Light version

Ask for help and post your question on how to use XnView Classic.

Moderators: XnTriq, xnview

Do you want a light version of XnView?

Yes, i'm very interested
5
29%
No, bad idea
12
71%
 
Total votes: 17

User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 31887
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France
Contact:

Light version

Post by xnview » Wed Oct 20, 2004 11:29 am

Are you interested by a light version of XnView, only a viewer with minimal features, and limited formats?
Pierre.

Lostclown
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:21 am
Location: Iceland

Re: Light version

Post by Lostclown » Wed Oct 20, 2004 1:23 pm

xnview wrote:Are you interested by a light version of XnView, only a viewer with minimal features, and limited formats?
Neither!
I think it is a good idea, but personally I don't think I would use. Would certainly recommend it to others though.

Regards,
Lostclown

Edit:
Changed my mind after reading the thread where this idea came up.
Going to say NO on this one.
Talknig about Irf..V.. gives you bad ideas, Pierre :)

Actually you have a minimal version of XnView already. The download page might explain better the difference from the standard version. From what the webpage says I'm guessing that it has fewer interface languages and no support for jpeg2000. But probably the same interface.

The XnView interface is well organized and only when you get problems placing new features into that organization should you consider a stipped interface version. XnView is not bloated, yet. And let's hope it never will be :)

User avatar
Dreamer
XnThusiast
Posts: 4605
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 9:08 pm
Location: Slovakia

Post by Dreamer » Wed Oct 20, 2004 3:47 pm

I've got an idea...

Light mode feature / button - if enabled, only few image formats would be on, no plugins would be loaded (or just few), browser should be on too...

I think it would be better than light version, because...

- starting of xnview would be faster
- anyone could turn it on/off anytime
- it could be turned on at startup automatically (for faster start) and if needed (or automatically if going to browser) it could be turned off...

User avatar
Crysler
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2003 9:33 pm
Location: Baltic Sea, Germany

Post by Crysler » Wed Oct 20, 2004 7:51 pm

What would be the advantage of a light version?
XnView already loads fast as lightning and I can't see the point in having some file formats not working.
So there's only the setup filesize left, but why bother? To keep it on a floppy which no one uses anymore? USB-Sticks are minimum 64 MB, rather 512 MB.
Anyway, I don't think someone would use the light version when there's the full version available, too. Some seldom used features might come in handy when you least expect it.

So I can't image what would be bad about the full featured program. If it's about the number of features that could scare new users you could split the options into normal and advanced ones and make a switch to hide/show the advanced options.

User avatar
Dreamer
XnThusiast
Posts: 4605
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 9:08 pm
Location: Slovakia

Post by Dreamer » Wed Oct 20, 2004 10:19 pm

Crysler wrote:If it's about the number of features that could scare new users you could split the options into normal and advanced ones and make a switch to hide/show the advanced options.
Yes, but not just hide, disable too - see my post above...

User avatar
helmut
Posts: 8172
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Post by helmut » Sat Oct 23, 2004 1:19 pm

For special usages and unexperienced users, a light mode might be useful.

Even if XnView has a pretty simple interface, this might be still too complicated for novice users. E.g. novice users don't care about EXIF and IPTC. Also, for photo preparations you usually you need few image effects, only.

XnView has a pretty simple interface, but still a light mode might be of some use. As you surely know, Microsoft has solved this issue (light mode / expert mode) in "Word" by displaying menus which contain the basic functionality, only. Personally I have switched these limited menus off, but for some users this might be helpful. This dynamic light mode has some advantages, since the more functionality the user uses, the more is offered. So the user gradually learns about the basic features and more advanced features. Perhaps this is the way to go.

Having a light mode just because of performance reasons is no good. If less plug-ins / functionality really makes XnView faster, Pierre should try to find a way that this is no longer case.

Note:
Already, we have the so called Hidden options which disable and completely hide some of the menus. At the moment, the hidden options have to be entered manually (no GUI for setting these) and are intended for companies and their adminstrators, but not for users.

