Simplified mixer

More
03 Jan 2013 13:59 #4591 by FDR
Replied by FDR on topic Simplified mixer
I think that's for now...
The icons and the order come later.

PB and Suvsuv, I understand, if you both resist to change the GUI, since it is already implemented in this way, but please consider this things, if you too think, that the simplified GUI is to help people to make the conversion to deviation.

I'm waiting for your opinion patiently... ;)
The topic has been locked.
  • rbe2012
  • rbe2012's Avatar
  • Offline
  • So much to do, so little time...
More
03 Jan 2013 14:03 #4593 by rbe2012
Replied by rbe2012 on topic Simplified mixer
My personal opinion: using the range 0-100 or -100-+100 should be user configurable or both values should be shown.
In manuals and GUIs it is handled different and (manual) recalculating has a potential source for errors.
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:05 #4594 by FDR
Replied by FDR on topic Simplified mixer

rbe2012 wrote: My personal opinion: using the range 0-100 or -100-+100 should be user configurable or both values should be shown.


Do you mean for every stick and channel, or just for the throttle?
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:38 #4601 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Simplified mixer
Just so you know you are not talking to a vacuum, I'm still here, but we need to keep the same interface for Devo10 and Devo8, so I was hoping suvsuv would show up and respond to some of your concerns. The layout and menu related stuff I can handle, but the actual funtionality I want his input on why it is the way it is. Maybe someone can poke him to respond.
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:38 - 03 Jan 2013 14:41 #4602 by suvsuv
Replied by suvsuv on topic Simplified mixer

sbstnp wrote: I know my personal opinion isn't highly valued around here :whistle: but I still think the standard mixer is a gimmick, a temporary familiar place for new users which will abandon it anyway. That's my opinion and you can hate me for it :silly:

But there's this saying "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime".

The standard mixer is the first part of these wise words.

In the end, when all the possible mixes will have been added, and I talk about airplane mixers, etc, probably we'll have a shortage of ROM and RAM and there will be 2 editions of Deviation. It's inevitable. Or, it will be incomplete, and obviously will miss it's purpose.

So we'd better write some good documentation, and I'm willing to contribute as much as I can, because I predict the simple interface will not be enough.

My opinion - love me or hate me for it.

Why do you alway believe others think in the same way as you?
I believe I understand the Advanced Mixer more than you , but I never use it to configure any of my helis, including minicp,nano cp, mcpx, 120d02s, vbar 250, sk720 250.
<<Moderated>>
Last edit: 03 Jan 2013 14:41 by PhracturedBlue.
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:41 #4603 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Simplified mixer
Before this gets out of hand, I'll stop it right here.
Keep this thread civil. If you are going to argue, do it on technical merits, and not personal attacks.
Remember that etiquite is hard enough when everyone has the same native language, and that is not the case here.
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:41 #4604 by FDR
Replied by FDR on topic Simplified mixer
:blink:
Please, gentlemen...
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:42 #4605 by suvsuv
Replied by suvsuv on topic Simplified mixer

FDR wrote: So, happy new year for everybody, here I am again, pretending to work while actually thinking about deviation... ;)

Since the simple GUI didn't let me sleep last night, I was thinking about it a lot.
If you don't mind I will share my thoughts with you.

First it is a huge help to all the novices, who come to deviation, but don't really understand the "advanced" mixer.
However, since they all (but a few, who just bought the DEVO because of deviation ;) ) come from the devention interface, the more it corresponds to the original the easier for them to convert their existing model configs to deviation.

That's why I was against the 9 point curves:

FDR wrote: Besides, I don't get why curves are 9 point?
All the DEVOs (except the 12) have 7 point curves, so if we want to give them a similar and hence familiar interface, why don't you offer a 7 point curve?
I have to admit, that I like quarters better then thirds, but this way existing DEVO users have to recalculate all their curves...

I think, the 9 point curves won't offer too much advantage to those, for whom the advanced mixer is too complicated anyway...

