Re: APRSISCE Lock Fix & New Features!
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "David Shrum" <dave.n8pu@...> wrote:
>I'll make it much simpler than that page, but it basically says that there'll be %X parameter that represent the various components of the date/time. Whatever you put in the configuration parameter will govern what displays.
> That page is way above my understanding, but what I had in mind was to be
> able to change the way it is displayed so if I wanted to have the
> month/day/year I could, but if another user wanted it day/month/year or
> year/day/month they could.
> On the time it would be nice if we could select a time zone independent ofGMT vs the device is not too difficult. Arbitrary time zones are MUCH harder! 12 vs 24 will be automatic given the %X parameters mentioned above.
> the device, say GMT time for instance we could and be able to select either
> a 12 or 24 hour format.
> Since you ask, I thought I would ask. :)I'm always willing to listen to any and all ideas. The best part about being the developer is I get to choose what does and does not make the cut (although with me, it's normally WHEN it gets implemented, not IF).
> I can't remember if you said you were going to try to let us track aYes, that is absolutely in the plans, as is the ability to pan around the map with some way of getting it back to you (or the currently selected station) in the center. Not sure when I'll get that going, but I just added the course/speed parsing. I've got a few more things to do before it's worth putting another release out though.
> specific call, but that would be nice; similar to what it is with
> http://aprs.fi/?call=n8pu-12 where you can 'type' in a call and if it is
> available it will display it and scroll the screen so we can view their
> progress. I know it is much better on a computer screen but if you are out
> away from yours it would be nice to see where they were.
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ
- Lynn W. Deffenbaugh wrote:
> Noel,Yeah... they get too small.
>> So I was just comparing the two versions of the program,
>> and I think I figured out what it is I didn't like about the normal one:
>> The icons get too small when you zoom out to see more map. Just too
>> small on the 3" VGA screen for my taste.
> So, they get too small too quickly in both versions, right? I only
> expanded them in the second, but didn't change when/how they get small.
I'd rather them just overlap than get really small.
>> I do kinda like the bigger icon at higher zoom levels.I think 2x the "normal" size would be good on a VGA device.
>> I don't think they really need to made any bigger.. at least not on this
>> screen. But it would make them look nicer at high zoom, so I'll work on
> So the 2x maximum expansion looks good to you? I concur with that
> opinion as well.
>> Also, what overall size (X/Y) should I make the grid for the larger iconWill do.
> To get them up to double size clearly, we'll need each square to be 42
> pixels instead of the current 21 pixel squares (21-4 giving the 17x17
> icons that the program ends up painting).
> I did a quick experiment here with IrfanView and I think if you start
> with just a resize/resample 200% retaining aspect ratio, you'll have a
> good starting point to clean them up. As I mentioned before though, try
> to make sure that all non-important pixels are actually pure white
> (RGB(255,255,255)) or they won't go transparent correctly.
> I'm trying to figure out how to fade them out and keep the transparencyI guess I didn't mess around with that too much... it didn't bother me.
> so I quit getting the square around fading stations. If you look close
> at the red dot in the screen caps you sent me, you can see what I'm
> talking about. I was drawing it at 50% fade, but that messes up the
> transparency. I'm going back to 100% for the red dot, but aging
> stations will still start having a square around them as they fade.
> I'll get it fixed somehow!
> Thanks again for any efforts you can do on getting clearer, biggerNoel
> icons. I'm hoping that I can just use them for all resolutions with the
> 320x240 phone just using them at 50% with Win32 doing the scaling for
> me. Scaling down tends to look better than scaling up!
> Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