A professional theme?

[Avatar44]

Originally Posted by Noisebeat

But Reaper gives the possibilities everyone to create themes. And that's a good idea, then all people can be creative if they want.
And there are also nature talents

Yes this was my first impression too. It's cool like Reaper is.
But...

How it's translate in reality?
A full thread full with useless theme, with too much talking like: "make it fader", "make it knob", "it's too dark", "it's too white", and so on...

And wait and wait for something good and simple. Very few people deliver something acceptable as a clean and good interface to work. And this come the part with taste. To much users find taste as an excuse or a strong point for bad design.

My posts was about this aspect.
Serious interface have all in common a good design rules. Basic or complex, with different color than you may prefer (again taste), but you can see far from the moon when things are done right. With many reaper theme, aspects like this are poor, missing or half done right.

And I'm asking myself, what's the point to be so cool?
You have a great audio software (best IMO), and you are so weak in this direction. And you create a full threads filled with nothing... Or just a little to be more precise.

In the other corner, there are companies that sell audio application that skip this cool part and deliver decent interface for their products, and customers are happy and can stay focused on making what is important with any DAW: making music. Call me stupid, but I find this to be a more serious and more productive way of thinking (regarding theme design).

Not to say, with upgrade like Walter, Cockos change the rules, and some "home designers" find it difficult to work with. So this make the "cool thing designing your own theme) more difficult.+ I'm not convinced that Walter can solve all aspect when you look for a nice and clean interface. The sliced feel and flat aspect I think will remain in Reaper for a while.

For people who jump on my neck. Take it easy...
I like Reaper like nothing else.
Theme is one aspect, making music with Reaper is another.
My opinion is here because the name of this thread is " A professional theme?"

[CaptainHook]

I think anyone saying UI is less important than function is REALLY missing something.

UI is EQUALLY as important as function. You really can't separate it. An interface that is not intuitive or that does not conform to standards interferes with usability and in a very real way affects performance with that tool. The less we have to think, the better our results. As with hardware, how the knobs/meters/faders are positioned, respond, and feel actually make a difference to the function of it as far as the user is concerned.

IMHO you should never have to learn the basics of any app, only the specifics to that app. Personal design preferences aside, this is one great thing about the apple user interface guidelines. If i open a native cocoa app, i already know how to navigate and find most things common to all apps.

When first using Reaper, i was SHOCKED that the scroll wheel didn't scroll the window like every other app i've ever used. Yes, i can change it (and have), but i shouldn't HAVE to learn and customize an app just to do such basic things. The are many defaults in Reaper that do not conform to user expectation. (at least the mac version anyway..)

I just brought a commercial license after using the trial for 3 weeks cause i do really like Reaper, but there are quite a few of the basics being ignored in favour of 'advanced' features IMHO.

And personally, i haven't found any Reaper theme better than v4 default yet.

For anyone who doesn't "get" the Pro Tools layout and why some seem to like it, it's because for anyone who learnt or spent time with a console (+ signal-flow ) and understood that workflow, and had used a text/word editor/processor before, PT is VERY easy and quick to learn. 12+ years ago i learnt PT as my first DAW and it took 5-10 minutes to learn the basics of recording/editing/mixing a band on it because of that reason. Yet i still learn things in it every day.

Reaper needs to figure out how to not let it's power/flexibility/advanced customization/features get in the way of basic usability. Clean the clutter, make logical defaults that users expect, but still allow access to the extra layer of (hidden?) advanced control. It's a reason i love OSX. The interface is clean and easy to use. But if you want power, customizing, and advanced control it's there but hidden away from the average user that doesn't need it. Plus you can open a terminal window and you have unix/linux under the hood.

Clearly this is easier said than done, but it requires some ego to be let go of as not everything needs to be re-invented and as already mentioned, the foundation for designers needs to be there to work from to achieve their goals.

One last thing, i think people should be very careful about letting users on the forum have influence in theme design beyond general "i find this difficult/annoying/easy/quick to use". I dont ask music listeners who are not mixers if i should have the bass louder for better emotional impact in the song and to get people dancing to the track. But i WILL pay attention to things such as "this bores me, i can't dance to this, i love this, sounds great, is this a demo?" etc.

