the nail on the head. That is one of everal things that I > really dislike about the progress bars, icons etc, of the Windows Vista's UI > defaults (and many other new software products in general as far as that > goes). Everytime I work with Vista in the lab at work the screen looks like a > collection of "mushy" objects and blurry lines. And the "melted/polished > glass" look of the icons, progress bars, etc. I also find to be straining on > the eyes, and not the least bit of any improvement - in fact I see it as > being a general step backward in UI "design and looks" because it seeks to > make you focus on the item (picture) on the computer screen as a real world > object. I don't want that. I want to look/see *beyond* the item *on* the > computer screen and instead optimize the presentation of what the > water/panadapter is actually representing. In short I don't want to see > pictures of > "physical objects" - I want to let the computer and the program's UI to show > me the "abstract", or in other words, the things that I cannot normally see, > i.e. RF spectrum. > > The idealized look of the UI for me is a nearly 100% screen sized > padapter/waterfall with a an absolute minimum of "controls" around it. I'm > also becoming increasingly convinced that virtually all of the adjustments > that I would want to routinely make can be done from *within* the visual > space of the panadapter/waterfall itself. > > As a side note: I'm finally getting some time to actually run this stuff > again after a lengthy "shack all dismantled" downtime. Currently am > re-familiarizing myself with the PowerSDR version that I had last used - 1.12 > (yes that far back). I soon plan to warp ahead a year or so to the current > released version + the various SVN's. I expect that experience to be very > enlightening given my "hands on" absence from the 1000/5000a & PowerSDR for > the better part of a year.. > > Duane > N9DG > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > FlexRadio Systems Mailing List > [email protected] > http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz > Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ > Knowledge Base: http://kc.flex-radio.com/ Homepage: > http://www.flex-radio.com/ > _______________________________________________ FlexRadio Systems Mailing List [email protected] http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ Knowledge Base: http://kc.flex-radio.com/ Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
