On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 19:34 +0100, Folderol wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 13:23:17 -0500 (CDT)
> "Gabriel M. Beddingfield" <gabrbedd@email-addr-hidden> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 7 Sep 2010, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
> >
> > > This is going to stir up a bit of discussion!
> > >
> > > Rotary knob GUI elements - should you move the mouse in a circle to
> > > operate them, or up and down? What about side to side?
> >
> > My opinion...
> >
> > circle: no.
> > up and down: yes.
> > scroll wheel: yes.
> > left and right: up to you.
> >
> > -gabriel
>
> Hate the things. Would much prefer a neat collection of sliders and/or
> spin boxes.
Never going to happen. Numbers are the worst possible way to represent
an "analogue" value.
I don't care if Fc is 1752.7Hz - I care if it's "about quarter up".
> In the real world you grab a knob with your fingers and have real
> precise *tactile* control. This is nothing like a computer
> representation, so why try to fake it?
Instant visual recognition of configured values.
> A compact 2000 step spin box would be rather hard (and expensive) to
> implement in the real world, and how would it deal with direct entry of
> numbers? It works perfectly on a GUI.
I can show you a compact 2000-step spin box -
http://www.rigpix.com/icom/ic2e.htm
Okay, so the least-significant digit is only ever 0 or 5, and not all of
the ten possibilities for the most-significant digit are valid. Have
you never seen those thumbwheel switches before? They crop up on old
external SCSI drives. I have one of those radios sitting on my bench
right in front of me ;-)
Gordon MM0YEQ
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Wed Sep 8 00:15:06 2010
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Sep 08 2010 - 00:15:06 EEST