I'm excited to see where Reaper goes.

[Noisebeat]

Originally Posted by Avatar44

Yes this was my first impression too. It's cool like Reaper is.
But...

How it's translate in reality?
A full thread full with useless theme, with too much talking like: "make it fader", "make it knob", "it's too dark", "it's too white", and so on...

Yeah, that's "The Dark side of the Moon" - The other side of the coin. I know what you mean and I generally agree to your posts.
But when some are happy with multicoloured ("Klicki-Bunti"/german phrase ) confused, tricky Themes, why not? Not my problem. Then the World has some happy People more.....
My thing are clear designed (eye cancer free) Themes too. (e.g.Logic Theme and also Studio One)
Therefore I'm now working in Reaper with the new ReaBorn Theme, where i've modified the colour in the Arrange Window (only one colour, darker grey-and some minor things) so it looks more like Logic for me. That's more my 'taste' .

cheers!

[Noisebeat]

Originally Posted by CaptainHook

I think anyone saying UI is less important than function is REALLY missing something.

UI is EQUALLY as important as function. You really can't separate it. An interface that is not intuitive or that does not conform to standards interferes with usability and in a very real way affects performance with that tool. The less we have to think, the better our results. As with hardware, how the knobs/meters/faders are positioned, respond, and feel actually make a difference to the function of it as far as the user is concerned.

Yes, I agree. That means the same.

[vStyler]

Great post CaptainHook

[bluefonia]

Thumbs up, CaptainHook

[ivansc]

Ker-ching!

And apparently at least one of the german contingent is beginning to see things slightly less dogmatically, for which viel danke!

"What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?"

[Noisebeat]

My freedom is the freedom of the other one

[spaceman]

You may not like the default behaviour of the mouse scroll, but for me, they have created the best zoom in any host with it. that, for me, is great UI design.

I'm actually often amazed how easy I can figure out functionality myself using modifier keys. That's an other indication that they've got a lot right in their UI design.

[Lawrence]

I mostly disagree with the OP in that there are enough themes out there where most people can find something they prefer. Where I do agree is that the grayish green default theme isn't my preference either. But again, there are so many themes out there it kinda doesn't matter much... the visual coloring and all that.

Where the general UI needs help isn't with the colors or contrast or any of that since all of that can be changed. The real problem with the interface is (imo, mmv) the actual design of the parts. It still seems to suffer from a data programmers mentality in too many ways.

The new docking functionality is great but some of the things being docked are the same designs they were before. Example: The properties windows is the same window, instead of being redesigned for a docker style panel, which I think would have been great here, it's just the same dialog window stuck into a docker panel... with no real regard for layout or presentation in that case.

Look guys, you all know I've pretty much chosen Studio One as my host so this isn't a bash. At a lower level, Reaper kinda kicks it's ass performance wise a little with some of my favorite large virtual instruments but there are so many parts of Reaper's UI that are just so (relatively) inaccessible with the mouse it makes using it a real pain for me. Going with the more (imo, mmv) friendly UI is an easy choice for me.

I can work in hours in S1 and never see a popup dialog which - again relatively speaking compared to Reaper and Cubase - means that a lot of forethought went into the general UI design and general accesibility. UI design is more than just colors and button graphics and the other parts are subjectively where Reaper needs help.

So again, I really disagree with the OP's premise that there's any major issue at all with the "themes" for Reaper. The real UI issue for me are the actual UI parts themselves, not how they get colored or themed. Some parts are brilliant. Others are just really kinda klunky.

[White Tie]

Well now, this is turning into a more grown-up conversation. A conversation about interface, rather than (I suggest, poorly informed) themer bashing. Awesome. On the subject, please allow me to meta-pontificate by quoting myself (yeah, I know...) from this thread

------------------- Start Self Quote, good grief --------------------

The 'user experience' of the Reaper interface is ...not so great. Yet. I genuinely think that's fair comment, from anyone. I say this as someone who is passionate about user experience design and the benefits it can bring, as someone who has been doing it professionally and successfully for many years, and as someone doing his best to bring the best of user experience design, as both an art and a science, to Reaper. It would be easy, at first glance, to say that I have failed and could be expected to be thoroughly miserable about the whole affair.

