Simplified mixer
The icons and the order come later.
PB and Suvsuv, I understand, if you both resist to change the GUI, since it is already implemented in this way, but please consider this things, if you too think, that the simplified GUI is to help people to make the conversion to deviation.
I'm waiting for your opinion patiently...
Why do you alway believe others think in the same way as you?sbstnp wrote: I know my personal opinion isn't highly valued around here
but I still think the standard mixer is a gimmick, a temporary familiar place for new users which will abandon it anyway. That's my opinion and you can hate me for it
But there's this saying "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime".
The standard mixer is the first part of these wise words.
In the end, when all the possible mixes will have been added, and I talk about airplane mixers, etc, probably we'll have a shortage of ROM and RAM and there will be 2 editions of Deviation. It's inevitable. Or, it will be incomplete, and obviously will miss it's purpose.
So we'd better write some good documentation, and I'm willing to contribute as much as I can, because I predict the simple interface will not be enough.
My opinion - love me or hate me for it.
I believe I understand the Advanced Mixer more than you , but I never use it to configure any of my helis, including minicp,nano cp, mcpx, 120d02s, vbar 250, sk720 250.
<<Moderated>>
Originally it is 7-point curve, and was changed to 9-point as they can be just displayed in one page of devo10. It shouldn't bother you for 2 more points as most likely no more 3 points are required to set in current FBL systemFDR wrote: So, happy new year for everybody, here I am again, pretending to work while actually thinking about deviation...
Since the simple GUI didn't let me sleep last night, I was thinking about it a lot.
If you don't mind I will share my thoughts with you.
First it is a huge help to all the novices, who come to deviation, but don't really understand the "advanced" mixer.
However, since they all (but a few, who just bought the DEVO because of deviation
That's why I was against the 9 point curves:
I think, the 9 point curves won't offer too much advantage to those, for whom the advanced mixer is too complicated anyway...FDR wrote: Besides, I don't get why curves are 9 point?
All the DEVOs (except the 12) have 7 point curves, so if we want to give them a similar and hence familiar interface, why don't you offer a 7 point curve?
I have to admit, that I like quarters better then thirds, but this way existing DEVO users have to recalculate all their curves...
So, if I were you I would:
- make the curves 7 point;
- make D/R assymmetric, and let it go to +-125% (instead of 120%);
- the range of the subtrims differ too (62.5% in 0.5% steps vs 50% in 0.1% steps), but I think it's not that important.
Since it starts to get too long, I will write about all the menu items in detail one by one...
Making D/R asymmetric and +/-125 will be done soon after PB fix all his porting in devo8.
1. I could pop up a alert dialog if duplicate switches are assigned to a functonFDR wrote: So, I continue in no particular order, just as they come to my mind...
About the switch assignment:
First, it shouldn't allow the same switch to be configured to controversial functions, however it might enable for example the flight mode and the gyro for the same switch. (i.e. currently the throttle hold should be different)
We may leave that to the users, but we want to help them, don't we?
Second:
- flight mode has more options then the original, which is good;
- the gyro has about the same options as the original, so this is good also;
- however the throttle hold has fewer options, because the use of the 3 way switches are not specific enough.
Also, I would like the throttle hold and gyro switch to be on their appropriate page too! (The gyro switch is there in the original fw...)
The purpose of having them together too is to see, are there any contradictions.
2. It is just too hard to provide more options when 3 way switches are specified for thr hold, so I would rather keep it simple
suvsuv wrote:
Well, I want the Standard GUI follows the commercial TXes but with some more features. So，FDR wrote: Throttle hold is alike:
If the throttle hold switch is configured on that page (too), there is no need for the on/off option: if a switch is selected, then it's on, if not, then off.
EDIT: ...and of course if the switch is none (or off as you please), the value could be hidden or disabled.
a) the thr hold page is to let users easily access it.
b) the switch assignment page is a add-on feature.
All in all, in generic TX GUIs, hidding options in a page is not welcome and hard to find.
In short, Advanced GUI is like a Windows system having folders and sub-folders, Standard GUI is like an IOS system.
I see, but it is a bit misleading, because the user goes into the throttle hold page, set it on, and thinks it's done, however if there is no switch configured, it won't work.
It is cymbersome too, that you have to visit two pages to set one feature...
(It was even worse in the original, because the switch assignment was in the system menu, while the TH was in the model menu...
)Actually I like disabling (i.e. making read-only) more, because that way I know there is a plus option that can be enabled somehow.
However when I make forms for more simple users, I use hiding, not to frustrate them...
Both have advantages and disadvantages, the main point is to somehow indicate, that the value in question doesn't actually have a meaning...
-
Home
-
Forum
-
General
-
General Discussions
- Simplified mixer