1  |   Order by index

Apr 8, 2004, 8:47pm

Anyone else read the warning?

http://www.xeonsoft.co.uk/aw35.jpg

*Pets AW* there there..

Apr 9, 2004, 1:53am

Helps if the actual image, let alone the domain itself, existed so that we
can see it.

[View Quote]

Apr 9, 2004, 6:48am

[View Quote] Must always read the warnings ;)
"WARNING: Beta software has bugs! Nasty, vicious bugs with great big, sharp teeth!"

--
Mauz
http://mauz.info

Apr 9, 2004, 11:25am

The domain does exist, check your settings ya silly fool!

~John

[View Quote]

Apr 9, 2004, 1:04pm

Well it works now, wasn't working yesterday when I checked.

[View Quote]

Apr 10, 2004, 2:53am

It succeeded in its purpose. It got my attention and I actually backed
up my files! :D Good going AWI.

Ryan
Citizen #323279

[View Quote]

Apr 10, 2004, 6:22am

3.5 is inacceptable with those goddammed floating tabs! Remove it or at
least make it an option to have them integrated.

[View Quote]

Apr 10, 2004, 1:05pm

Now Star ... *in with the good air, out with the bad air ... nice 'n slow
see*. LOL But true enough, docking windows might be better, either way the
windows will take up view area. In browser windows took up view area too, so
not sure what the problem is.

LNH



[View Quote]

Apr 10, 2004, 2:26pm

Thing is these tabs are NOT dockable they just clip in to the corner they
still sit on top of your 3d view nstuff and having them along the side and
not running the browser maximised gets annoying.

Apr 10, 2004, 3:16pm

i want the old way back the new way is just frustrating moving the tab all
the time and I like the 3d window to be square and read what people say and
that's not possible unless you have the web open which sometimes lags aw for
me lol
[View Quote]

Apr 10, 2004, 11:10pm

I don't see the diff, before they were in the left in browser ... now they
are their own window on the left in the same manor. I've resized it so it
fits in the same place it did before, just not in browser but beside it.
Mine's always open tho. Perhaps your complaints are that you don't want em
always open therefore with them closed you get a larger view window?

LNH


[View Quote]

Apr 11, 2004, 4:05am

Maximize the browser, they were beside the chat and view screen before and
didnt cover it, but now goddammit it always cover part of the chat and view
screen. The tabs being able to cover the view is the idea of someone with
zero intelligence.

[View Quote]

Apr 11, 2004, 8:05am

You can shorten the tabs window so it does'nt cover chat :)
[View Quote]

Apr 11, 2004, 5:35pm

[View Quote] > You can shorten the tabs window so it does'nt cover chat :)

'Tis still blocking some of the rendering screen.

Apr 11, 2004, 10:19pm

Hmm... what about making your rendering screen smaller?

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Apr 11, 2004, 10:32pm

[View Quote] > Hmm... what about making your rendering screen smaller?

According to Enzo, the point of the floating tabs was to make way for
the coming of the fullscreen mode. Now, if you go into full screen mode
it's going to be covering your render screen. The only way about this
is to make some sort of personalized API to draw DX/OGL/Software windows
in the actual screen itself which then can take any number of
characteristics from opacity settings, to "attachment" settings. This
would be the best way to go about this if you want to head towards
having the ability for some users to go into full screen mode. Same is
true for the web window and chat box. I certainly am not a big fan of
internal windows, but am even less of a fan of floating windows free of
the view (and having the ability to conceal my viewport).

[View Quote]

Apr 15, 2004, 2:51pm

[View Quote] > is to make some sort of personalized API to draw DX/OGL/Software windows
> in the actual screen itself which then can take any number of
> characteristics from opacity settings, to "attachment" settings. This

With skins this would be cool.

Apr 15, 2004, 6:28pm

[View Quote] [View Quote] Yup. Forget trying to adapt the windowsAPI to what you want to try and
simulate. There is a line that you need to figure where it becomes more
beneficial to write something from scratch. The sort of course that AW
is on now is such a time. It's not like it's overly complicated to
write some classes for window generation. AW doesn't use much along
those lines (Shamus seems to know what he's doing enough to prettify
such things as his change to the world dialog with the stripes).

Buttons, text boxes, radio/check boxes, sliders, combo box... not much
more than that, maybe 3 or 4 more. Maybe three to four weeks writing an
alpha browser to test such a use (to see if it's more practical then
trying to FUBAR the windows API crap). In my opinion it is, Andras and
Ananas probably have more weight in that deparment though.

All this being said that there will still be a classical mode...
preferably holding true the same values as the 3.4 browser's feel/look.
Just use the windows API if not in fullscreen, if you are, switch to
the personal API. Or, give the user the choice which they want to use
-- which is ALWAYS the best. If they want the classic style, let them
use it; fullscreen? Go ahead, it's all yours.

:) I would say writing a class from the ground up to handle render-drawn
windows is the best way to go about the full-screen fiasco.

Apr 15, 2004, 6:41pm

Yes, a 3.4/498 mode! Not with the crappy screen-covering floating tabs and
visibility-limiting cpu throttle.

[View Quote]

Apr 16, 2004, 2:06am

[View Quote] > Yes, a 3.4/498 mode! Not with the crappy screen-covering floating tabs and
> visibility-limiting cpu throttle.

That would make me cry tears of happiness.

1  |   Order by index