But no. Not a bit of it.

How come?

Because I have the experience of working the other way, and I have colleagues who do it the other way all the time: projects where the design leads the show. If there is user feedback it is routed directly to design, and anything new or altered is carefully knitted into the fabric of the whole, so consistent UX paradigms are maintained, a best practice overview is followed, and the latest developments in interface theory are integrated into a slick and satisfying whole. Then, the whole lot gets thrown into the pit where the poor code monkeys are told to 'make it so' as fast as possible. Its a designer's heaven and the end product is desperately appealing, at every iteration, year after year. Meanwhile, the code might be turning into a horror show, but ...meh. It looks good and it works ...well ... it works most of the time. We'll get to those bugs eventually

On the other side of the fence, Reaper is stuffed full of awesome, and that awesome is all in the places that really matter for an audio application: stability. dependability. the tiny footprint. agile development. The interface is always a few steps behind, but its also always catching up. We have a long way to go yet, but so much less than it was only a short while ago. Customization is the means by which this happens, because it frees the programmers from the legwork, maintaining agility, and because it doesn't just empower me to do better, but all the other third parties too. Why should one of the superstar programmers of our generation spend hours enacting size and location data from my design? Pfft, gimme WALTER and I'll do it myself. The Reaper way. Its a bitter pill for me to swallow that we're not capable of interface nirvana yet, 'skinning' is maybe 10% of good design, but I do it gladly because I know, in my heart of hearts, the awesome is in the right place. The user must make a similar leap; this is not a slick interface covering a rats nest of hodge-podge code, its genuinely slick code with a good interface that's getting better, and absolutely will get there. I know everyone wants the best of both worlds, but that is the real world choice. Decide!

For me? The code is king. Long live the code!

The other element in play here is the question of what the users, as a whole, are asking for. Obviously, it would be great if all existing Feature Requests could be implemented NOW. But because that's not possible, priorities have to be set. And statistically its likely that the FRs that are most important to you aren't all being worked on, and of course you think your FRs are more important than everyone else's. Naturally! The problem is that we all think like that too If we could all agree to make only interface / interaction / workflow / slickness FRs, than that would be super, I'm right there with you. Hurrah for us. But that's not going to happen, is it? Experienced users can become accustomed to the user interface, and have all their customizations rocking, and now they want NEW FEATURES. Slick little treats of interface finesse aren't going to help them groove quantize this moronic bass player to the drums. So there's a conflict there that we just need to navigate our way through as best we can.

TL/DR : s'all good

------------------- End Self Quote, what a douche --------------------

[CaptainHook]

Originally Posted by spaceman

You may not like the default behaviour of the mouse scroll, but for me, they have created the best zoom in any host with it. that, for me, is great UI design.

Which part? In PT i can hold down option and scroll wheel to horizontally zoom in (which is how i've set it in Reaper). Seems to behave the same (now) to me..?

My point is, PT understands that users expect to scroll with the mouse wheel, and holding shift will scroll horizontally like other apps. So they used option(alt) to zoom horizontally. Doesn't that make more sense then changing default behaviour? A bit off topic of "themes" but i guess it's all part of the same underlying issues.

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by White Tie

Well now, this is turning into a more grown-up conversation. A conversation about interface, rather than (I suggest, poorly informed) themer bashing.

Well... yeah, that was my intent really... to turn the conversation to a more practical place, the actual interface, not the graphics. Reaper has the graphics (for what's currently theme-able) 100% covered. Graphic guys like VStyler can do their thing and create some really great themes. But they can only theme what's there, they can't change the lower level design of the parts.

I personally think (mmv) some of the graphic work you've done with Reaper is really outstanding, even if some of the actual themes aren't my personal preference.

