Arpegg | Oct 24 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD That's a good name, I already renamed it Bass Line but I like Arpegg, thank you for the reccomendation! :) Also, whilst I was changing the name, I improved the interface a little bit; you don't have to go through menus to enter in notes. Quite handy if you prefer entering by mouse :P
(Version 1.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
Arpegg | Oct 23 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Hmm, I did have my doubts about the name... Here, we'll have a poll and decide on the name, okay? :)
(Version 1.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
Drumatix 606 | Oct 7 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD I decided to use some keys that I thought of myself. You need to read the tutorial if you want to find out which keys do what. | |
| [ Reply ] | |
Drumatix 606 | Oct 5 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Hi! Sorry about no updates for two weeks or so! I've been busy with school, friends and girls B) you know the drill..! At the moment, Drumatix is going through something which will fundamentally change the entire way that you make patterns. The new version supports keyboard controls - so you can program beats, change instruments etc with your keyboard providing mouseless control (except with pattern saving, once I've worked it out then you'll get a release) Thing is, I need help on where to put the keys. There's not a row of 16 buttons on this keyboard, so I really NEED your help! Where will the programming buttons go? Eventually I'll be customising keyboards so that they have specific controls just for Drumatix, so in theory it WILL be a drum machine... The plans will be made public and modified software will be available, I'll just build them for you if you wish. This will happen as I'm doing it for a school project anyway :D | |
| [ Reply ] | |
HealthEngage HIV/AIDS | Sep 24 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Oh man... This app is a bit morbid isn't it? And the price tag... It sounds helpful, but it just looks to me like you're trying to capitalise on someone's sickness...
(Version 3.9.3.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
Drumatix 606 | Sep 21 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Hi there! Are you using Intel or PPC? It's a little choppy on Intels. I'll remedy this eventually.
(Version 1.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
Drumatix 606 | Sep 19 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Hi there! Thanks for the review :) I'm not sure if you've ever used a TR 606, but they work in pretty much the same way as the application - you press buttons where you want the sound and hit run. I've seen a TR 606 in action, and they switch instrument in almost the same way as Drumatix, difference being that you twist knobs on a 606. The whole point is that it's a very basic drum machine like the TR series that Roland produced :) And I will agree with you, the graphics really are pants... I'll definitely work on this as soon as I can, and I wasn't too sure about the loading bar either. Thanks for your input, it's appreciated!
(Version 1.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
Apple iTunes | Sep 17 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD What's the point of Quicktime Pro if you can watch movies fullscreen in iTunes? And, and, and where's the iTunes 2.3 interface gone? That was a good interface.
(Version 7.4.2) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
Apple iTunes | Sep 17 2007 |
GANNET As of QuickTime 7.2, the pro version is no longer required to play movies in full screen.
(Version 7.4.2) | |
HunAgurk | Sep 16 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Thank you, that's better. Originally I used styles to style the text, but it would do it for each and every paragraph which is the surplus of useless code ScottyArch was talking about. I ditched the styles and then added the font tag for compatibility with old old old browsers and it seemed to make sense though, I can't work out styles and the font tag is much more friendly imho. I'd have to restructure the whole program for styles, which is going to be a waste of time, and I'd have to add code for styles on and off, which would increase the size of the application. I'll try it, just not now. You are right about the drop down menus, but I can't do dialogues for images sorry. It would try to access the images, like, where they are on the hard drive. Instead of docs/image/hi.gif, it would go to Macintosh HD:Users:Telstar:Desktop:Website:docs:image:hi.gif. I will agree that not being able to insert code wherever you like is annoying, but I'm totally stumped as to how I'd get around that. I'll give it a try and we'll see what happens. But cutting and pasting doesn't really require any skills, and you can always select and drag the code to where you want in the page. But fair play, I'll see what I can do about inserting code wherever you want, but you shouldn't really dive into HunAgurk without knowing what you're going to make, so there's no excuse to have to change the title; unless you change your mind and want to go over again. There's nothing stopping you to go into the code window and just changing the title though. Thanks for your input, I'll get to work on some of these straight away. :)
(Version 2.3) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
HunAgurk | Sep 15 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Okay, from this point onward, please leave CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM. I don't want "it's a terrible application" or "use something else", I want answers. If there's something you don't like, TELL ME SO I CAN CHANGE IT. If you're not going to contribute to the development of HunAgurk and are just going to be selfish by posting flimsy comments, then my recommendation to you is go and buy this book-> http://www.amazon.com/Learn-HTML-Weekend-3rd-CD/dp/0761526943 and open Textedit and code your own damn pages by hand. Sorry if I'm being rude or anything, but I'm frustrated with the three people who commented on this and said hardly anything constructive at all. This is the line, above this line will be useful, what you like and don't like about my program, what you want changed, what you'd like improved etc... Got it? Good. __________________________________________________
(Version 2.3) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
HunAgurk | Sep 16 2007 |
BDIDI Okay, here's a few things you might want to think about. 1. I don't know anyone who's still using FONT tags, and your app is spewing them out left, right and centre - which is why scottyarch made the observation about bloated code. Ditch the FONT tags and add support for CSS instead. 2. Make your interface more Mac-like - use dropdown menus, dialogs for finding image files, etc. - using type-in fields increases the likelihood of mistakes being made and your app being perceived as 'clunky' - which at the moment, it is. 3. Your Tools window simply squirts chunks of code into the HTML, which can cause problems - for example, if someone tries to *change* the title from the Tools window, it simply adds a new chunk of code at the bottom of the document; similarly, if someone decides to add a paragraph back into the middle of the document from the Tools window, it just goes to the end anyway, and they then have to cut and paste - none of this makes for a happy user experience.