So, if I were you I would:
- make the curves 7 point;
- make D/R assymmetric, and let it go to +-125% (instead of 120%);
- the range of the subtrims differ too (62.5% in 0.5% steps vs 50% in 0.1% steps), but I think it's not that important.

Since it starts to get too long, I will write about all the menu items in detail one by one...

Originally it is 7-point curve, and was changed to 9-point as they can be just displayed in one page of devo10. It shouldn't bother you for 2 more points as most likely no more 3 points are required to set in current FBL system
Making D/R asymmetric and +/-125 will be done soon after PB fix all his porting in devo8.
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:46 #4607 by suvsuv
Replied by suvsuv on topic Simplified mixer

FDR wrote: So, I continue in no particular order, just as they come to my mind...

About the switch assignment:
First, it shouldn't allow the same switch to be configured to controversial functions, however it might enable for example the flight mode and the gyro for the same switch. (i.e. currently the throttle hold should be different)
We may leave that to the users, but we want to help them, don't we? ;)

Second:
- flight mode has more options then the original, which is good;
- the gyro has about the same options as the original, so this is good also;
- however the throttle hold has fewer options, because the use of the 3 way switches are not specific enough.

Also, I would like the throttle hold and gyro switch to be on their appropriate page too! (The gyro switch is there in the original fw...)
The purpose of having them together too is to see, are there any contradictions.

1. I could pop up a alert dialog if duplicate switches are assigned to a functon
2. It is just too hard to provide more options when 3 way switches are specified for thr hold, so I would rather keep it simple
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:47 #4608 by PhracturedBlue
Replied by PhracturedBlue on topic Simplified mixer

suvsuv wrote: Originally it is 7-point curve, and was changed to 9-point as they can be just displayed in one page of devo10. It shouldn't bother you for 2 more points as most likely no more 3 points are required to set in current FBL system

I think FDR is thinking about someone directly porting an existing mode (or even using an automated utility to write a compatible ini file directly) and being able to map the curves exactly would be useful in that case. I don't have an opinion one way or the other.
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:47 #4609 by FDR
Replied by FDR on topic Simplified mixer

suvsuv wrote: Originally it is 7-point curve, and was changed to 9-point as they can be just displayed in one page of devo10. It shouldn't bother you for 2 more points as most likely no more 3 points are required to set in current FBL system


Yep, but the point is, that if somebody wants to convert his existing Walkera model config to deviation with the new GUI, then he have to recalculate the points of his curve...
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:48 #4610 by suvsuv
Replied by suvsuv on topic Simplified mixer

FDR wrote: Next is the gyro, because it is related to the previous:

If the gyro switch will be there too, it would be nice, if in case of a 2 way switch is selected, the third value could be hidden or disabled.

The range is 0%..+100% mapped to our -100%..+100%, which is good IMO.

Will implement it
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:51 #4611 by suvsuv
Replied by suvsuv on topic Simplified mixer

FDR wrote: Swash type:

I've already asked about that:

FDR wrote: Don't you think that the simplified swash form could be unified with the heli options form?

I am more used to current setting for simplified swash form by using +/- to set reverse direction, which is the common manner in commercial TXes
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:56 #4612 by suvsuv
Replied by suvsuv on topic Simplified mixer

FDR wrote: Throttle hold is alike:
If the throttle hold switch is configured on that page (too), there is no need for the on/off option: if a switch is selected, then it's on, if not, then off.

EDIT: ...and of course if the switch is none (or off as you please), the value could be hidden or disabled.

Well, I want the Standard GUI follows the commercial TXes but with some more features. So,
a) the thr hold page is to let users easily access it.
b) the switch assignment page is a add-on feature.
All in all, in generic TX GUIs, hidding options in a page is not welcome and hard to find.
In short, Advanced GUI is like a Windows system having folders and sub-folders, Standard GUI is like an IOS system.
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 14:57 #4613 by suvsuv
Replied by suvsuv on topic Simplified mixer

FDR wrote: That's all for the pitch curves...