But user interface design is much more than that. The media explorer, as another example, isn't a "UI design" really... it's just the OS file system in a box. While that file system is fine for OS browsing, it's really not the best case for a DAW's file browser, imo... just the easiest way to implement I suppose. Other products design their own custom file browsers for a reason, because the different context often requires something different.

So yeah... some of those kinds of places are more where the actual UI needs re-thinking or re-configuring or re-designing imo, not the themes. The themes are fine imo. This conversation is (imo, mmv) a little bit misdirected imo.

[CaptainHook]

White Tie - i appreciate and agree with your position. I do think it's slightly unfair to paint the picture that all other software (audio related or not) that has good UI most likely has poor code, but i also know you don't really mean to suggest that is the truth.

I will also assume the PC version of Reaper doesn't suffer from some of the (what i would consider) usability bugs of the Mac version.

eg, If you have an undocked mixer window command+` will not cycle through them. The menus at the top change, but not the window (surely bug). Having plugin windows open will cycle using the (OSX default) command, but not the two main edit/mix windows.

I have already accepted that this will probably not be fixed any time soon, even tho functioning code is a priority above all else. :P

I do have faith in your taste/decisions/influence though and i can't wait for Reaper to be what it seems like everyone in this thread wants it to be usability wise.

[chip mcdonald]

Piling on...

There's amusement to me for eye candy from a certain aesthetic standpoint, but I think there is a dismissal here of the idea that a rather plain, non-cartoony/flashy theme can be as difficult to execute as anything else.

[CaptainHook]

I agree, often "artists" (in any form of expression) will look down upon something that conforms to standards or certain rules as being simple or even 'easy', but in my experience (just like writing a GREAT pop song) IMHO it's actually HARDER to do something really well within a limited scope.

[White Tie]

I most certainly dismiss conformity and 'easy' when I'm working on my personal themes, because ...well, because I like to. If I'm doing what I like, I like to have fun, be creative and challenge myself. But I also assert that conformity is profoundly worthless in any situation where it shows every indication of being the sub-optimal solution, not because it is conformist, but because it is sub-optimal. With me?

On the question of multiple colour use and 'flashy 3d bits' ...this too is a discussion we've had many times. If you use 3D to indicate that an element is interactive, you differentiate it from elements that are not interactive. And differentiation is the key - be it by labelling, 3D-ness, size, location, varying levels of contrast, colour change or colour saturation change. Using a lot of different colours is proven to aid visual searching and afford massive usability gains, at the cost of people not liking how it looks because of the (very real) 'OMG Christmas Tree' effect, that assaults the eyes when you look at the interface as a whole. These things need to be balanced, and we also have to balance the fact that people may not intuitively like what is actually best for them, and so a degree of pandering is fair if it acts as an encouragement. Other (agreed, not all) interfaces do a great deal of pandering, because the end goal of the sales and marketing departments is, to a degree, complete the moment you buy the software. We can play for the longer, more truthful goal.

[musicroom]

Originally Posted by musicroom

There are so many good themes. I think the disco lab theme is also outstanding...

It looks better loaded in reaper than the screenshot. At least here anyway...


___

I inserted the wrong link for Disco Lab theme in a previous post. This theme is clean with great contrast.


_

[vStyler]

Originally Posted by musicroom

I inserted the wrong link for Disco Lab theme in a previous post. This theme is clean with great contrast.


_

Isnt that pretty much just a recolor of the default?

[hwhalen]

I'm curious.
What do people here think about the Tracktion UI?
I used it for a while before moving to Reaper.
Some users find the Tracktion UI to be a great design.
Very different from the typical console/mixer based design.

[ivansc]

Excellent post, W.T.

And makes the point that it IS all about the code and the methodology, not what it looks like superficially.

And of course there is always going to be endless debate s to HOW Reaper should do what it does.....

[Noisebeat]

Btw. Imgaine we all will love the same woman? Life became boringly

[vStyler]

Interesting discussion, personally I am of the mind that Yes, the underlying code and functionality is the most important, but speaking for myself, and I suppose most the people I know, If a software (especially these-days) isn't professional in its appearance, and I mean PROfessional.. then it is unlikely to do as well as a competitor that is.

