• Hi !
- Like Roman means above, the registry is not used to save the configuration itself for TC.
• This is done with two simple INI files :
- wincmd.ini : all program-settings
- wcx_ftp.ini for FTP connections.
- Only some subsidiary small things are not saved in the INIs, and that does not satisfy many user, I first…
@Clo: You French people have a really strange kind of humour.
- Astonishing ? You know me … It was the first similar situation I thought to
G
Claude
Clo
Old user ON SELECTIVE STRIKE till further notice •
Hiding options in ini files is really stupid, however there are some good reasons to do so. They are only:
- impossiblity to fit options in GUI for some reason
- hiding options that are dangerous to user data or security
- options that are supposed to fix problems in some exotic conditions/environments.
If we want to separate more used options from less used/fine tuning options, there should be just a new branch in Options window.
- Who requested to HIDE options in the INI ?
This whole thread explains the reasons to use such a way.
The programme being -fortunately- continually improved, following you way one should get an option-set bigger than the programme itself !
- I wonder to read this from a TC-user…
Friendly
Paul
L'important n'est pas de convaincre, mais de donner à réfléchir.
The important thing is not to convince, but to incite to think.
1,77245385090552... •
Xyzzy wrote:Hiding options in ini files is really stupid, however there are some good reasons to do so. They are only:
- impossiblity to fit options in GUI for some reason
- hiding options that are dangerous to user data or security
- options that are supposed to fix problems in some exotic conditions/environments.
If we want to separate more used options from less used/fine tuning options, there should be just a new branch in Options window.
ouistiti wrote:This whole thread explains the reasons to use such a way.
This whole thread is a mess, If you could summarize these reasons in a few short topics, I would be grateful.
ouistiti wrote:
The programme being -fortunately- continually improved, following you way one should get an option-set bigger than the programme itself !
I don't get your point here. Bigger in what way? If it has got 40 panels with options, is it better than 300KB ini file? Yes, of course.
ouistiti wrote:
- I wonder to read this from a TC-user…
TC has quite a few design issues, putting a whole lot of useful options in INI is one of them.
Dreamer wrote:I agree (maybe you could check this topic).
For a Novice user Windows image browser is enough. If he changes into something more, it is because he needs new functions/options. Why hide/disable them, when they are the reason user takes on a new viewer?
What can make first time user experience better:
- Careful program design- including proper names for options and their good placement
- Careful selection of default options' values
- Good documentation, _I_ like when it is avaliable on F1 in every dialog.
X.
PS. Have you ever wondered why I***View seems to be at least a few times more popular than XnView, despite it is awkward in use? The reason comes to mind: because user can more easily can find his way there (like- it has real help).
Xyzzy wrote:PS. Have you ever wondered why I***View seems to be at least a few times more popular than XnView, despite it is awkward in use? The reason comes to mind: because user can more easily can find his way there (like- it has real help).
I***View is definitely NOT easier or clearer! I tried to switch from A**See to I***View (when I didn't know XnView) few times, but I don't like it...
It's so popular because people don't know about XnView, normal users just view images and adv. users learn to use it (adv. operations). XnView is much better, easier to use, clearer... - and I'm objective!
But if you want continue, please start a new topic "How to make XnView more popular"...
[/OT]
Xyzzy wrote:
This whole thread is a mess, If you could summarize these reasons in a few short topics, I would be grateful.
As stated in original article and more, extra ini entries are appropriate for such things as: changing color codes, language strings, all those little things designed for experimentors. It is also appropriate for items which the programmer does not want to create GUI for. There are an infinite number of requests for checkboxes and options in this forum, extra ini entries can be useful.
Xyzzy wrote:
This whole thread is a mess, If you could summarize these reasons in a few short topics, I would be grateful.
As stated in original article and more, extra ini entries are appropriate for such things as: changing color codes, language strings, all those little things designed for experimentors. It is also appropriate for items which the programmer does not want to create GUI for. There are an infinite number of requests for checkboxes and options in this forum, extra ini entries can be useful.
OK, but these ini settings would be just for few users, maybe 10 or 20? Special section in Options window would be for more users, 1000, 10 000... Try to change some color in ini file, I know how complicated it is, you have to add just standard windows color 'option' to Options window and it's much easier to use - also other users might want to change colors. It's just one example.
Another thing is that some users want to move existing options just to ini, why, I think special section in options would be better...
I don't agree with the ini exclusive options.
I think they should all be in the Options window. Never thought that those option might not be used, cause ppl just don't know they exist?!
an someone said something about hidding options... why is that bad?
check VideoLAN... i don't recall seeing anyone sad for having advanced features hidden by default.
Ad decus et ad libertatem nati sumus
Aut haec teneamus aut cum dignitate moriamur
VuDu wrote:I don't agree with the ini exclusive options.
I think they should all be in the Options window. Never thought that those option might not be used, cause ppl just don't know they exist?!
Exactly!
VuDu wrote:an someone said something about hidding options... why is that bad?
check VideoLAN... i don't recall seeing anyone sad for having advanced features hidden by default.
- Whether we'ld have more than a handful of them, I would add certainly a chapter in my manual !
- I'll do, anyway, soon or later…
- Like we say in French, the manuals “are not made for the dogs”
- Moreover, being in the habit to use a certain programme which saves the caboodle in the Win_registry_big_mess doesn't allow to estimate objectively the value of such entries, IMHO… Please, don't mix all !
KR
Claude
Clo
Old user ON SELECTIVE STRIKE till further notice •
- The Manual I make is in French too - after all, XnView is a French programme -, and French was the first …
… and the sources can be provided to anyone wishing translate them in any (European) language… The structure is designed in such a way…
KR
Claude
Clo
Old user ON SELECTIVE STRIKE till further notice •
G
Hello Dreamer !
