Re: widget layouts and such ...

[Brendan Howell]

On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, David O'Toole wrote:

> > Would it not be possible to allow machines to pass a sort of 'user
> >interface layout' file to Octal that would explain to Octal how the
> >machine wanted the widgets layed out and possibly other stuff to embelesh
> >the Machines UI, and Octal could do exactly what was in the lay out file,
> >or ignore it completely or any thing inbetween depending on the
> >situation?
> 
> We discussed a layout extension earlier this week. It would involve
> passing some table coordinates to the host (not in a text file, but in the
> same way parameters are specified.)

Some other folks are skeptical but I think this would be a major
improvement over the Buzz UI.  It would even be useful in the pattern
editor.  There are so many times when I got irritated from scrolling
around a two screen wide list of parameters just to tweak one or two
things in a pattern.  With most machines, I usually build a basic patch
first and I want to be able to see all the params.  But, when I edit
patterns I only sequence notes/triggers and maybe change one or two
parameters.  I don't need to see all that other crap when I'm making
patterns.  Less is more.
  This is even more important in the case of live performance or live
mixing etc (a seperate thread is needed in regards to the sequencer
recording live mixes).  If I'm doing a liver performance, I need to have
all of my stuff on the same screen.  If the UI allows docking/custom
frames, then I can do that and I only see the cutoff knob or the delay
time slider or whatever.  If I don't need to tweak the envelope in
realtime, then I should not have it cluttering up my screen.  No UI is
perfect but if it is flexible and simple then it can be very effective.
 
  A bit of a tangent, but one thing that bugs me about trackers is the
fixation on using hex numbers.  I know that when you only had 80 columns
of text, and you were used to coding in assembly, it was cool to keep
every param to 2 fixed width characters but now that we are using graphics
is it still really necessary?  Hex is not intuitive to me and I'd just
rather see stuff in decimal.  Maybe we could make this an option?

  And one more thing, while I'm at it, a particular irritation with buzz
was the lack of transport control.  There was stop and play but no simple
button for ffwd, rewind or song restart.  Also, while it was not terribly
difficult, it should be easier to select a section of the song to loop.

  Whew, its Friday night.  Time for some disco action.  Good weekend all.
I'm all hyped to write some machines when the beta comes out.

stay cool,

-Brendan