User avatar
JohnFredC
XnThusiast
Posts: 2010
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 8:33 pm
Location: Sarasota Florida

Post by JohnFredC » Mon Oct 25, 2004 1:27 pm

Please don't waste valuable development time on a "lite" version. It is not needed. The current XNView freeware can be configured as "lite" as you like.
John

ckit
XnThusiast
Posts: 2444
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:11 am

Post by ckit » Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:05 pm

JohnFredC wrote:Please don't waste valuable development time on a "lite" version. It is not needed. The current XNView freeware can be configured as "lite" as you like.
Actually I couldn't agree more.
I first thought it was a good idea but I've gone cold on the idea so my vote for a "yes" is now a "no"
Windows 10 Pro x64 1903
XnViewMP and Classic and PhotoFiltre Studio X

User avatar
maadjordan
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 8:33 pm

Post by maadjordan » Wed Oct 27, 2004 9:07 pm

i've voted NO, bad idea as .. i would request a COMPACT version not light version.. maybe a rewritten one (lets say when it reaches v2.0) so it would result into..

smaller total size..i've argued with Pierre about it .. years ago.. (specially those DLL lang files..)

thus faster run../less memory req..

my problem .. i can't fit it into a FLOPPY (1.4MB or even 1.68MB) without removing any dll or plugin..


.. if langs files are made as TEXT not DLL and packed into ZIP (which already unpackable with XnView..) it can reduce 2.5MB easly..
..
XnView Arabic Support

User avatar
xnview
Author of XnView
Posts: 31887
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:31 am
Location: France
Contact:

Post by xnview » Thu Oct 28, 2004 7:17 am

maadjordan wrote:i've voted NO, bad idea as .. i would request a COMPACT version not light version.. maybe a rewritten one (lets say when it reaches v2.0) so it would result into..
smaller total size..i've argued with Pierre about it .. years ago.. (specially those DLL lang files..)
thus faster run../less memory req..
Language dll is better, and faster than text. By compact version, you think only about language dll?
Pierre.

User avatar
maadjordan
Posts: 25
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2003 8:33 pm

Post by maadjordan » Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:20 pm

language dlls are taking much of total XnView size.. so it is no.1

ok to be active look at this program..
http://www.nyam.pe.kr/dev/imagine/downl ... 040828.zip

it is compact.. with plugins and langs..

.. another way to look at ALL formats structure..and look for routines that are shared..

JPEG code are used in jpeg,tiff,jng,ps(embedded jpg) so instead of coding double..

deflate code (zip) are used in TIFF,PNG,MNG,CACHE

.. and so on.. still i'm not in a good mood now..

give more time and i anatomy XnView
XnView Arabic Support

ckit
XnThusiast
Posts: 2444
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 1:11 am

Post by ckit » Thu Oct 28, 2004 3:30 pm

..
Last edited by ckit on Fri Oct 29, 2004 1:35 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
ouistiti
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:28 pm
Location: Belgique
Contact:

Post by ouistiti » Thu Oct 28, 2004 7:50 pm

2Ckit
You said :
This "Imagine" program is pathetic.
But dont forget that Imagine:

- Faster than external IrfanView and supports clipboard copy.
- Views Image/Animation files. (NO depends on their extensions)
- Shows informations of image/animation files.
- Shows EXIF(JPEG) informations.
- Shows transparency.
- Extracts a frame(or whole frame) from Animation file.
- Exports Animation file to Animated GIF file/AVI/Flic/Pro Motion Animation.
- Manipulates image
(Flip,Grayscale,Negative,Change color depth,Swap colors,Rotate,
Effect filter,Edit palette)
- Tiny & Fast & Pure & Neat executable.
- Fully customizable. (Keyboard shortcut, Toolbar)
- Plugin add-on available.
- Multilingual support
- NO depends on any OLE method or any other external viewer.
- NO creates or uses any registry value.
(except for only when setting desktop wallpaper)

Don't forget that initially Imagine was a plugin for Total Commander...
Don't forget that Imagine is tiny (<300,000b)

It is to be regretted that pathetics programs are so rare :(

Regards

Le ouistiti
Last edited by ouistiti on Fri Oct 29, 2004 7:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
helmut
Posts: 8172
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Frankfurt, Germany

Post by helmut » Thu Oct 28, 2004 8:52 pm

Folks,
ckit wrote:...
This "Imagine" program is pathetic.
we do not want extensive discussion about other programs, here in this newsgroups. And most of all we must not talk only negatively or in a dissmissive way about other programs. We are in the happy position to have a good or even excellent graphic viewer, but we should never get vain or arrogant. Any program is a lot of work for the author/developer, please remember this when argueing/posting.

Greetings,

Helmut

User avatar
Clo
XnThusiast
Posts: 4441
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:57 am
Location: Bordeaux, France
Contact:

No more---

Post by Clo » Thu Oct 28, 2004 11:07 pm

>>> Ouistiti
>>> Helmut


Image   Final dot !

:mrgreen: Cordialement, V.G.
Claude, French translator of “Imagine”
Clo
Old user ON SELECTIVE STRIKE till further notice

Post Reply