It's no coincidence that the more popular software titles being used, purchased these-days, are also typically the best graphically designed...IMO

I think too many companies take this for granted, in that they put most of their eggs in the functionality basket, not giving proper consideration and priority to the UI

Actually WT, when I saw that the same person designed the default Reaper theme AND the Imperial theme, I could have fell over backwards in disbelief.


I am happy to be able to modify, redesign this stuff myself, but 98% of everyone else isn't and I can understand the frustration of some in this thread.

Having said that, Nicks recent stuff, and inevitably any new stuff from yourself are probably singlehandedly saving the day for Reaper from the viewpoint of those of us that HAVE to have a PRO UI to work in. Regardless of how great the code is, or tiny the footprint.

[ivansc]

(grin) But I actually like Albert's theme best of all so far....


(heads for the door, ducking and running)



Oh and at least nobody so far has offered up Logic as a model of an effective design software or graphics wise.

For me, the single most inappropriately named software ever.
And to be honest, for me Cubendo runs it a close second.

But as I have been banging on and on about in this and other threads, that is why there is chocolate and vanilla.

[White Tie]

^^ Well, ...er.. I did

[ivansc]

Originally Posted by hwhalen

I'm curious.
What do people here think about the Tracktion UI?
I used it for a while before moving to Reaper.
Some users find the Tracktion UI to be a great design.
Very different from the typical console/mixer based design.

Sorry - I got an early version and it stayed on the hard drive exactly one day.

I persevered a little longer with Studio One since I had paid a few $$ for that, but it too just didnt work for me.

[Hardwire666]

Originally Posted by CaptainHook

UI is EQUALLY as important as function.

I think what a lot of people don't understand is that UI should be; or is function. Not style/motif/theme/looks ect.

I have used so many different specialized software packages for content creation its sickening, and the one thing that always makes or breaks an application is the usability of the UI. Your most common tools need to be readily available with out searching, and as well be intuitive.

This is not to say reaper nails it on the head 100%, but I will say it's more than good enough. I also haven't found anything that breaks it, or makes it unusable. Weather it looks pretty or I not I could care less. Yes I love themes, but if they didn't exist I would still use Reaper. So, if it doesn't look "professional" I could care less... actually I couldn't because all I care about is how it well it works.

One piece of software I will give you as a good example of a bad UI is Pixologics Z-Brush. To me it made the program useless for a long time. It took me quite some time to learn it, and in the end I still had no clue what was going on. It's like when someone creates a new Compressor VST, and then labels all the UI elements in a willy-nilly manner, and none of those labels pertain to what you would find on an actual hardware compressor. But, then everyone gives it praise, and whoever mixed that last popular artists master piece album said he couldn't have done it with out that VST. /FACPALM


Software, it is the nature of the beast. This is also why many companies spend time refining their package in function first. To then, later on refine UI work flow , / intuitiveness.




P.s.
On a side note I agree with anything WT says because I want a certain theme finished that I wont bring up here, but it's suited for an empire. ;D lol /jK /notreally /sad puppies

[bluefonia]

Oh and at least nobody so far has offered up Logic as a model of an effective design software or graphics wise.

I will say Logics graphic design maybe is the best at the moment, - not that it's perfect, but better than most.
It is very clean and easy on the eye. If you want eyecandy and 3D Logic is certanly is not the one, but everything is clearly laid out and you can work on it for hours.

Wether Logic is logical or not in its functionallity depends on who you are. I think it´s logical because I've used it for several years.
On the other hand Reaper was not logical to start with for me, - so it depends on how you are used to work.

In general I think most of us DAW-users are very conservative in the way we are thinking. We would like the GUI to look like a Neve- or SSL Console, most likely because we would want one of these but can't afford them. But a DAW is not an analog console. It's piece of software on a computer meant to be operated on a monitor. (and maybe a controller)

I for my part think Ableton and Traction have made some nice attempts to break new grounds. Again, I'm not saying these are holy grails, but both shows new and interesting ways to get the job done.