However in case of the throttle curves, there is the question: shouldn't we map these to the 0%..100% range just like you did with the gyro value?
The original (and I think the other brands too) handle the throttle between 0 and 100.

This will be done soon
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 15:00 #4614 by sbstnp
Replied by sbstnp on topic Simplified mixer

suvsuv wrote: I believe I understand the Advanced Mixer more than you , but I never use it to configure any of my helis, including minicp,nano cp, mcpx, 120d02s, vbar 250, sk720 250.
<<Moderated>>


If you never use it, maybe PB should remove it. Ego-centrist much?

An opinion is an opinion, and should be treated as one. I don't have opinions to insult people, and people should not feel insulted by my opinions.

Still I raised some important points, do you think there will be enough ROM and RAM after you implement everything in the "stabdard" way?

Devo 10 + 4in1
Spektrum Dx9
FrSky Taranis + TBS Crossfire
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 15:22 #4615 by FDR
Replied by FDR on topic Simplified mixer

suvsuv wrote: 2. It is just too hard to provide more options when 3 way switches are specified for thr hold, so I would rather keep it simple


I meant like they did, separate rows for the different options:

FMOD 1,2 (Safety=!FMOD0)
FMOD 2 (Safety=FMOD2)
MIX 1,2 (Safety=!MIX0)
MIX 2 (Safety=MIX2)

As I see it works the other way now: if I set the throttle hold switch to say the MIX 0/1/2, then the safety will be MIX0...
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 15:30 #4617 by FDR
Replied by FDR on topic Simplified mixer

suvsuv wrote:

FDR wrote: Throttle hold is alike:
If the throttle hold switch is configured on that page (too), there is no need for the on/off option: if a switch is selected, then it's on, if not, then off.

EDIT: ...and of course if the switch is none (or off as you please), the value could be hidden or disabled.

Well, I want the Standard GUI follows the commercial TXes but with some more features. So,
a) the thr hold page is to let users easily access it.
b) the switch assignment page is a add-on feature.
All in all, in generic TX GUIs, hidding options in a page is not welcome and hard to find.
In short, Advanced GUI is like a Windows system having folders and sub-folders, Standard GUI is like an IOS system.


I see, but it is a bit misleading, because the user goes into the throttle hold page, set it on, and thinks it's done, however if there is no switch configured, it won't work.
It is cymbersome too, that you have to visit two pages to set one feature...
(It was even worse in the original, because the switch assignment was in the system menu, while the TH was in the model menu... :pinch: )

Actually I like disabling (i.e. making read-only) more, because that way I know there is a plus option that can be enabled somehow.
However when I make forms for more simple users, I use hiding, not to frustrate them...
Both have advantages and disadvantages, the main point is to somehow indicate, that the value in question doesn't actually have a meaning...
The topic has been locked.
More
03 Jan 2013 15:36 #4619 by FDR
Replied by FDR on topic Simplified mixer

suvsuv wrote:

FDR wrote: Swash type:

I've already asked about that:

FDR wrote: Don't you think that the simplified swash form could be unified with the heli options form?

I am more used to current setting for simplified swash form by using +/- to set reverse direction, which is the common manner in commercial TXes


OK, but at least their labels and spinbox items should be the same just for the sake of the translators...
The topic has been locked.
  • rbe2012
  • rbe2012's Avatar
  • Offline
  • So much to do, so little time...
More
03 Jan 2013 15:39 - 03 Jan 2013 15:44 #4620 by rbe2012
Replied by rbe2012 on topic Simplified mixer

FDR wrote:

rbe2012 wrote: My personal opinion: using the range 0-100 or -100-+100 should be user configurable or both values should be shown.


Do you mean for every stick and channel, or just for the throttle?


I remember this only for gyro sensitivity, but for throttle 0-100 might be good for fp helis and planes (with cp we have a throttle curve <> minimun so it would not matter, but it should be identically everywhere).
For controls where something moves in two directions the +/- should be more natural.
Last edit: 03 Jan 2013 15:44 by rbe2012.
The topic has been locked.
Time to create page: 0.079 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum