[I had left this in my drafts folder yesterday evening, it should be my
last statement on the topic for now.]
Sorry, you may have missed my point. It's what people expect from
software, and what hardware they have available. I thought if two of the
core team implemented the said feature it is counted as important. OK, for
me personally it isn't, as I have no application for that plugin. I also
don't care for the satellites, others, apparently radio amateurs, will
like them, so it's good to have them available. For me fine-calibrated
landscapes, object positions and visibility, skycultures and scenery3d are
the relevant features, others will keep them switched off, accepted.
My point is that many people can only just afford Intel-onlys, but still
are delighted to have such nice-looking and versatile astronomy software.
They will be left alone when Stellarium drops OpenGL1.4 support. They
should be however capable of keeping their systems up-to-date with recent
fitting drivers, so problems related to outdated drivers are nothing for
Stellarium developers to fix or even care about, even though some bug
reporters apparently think differently and compete in rudeness when
complaining. "Buy decent hardware" could be the standard answer for those,
On Di, 21.02.2012, 21:35, Reaves, Timothy wrote:
> If the people using Stellarium for the purposes of driving a 'scope
> that 'advanced VR is irrelevant', then they need to find a different
> I'll repeat: that someone chooses to use Stellarium to drive a 'scope is of
> no concern to Stellarium development! A plugin was added to help people
ALREADY using Stellarium to drive a 'scope. Advanced feature were not
added to a telescope driving application.
> Stelalrium exists as an advanced (rendering) astronomy application; oh, and
> there is this plugin to allow for driving a 'scope
> Slellarium is a telescope driving application; oh, lets see if we can
> it pretty with OpenGL
> Those are two very, very different things, and the implementation needs
> be driven on what the purpose of the application is, not what someone
> chooses to use it for.
> Those two statements could be replaced with several other things as
> the same test applied. What is the intent of Stellarium.
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 1:09 PM, Georg Zotti
>> No, certainly advanced graphics should not be dropped, but should be used
>> for advanced effects and possibilities. But there ARE people using it
>> drive scopes, and for them the advanced VR stuff may seem irrelevant. For
>> me during daytime, advanced graphics is relevant, but much more so,
correct algorithms and reliable object positions, i.e., the
>> part. My scope has no computer port, so I cannot even comment on the
quality and applicability of the telecope control plugin, I had just
thought it's an important feature for the developer of this plugin. (If
>> had a suitable scope, I would rather use my netbook for its better battery
>> life and lesser weight, and most likely also other/true observation
>> A fact is the large user base working with cheap (1.4-compatible only)
hardware, when better hardware is too expensive, and the immense
creativity and unique possibilities in usage scenarios of Stellarium.
>> yesterday I attended a presentation of incredible timelapse night movies,
>> and the creator recommended Stellarium besides a commercial program.
Elsewhere I have seen an ethno-astronomical movie made with a custom
skyculture. Of course, it would be possible to declare some version
0.14-ultimate-for-OpenGL1.x and go elite with OpenGL3.2+ (when dropping
old/cheap hardware, do it thoroughly...) after that, losing all
non-NVIdia/ATI users and all troubles with Intel drivers. The question
will be, does that make sense, and what to expect from OpenGL3+? Do you
have any usage statistics of users' hardware? Sure, it would help a lot
>> a new
>> astronomer-and-OpenGL-with-Qt-expert with lots of time and energy could
join. If I knew one, I would have asked him already...
>> I just wonder, how many of the "missing lines here, bad character display
>> there" bugs are from post-2010, describe separate issues, are
>> single-vendor-related and still reproducible, and cannot be solved with a
>> 2011-driver update? Many bug reports may be still open just because the
reporters did not set them "closed/answered/solved".
>> On Di, 21.02.2012, 16:26, Reaves, Timothy wrote:
>> > Stellarium is not geared towards people with cheap Atom based laptops
>> > want to use it 'scope-side. That there are people in that category
>> use it is not overly relevant. If Stellarium wants to change to be geared
>> > towards those users, then remove the advanced stuff.
>> > Stellarium is not intended to merely be a telescope control program.
>> > people, myself included, that are really using computers 'scope-side,
>> > using things like SkySafari, which do a much better job of telescope
>> control. Or they are using things like AstroPlanner, where they can
actually plan an observing session.
>> DI Dr Georg Zotti
>> VIAS-Vienna Institute for Archaeological Science
>> University of Vienna
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
>> The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3,
>> Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
>> Stellarium-pubdevel mailing list
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
> The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
Stellarium-pubdevel mailing list
DI Dr Georg Zotti
VIAS-Vienna Institute for Archaeological Science
University of Vienna