As far as I remember Tracktion is probably the most logical DAW I´ve yet seen . Of cause it didn't have all the features we demand from a DAW today, but anyway.

If it makes any difference I might add that I come from 15 years of big consoles and 2" tapedecks and 10 years of DAWs.

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by vStyler

It's no coincidence that the more popular software titles being used, purchased these-days, are also typically the best graphically designed...IMO

As to "graphic design" I have to agree but maybe not for the same reason... we may disagree there. I think if that's true, it's probably because they've have many years to kinda flesh out the graphic bits that don't really work well, via trial and error in some cases, and maybe improve on them gradually along the way.

Granted - to WT's point - sometimes applications are dramatically changed graphically just to drive home the point of it being "something brand new that you should really want" , not necessarily because those graphic changes are an improvement for the user. It's another version of "the shiny" in those cases.

I think if you look at the "big 3" (PT, Logic, Cubase), with the possible exception of Logic's overhaul into a unified UI, graphic changes to those apps seem to have been staged in a minimal way over the years... no really huge graphic changes from one version to another but maybe some smaller ones along the way that all kinda add up.

Cubase (SX) 6 looks different from (better than) Cubase SX1 graphically but those changes happened very gradually through multiple versions. Trial and error I think. Gradual refinement. I'm not a fan of the Cubase 6 workflow but it looks damn good to me, the graphic design.

But yeah, Cubase SX1 was one of the better looking apps of that era so they were kinda on the right track (graphically) early on.

[Lawrence]

Look at PT back then... Cubase never really looked quite that bad.



... and now. Much better graphically. Probably the "most improved" of all of them over the years. It used to be kinda butt ugly, the mixer.

So I think it's less "pandering" than it is common sense... the improvements.

[airon]

Apart from the environments I never had trouble using Logic almost from the get go. That counts for something.

And I certainly like their library view and pre-designed layouts.

White Tie, how about an elaboration about the GUI design of Logic, if you have some time.

[vidalsh]

one of the worse things in reaper GUI for themers are the toolbar buttons...

still no has universal toolbar buttons (and colourable)...

the final aspect GUI of reaper for themers depends of those toolbar buttons...

WT did a great work with those toolbar buttons in v.4, but each reaper user has his own buttons and themers creates only a few ones...

so, actually if I try one new theme, the toobar buttons are a matter...

-toolbar buttons should be universal for tipical actions as menu actions

-toolbar buttons should be more customizable in colours and state

[vStyler]

THE... only thing I see better designed in Pro Tools.. are the Knob indicators.

Reaper is sadly lacking in that dept.

Is it really that difficult to implement real knob behavior as opposed to a crude looking, aliased, single pixel line?

Every other DAW seems to have no problem regarding this.

Oh.. also the FX images dont have the text scrunched inside them like Reaper does with no room to breath. Would also be nice.

[ivansc]

Funny how we all have our likes and dislikes about HOW a UI works as well as what it looks like.

Shame we can't get together a demographic of which "look" and which "feel" left rain and right brain users prefer.
I am no expert, but I'm sure this has a bearing on our perceptions of what makes for an effective workflow.

Hilariously, I found the original PT interface a lot more usable than the newer one...

And of course there are gazillions of people who DO, unlike me, 'get' Logic.

[gofer]

Even Reaper itself can do knobs better, well, at least slightly - see rotating knob thumb for parameter knobs and sends.
Actually I'm quietly hoping they didn't do the rotating image for the newer knobs because maybe they plan to do it proper and have the line as a placeholder until they replace the knob method altogether. *knocks on wood*

I'm one of those weirdos who found Logic's gui immediately appealing, highly usable and stuffed with smart albeit unconventional ideas handling-wise. It's a good example why a programs interface at times does good giving a *** about how stuff is behaving in all other applications. Serve the purpose, not conventions for convention's sake.

But then again I also am of the rare species which (still) totally digs Logic's environment, so I'm aware I'm different . I believe partly the program is called Logic because of the way you can build stuff there, assembling all kinds of logic circuits to influence/generate MIDI data streams.