(Version 2.3) | |
HunAgurk | Sep 16 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Thank you, that's better. Originally I used styles to style the text, but it would do it for each and every paragraph which is the surplus of useless code ScottyArch was talking about. I ditched the styles and then added the font tag for compatibility with old old old browsers and it seemed to make sense though, I can't work out styles and the font tag is much more friendly imho. I'd have to restructure the whole program for styles, which is going to be a waste of time, and I'd have to add code for styles on and off, which would increase the size of the application. I'll try it, just not now. You are right about the drop down menus, but I can't do dialogues for images sorry. It would try to access the images, like, where they are on the hard drive. Instead of docs/image/hi.gif, it would go to Macintosh HD:Users:Telstar:Desktop:Website:docs:image:hi.gif. I will agree that not being able to insert code wherever you like is annoying, but I'm totally stumped as to how I'd get around that. I'll give it a try and we'll see what happens. But cutting and pasting doesn't really require any skills, and you can always select and drag the code to where you want in the page. But fair play, I'll see what I can do about inserting code wherever you want, but you shouldn't really dive into HunAgurk without knowing what you're going to make, so there's no excuse to have to change the title; unless you change your mind and want to go over again. There's nothing stopping you to go into the code window and just changing the title though. Thanks for your input, I'll get to work on some of these straight away. :)
(Version 2.3) | |
HunAgurk | Sep 15 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD You're not helping; what's wrong with it? If you can come up with a list of things that could be changed in the next version to make it better, please give it to me. Thanks.
(Version 2.3) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
Jetpack | Sep 14 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Haha! Brilliant! I'm addicted already! I love the little comments that come up whenever you brush past things that hurt you. I might just buy this game when I get some cash out just for those. I've not run into any problems, the graphics could be a little better though, but the sound effects are class. I recommend this to anyone :P
(Version 1.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
HunAgurk | Sep 8 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD I'm afraid I have to disagree. I notice a big speed difference when I run HunAgurkHTML on my G4 as opposed to my Intel Mac. Having said that, my G4 has more RAM than my Intel. That could be why... Who knows. Oh, it could be because the application is native to PowerPC and it's running under Rosetta... If you've got a G4, then try it, you might notice a difference.
(Version 2.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
HunAgurk | Sep 4 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Okay, I see your point. But really, I don't see anything wrong with the generated pages. They show up with a font, a font size and a colour. If it's bloated, then please come up with Realbasic syntax to fix this, because I really don't know what to do. Thanks :)
(Version 2.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
HunAgurk | Sep 4 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Okay, you've got some fair points. When I said Dreamweaver, I was refering to, well, wysiwyg editors, assuming DW is wysiwyg. I'm not sure that the pages it generates are bloated, as I think I'm using the latest HTML I could find (I avoided the tag in favour of styles). You can think whatever you want, you don't have to use this if you're a professional HTML coder. But for people with, say, freewebs sites or similar things that may or may not come with editors, then I suppose that this kind of application could be useful.
(Version 2.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
HunAgurk | Sep 4 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Ah, sorry. I misread. You don't own iWeb, my bad. But still, unfair comparison. And as for being bloated, it only really runs slowly on Intel. On my G4 it seems pretty zippy.
(Version 2.1) | |
| [ 2 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
HunAgurk | Sep 8 2007 |
JOELLEVIN Intel machines are way faster than any g4 you can come by, so there's something wrong with that statement.
(Version 2.2) | |
HunAgurk | Sep 8 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD I'm afraid I have to disagree. I notice a big speed difference when I run HunAgurkHTML on my G4 as opposed to my Intel Mac. Having said that, my G4 has more RAM than my Intel. That could be why... Who knows. Oh, it could be because the application is native to PowerPC and it's running under Rosetta... If you've got a G4, then try it, you might notice a difference.
(Version 2.2) | |
HunAgurk | Sep 4 2007 |
JAMES STAFFORD Hi, it's nice to see someone peeing all over my program, it must be popular! How and why are you looking at my source code? It's not open source and I didn't bundle the source with the .zip file, unless you're using seedy and naughty methods to pick though my application. I don't approve of that, and I'd like you to cut it out. :) And I think iWeb costs money - about £70 if I recall. The point of my application is that it's free. I'm not saying that it's better than iWeb, because it's not. But for most people, text, images and links are really quite enough. So really, it's a bit unfair to compare something like this with something like iWeb or Dreamweaver and all that stuff. Anyway, you've got iWeb, so why bother with a free HTML editor in the first place? :P
(Version 2.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
|
