AJ wrote: > > On Mon, 04 Mar 2013 15:38:45 +0000 > James Turner wrote: > > Aha, and instantly we get a usability discussion: > > > Right, you need the keys because you're working around a simulator bug > (frame-rate drops badly) using manual interaction. The correct fix isn't to > make the workaround-UI easier, it's fix the underlying issues, by making > adaptive-LOD work so we can achieve a target frame-rate reliably. > > I do agree that would be the ideal... really I'm just saying that the fix ought to > come and be proved satisfactory before the established "workaround" is > removed. Hopefully nobody was really suggesting that, but I think there is a > horrible tendency in open source projects for similar things to happen - > because removing the workaround or "cleaning up" the UI is generally > significantly easier than fixing the problem, it's only the former that gets > done! > > > You're the third person to say the same thing. But again, you don't > > actually want to change the FoV at all. What you're doing (and > > everyone else) is using this feature to look around 3D cockpits, > > right? In other word, our cockpit navigation UI needs some improvement > > :) > > Actually I think our cockpit navigation UI works better than anything else I've > ever used in over twenty years of flying flight sims :-) It's not instantly > intuitive, granted, and maybe there's room for improvement there, but I'd > want to tread very carefully on this one as I think our method of interacting > with the 3D cockpit using the mouse is generally very efficient indeed... > > > Also, usability is hard :) > It is... and partly because everyone has different ideas on what's good and > what isn't! A lot of people seem to think that Apple's IOS UI approach is the > greatest thing since sliced bread and I think it's one of the worst I've ever > come across (Win8 is definitely worse, but not many people are insane > enough to contest that view!) > > What I wouldn't like to see (and I'm sure isn't intended) is that we end up > with a Gnome3 / Metro style UI revamp where we get what one or two > people (who _are_ doing the work from best intentions) no doubt think is > great and intuitive but most people find obtuse and retrogressive. At least > we're having a discussion about this first - I'm hopefully being excessively > paranoid but the sort of "baby out with the bathwater" scenario has been all > too common in recent years! >
I think AJ has summed it all up pretty well. I almost never used zZ while using the normal scenery, but since I've been working on the detailed customised stuff I've needed it to try to keep performance within reasonable bounds. If we can solve the underlying problems, I would like to think I can go back to letting FG decide the vis for me. Let's put this discussion to one side, and see if we can do something about custom scenery/LOD/linear scenery etc. We might find zZ is redundant (I hope so) or we might need to retain it. It will argue for itself in the light of future developments. No need to discuss how many angels can dance on the head of a pin (no I don't know the answer either). Vivian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