[bluefonia]

Shame we can't get together a demographic of which "look" and which "feel" left rain and right brain users prefer.
I am no expert, but I'm sure this has a bearing on our perceptions of what makes for an effective workflow.

I can't answer that either, but guess you got a point.
I know people who does not care a second about the looks. If the thing has the appropriate buttons, faders ect. everything is fine to them. Others - like myself - cares a lot for aesthetics and design too. (There might be others again who cares only for the looks, but I'll leave those out here)

I my world I don't see why we should not aim at the best from both worlds. Of course the code behind it all should be top notch, but having the choice between a well designed GUI and a boring/bad GUI to handle the top notch code I know where to go.

[CaptainHook]

It depends on your background and previous experience, and with things how they are these days this is a lot more varied. Consider when say pro tools was at version 4 itself (mid-late 90's), users giving feedback and input all basically had the same background:

They were studio users who had used consoles/tape and probably had used a text editor and computer before. Pro Tools was the first to listen to these people (who were their market) and it became the standard.

Now it's very different as someone's background can range from that era, to someone who is very experienced with a different DAW, to someone using Reaper as their first DAW with no other experience with audio what-so-ever.

So expectations are wide and very different, who do you cater for? I'm one who believes if you try cater for everyone, you will attract *no one. Define your audience.


While on the topic of usability and meeting standards and such, why is it that the post editor here on the forum doesn't show the typical BBCode menu and smilies down the side?
Clearly BBCode is enabled along with smilies and this is vbulletin like many other sites i use, so why the decision to make the interface different to the default and what users have come to expect??


*Not literally but very much less than the alternative

Originally Posted by gofer

I'm one of those weirdos who found Logic's gui immediately appealing, highly usable and stuffed with smart albeit unconventional ideas handling-wise. It's a good example why a programs interface at times does good giving a *** about how stuff is behaving in all other applications. Serve the purpose, not conventions for convention's sake.

I'm curious at what point in logic's history did you learn? Pre or post Apple? I ask because my first attempt at using (at the time emagics) Logic was over 12 years ago before i became a PT user. After a frustrated couple of hours trying to record one of my songs, i closed the app indefinitely and then wrote a song about the irony of how "logic" was anything but (as i'm sure many others did :P ). At the time i was in high school and my guitar tutor owned a 8 track (voice) version of Pro tools TDM v4 and hired me to record his album. I learnt how to use it on the spot since i already knew how to use a console/text editor. Once PT5 and the digi001 was released i purchased the system even though i didn't own a computer myself.

I wouldn't be surprised though that now Apple have probably conformed Logic to it's own standards for Apple apps and UI, that i would find Logic very easy to navigate and use the basics even if different to my 'console/text editor' way of thinking.

[vStyler]

"In my world I don't see why we should not aim at the best from both worlds."

+1

[CaptainHook]

Originally Posted by Hardwire666

One piece of software I will give you as a good example of a bad UI is Pixologics Z-Brush.

A problem with many of the higher-end graphic apps.
Maya, Nuke, Resolve, PFFarm, Shake, Color, etc etc all have the feel of custom-in-house made solutions made public with steep learning curves given the developers were solving problems and the need to get something done rather than develop solutions that guides users into how to operate and get the best results from tools. That's a completely different skill and talent to be able to do that well.

It's worse for mac users when it's a port that uses some framework with it's own way of doing things (or the developer has used their own methods) and sometimes even it own's file menu etc instead of being a native cocoa app. Unfortunately the mac version of Reaper suffers a bit from that.

[gofer]

Originally Posted by CaptainHook

I'm curious at what point in logic's history did you learn? Pre or post Apple?

I started out with Logic v4 on PC. Never owned a Mac, I was using 5.51 on PC for a very long period of time. Emagic all the way . I don't know jack about Mac.

I believe the initial selling point was the way I could incorporate all my MIDI hardware. Other apps I tried back then were Cubase and Cakewalk (ProTools was completely out of reach for me). Logic was the one where I actually managed to sync and control all the stuff.
I am not claiming I didn't grow grey hair getting into it, but no DAW would have been easy I guess - as I also was completely new to computers.