Re: AW: AW: [Jsynthlib-devel] Okay... so why can't I edit a patch with this?

[Brian <br...@ov...>]

>
> Lastly, I wasn't (and still am not) certain that there's even a 
> readiness to discuss a different interface.


True, we are not willing to shutdown JSynthLib and start up a 
JSoundDiver. Nor do we all agree with you that the SoundDiver/Midiquest 
interface is good and the JSynthLib interface is bad. I've used 
SoundDiver and Midiquest and found
their interfaces intrusive and annoying. Though I must admit I was able 
to figure out how they worked easily, I quickly came to regret that they 
worked that way.  This was before I began JSynthLib, so its not a matter 
of liking what I'm used to
either.

Still, you've made it clear that there exists a prefered workflow for 
many people where that kind of interface is preferred. In addition, I 
see that that this way of working is not easy to emulate in JSynthLib's 
current interface. This is a problem.  For every person like you who 
comes on the developer's list and complains loudly about something, 
there are hundreds more who just silently hit the delete key.

So while I don't think we are about to *change* our interface, I do 
think we can *augment* and *improve* it. There are fights you aren't 
going to win here :-). I'm not going to remove the ability to have 
patches from different synths in one library simply because I'm not 
about to remove a feature that I and many other people find useful and 
commonly use. Removing this feature would destroy the ability to emulate 
*my* preferred workflow in JSynthLib.

Still, I agree with some of your points and have some ideas of how we 
can have our cake and eat it to. We can develop an interface that we 
both can like. Give me some time to work up some interface mockups-- 
You'll have a chance to complain about them too. :-)


> I just think that a lot of it is unintuitive. There are a lot of 
> windows that the user sees that they don't need to.... there are some 
> that they should see but don't, and the overall UI interaction, 
> although I agree that it can be learned, is not very natural.


I can see what windows you think the user needs that we don't offer, but 
what windows that we do expose to the user do you think should be hidden?

>
> In that light, I think it's safe to say that anybody who currently 
> chooses to use JSL over something like MidiQuest is probably because 
> it's free. And the primary alure of one's product being the fact that 
> you're giving it away isn't exactly a flattering testament.


Most definately some do use it for that reason, but I really don't think 
its the major cause. Someone who is willing to pay thousands of dollars 
for a synthesizer isn't going to use a program the hate just to save a 
couple hundred bucks. People use JSynthLib because it gets the job done 
for them and does what they want it to. JSynthLib isn't nearly as flashy 
as the commercial Librarians, nor does it have all the features and 
support all the synths they do. But for many people, JSynthLib
gets the job done for them, so they use it. I think the primary alure of 
JSynthLib is that its 'good enough'. Would I like JSynthLib to compete 
directly with SoundDiver and MidiQuest on features and abilities? Sure, 
and if someone wanted to give
us the same budget they have, we could do it. None of us work on 
JSynthLib full time, its always a few hours here or there that I'm able 
to sit and look at it. This has two effects, first it slows development 
down, and second, people tend to work on particular features they are 
interested in their limited time rather than doing some of the more 
boring but necessary code mainenance. Still, I'm very happy with where 
JSynthLib stands today. We are way beyond any other attempts at a free 
universal librarian/editor. JSynthLib is widely used, and many people 
find it useful.

The Commecial's definately do have some advantages over us, so what are 
our advantages over them?

    1st) Like you said, we kick their asses in the price department :)

    2nd) We support Linux. Many of our developers and users are on Linux 
Platforms. We kick all their asses on Linux. They don't even run :)

    3rd) We give away source code. Don't like something, feel free to 
change it. If others like the change, you can even get it incorporated 
into the standard code base.
             
    4th) Its permament. If Apple decides to do way with SoundDiver, 
thats it. No More SoundDiver.No new versions. As long as someone remains 
interested in JSynthLib ,it will continue to be improved.
             Even if all the current developers were to leave and move 
on, any one else could come in and continue development. They have the 
source, and more important, our license gives them the right to do so.

    5th) Half the fat and calories of SoundDiver!

Brian