- Thank you for your suggestion Sacha, but no matter how many hours we may be behind, the fact remains: People using FFC, actually make USE of what there isMessage 1 of 82 , Feb 3, 2013View SourceThank you for your suggestion Sacha, but no matter how many hours we may be behind, the fact remains:
People using FFC, actually make USE of what there is supported, while hand-coders using either FPP or KRP, make do with the simplest output (generally). The reason is that having to deal with all the pitfalls of hand-coding, the enormous time consumption when making a custom project, it simply won't be worth anyone's time and effort (monetarily speaking). Look at what people are actually doing with (not mentioning the players): ... standard output with no extra visuals or extra features. At the same time, FFC users create tours that are full of functions and features. What is the use of having a million options, if no one actually uses them? Sure there are examples of tours made by the players I don't mention, where a lot of features have been included, but those are normally private test projects without commercial value, whereas the FFC projects with functions and features are generally commercial in nature, and created in a very short time (minutes to hours). When someone goes through the trouble of actually doing something out of the ordinary with the other players... even if it only means applying a couple or three graphics for the interface to look "custom made", it is cheered on by most people who use the same software, because it is beyond their ability.
There is a reason for people moving away from other players to FFC, even when we haven't had a native iOS version or multires or little planets or architectural view.... and equally, there is a reason for people moving away from FFC towards other players, because we haven't been able to provide the before mentioned features. Having ALL the tools of the trade in one's toolbox, is wise, while limiting oneself to a single screwdriver and a single wrench, is not a wise thing to do. That is to be taken as a slap in my own face. I know I should have reacted sooner in order to get native mobile support... while I didn't. We already have the best mobile engines ready to be deployed (in my opinion, based on testing and comparing with other mobile engines)... and even so I am not going to be happy with our contribution, because those extra 2 engines do not cover all mobile devices. The day I will be happy with our support, is when we have 100% coverage,but unfortunately I don't see that day anywhere close to the current horizon.
TraustiOn Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 11:29 PM, Sacha Griffin <sachagriffin@...> wrote:Switch your flashificator to krpano. You have no idea how many thousands and thousands of programming hours you are behind. There is so much more than just a raw player. If you visit them all you will find a graveyard fill of them.Fpp forums are dead with years between posts. No one will switch from krpano to fpp beta 1 because of the 9000 other improvements. I told you this two years ago or was it three?
On Feb 3, 2013, at 9:39 PM, Trausti Hraunfjord <trausti.hraunfjord@...> wrote:
The sample is online and has been there for the past 9 days. Linked in a previous post in this thread: http://goo.gl/Q9wyB You are of course welcome to try... and while you are at it, a decryption of the xml file (same encryption as the images use) would be quite welcome :)
Our own H5+WebGL players will be available before the end of this month. Example of the H5 player has been available for testing for the past few weeks. Doesn't mean that I change my view that having one platform to fit all devices is the best and most logical solution.
And yes, it is so 2010'ish when apple fanboys continue to comment on Flash being oh so bad and useless ... at every given chance. Completely useless and pretty boring. It doesn't change anything at all.
... or when Apple fanboys don't want to hear about how un-cool it is that their beloved devices are crippled by design.... which isn't going to change any day soon.
As to what my time is spent on, and what we have planned for testing etc... some of the plans and near future testing we have scheduled, will be earth shattering for our sector (panoramas/video panoramas) if the results prove that these things can be applied to panos/video panos. Not staying on a trodden path or follow advice from others, most often results in real innovation and not imitation. I value every single input from knowledgeable members of the community but when people come with claims of things that don't work (without providing proof for their claims) or when they feel they should be the ones who decide what one is to spend time and money on (without knowing what it would cost in both time and money, and not having a hand in paying for it), and providing typical fanboy comments... well, I need to filter such things out, or respond in kind. I could have reacted better and faster when the Apple-mania started, but I didn't. I was convinced that Flash would carry through on the promises of a mobile version, less CPU demanding and more stable... that was the plan... but that fell through the floor as we all know. I did bet on the wrong horse.... and to make it even worse, after I was persuaded to have native mobile output for the player done, last year turned out to be the worst year programming time wise... the programmer didn't have any time to work for me at all. Now that he is back, he has been full time working on the H5 and WebGL players. Late arrival, but it's getting there... still it can only be seen as a temporary/limited solution, because not all mobile devices will be covered, based on the fact that the hardware manufacturers and browser providers are not hell bent on following or aiming for the same set of standards.
I genuinely want to provide the best possible solution, and even though I am sure that our H5 and WebGL engines are the best... they are just band-aids, trying to make things better... still leaving a lot of hardware in the dark middle ages.
TraustiOn Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 8:47 PM, Keith Martin <keith@...> wrote:On 3 Feb 2013, at 00:30, Trausti Hraunfjord <trausti.hraunfjord@...> wrote:
Well, I could be bothered to try your claim.
Lesson learned: OpenGL Profiler crashed repeatedly, and it could not get a single cubeface from the project. Thereby your claim has been proven to be wrong.Care to post a sample online for others to try? I mean, if you're getting all feisty about it then why not make it a challenge? I'd love to help. :)
If I ever get to be your employee, I would possibly accept having you to tell me what to spend my time on. Fact being that you don't have me in your employment...... you can figure out the rest.I am certain that Christian didn't mean it as an order. I actuallythink he's right, in that there are things that would make your product far more exciting to far more people. As you so clearly indicate, you can and will do as you like. Unsolicited feedback is normally worth what you pay for it. But unsolicited feedback from experts in the community that also contains many potential customers... that's definitely worth more than zero.
Sorry about your inability to understand the need/desire to use encryption as a part of the security, and your "Flash is unusable" comments are getting quite tired. Live with the fact that Flash is still the best tool for content delivery, even though it is far from being perfect. Try to put focus on the fact that iDevices are crippled by the producer, so they won't be able to display Flash content.Heh. This argument is so 2010. Stop complaining about "iDevices", remember that Adobe has *dropped* development of Flash for ALL mobile devices, and consider where the future lies. Don't skate to where the puck is (or was a year or two ago), skate to where it is going. You may not like where that is, but if you're going to continue to market software to people who want to market their work to others, you need to make sure your tools satisfy whatever major needs that may produce.Me, I'm happy to carry on publishing Flash-compatible versions of my pano work... but I won't ever do that without also providing HTML5 versions. Because of this I won't even consider using a tool that doesn't support that. But on the flipside, I'm always very keen to find software that increases feature parity between the two outputs, as much as is possible. I'm with Sacha on that.k
- Hi, long and important discussion. With hacker skill into digital world we can do everything but i think that a pano-virtual tour would be published with aMessage 82 of 82 , May 20, 2013View SourceHi, long and important discussion. With hacker skill into digital world we
can do everything but i think that a pano-virtual tour would be published
with a mininum of protection to discourage the average user. So with Krpano
what's the best workflow with minimal protection?
View this message in context: http://panotoolsng.586017.n4.nabble.com/Html5-xml-and-image-encyrption-tp4656899p4657423.html
Sent from the PanoToolsNG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.