Questions on next version 5.6

[Ronniebootwest]

Brian, Igor and everyone.

I am not against the addition of your proposed 2xButton Program Set-Up Brian, in fact I think it is an eloquent solution if one was need in the program. However I think there is an even simpler solution to the "New used PTE confusion" development problem highlighted in this thread by you and others.

This would not involve more programing, consuming more of Igor and his teams time or adding more functions to the PTE interface.

Simply make PTE v4.49 available renamed as PTE Basic which has no further development as presently is the case.

This would become the beginners version and when or if ever the user wishers to use the more advanced features they simply move to the PTE Advanced version, currently v5.5, which continues to develop as required to keep pace in the market and meet the needs of the more advanced users.

Both versions live comfortably side by side on the PC, it just requires a slight re-thinking of what the 2 version are called and how they are presented. This is done with a simple renaming and the way each is presented on the WnSoft Web-site.

So we would see--

PTE Basic -- currently v4.49 with no further development, (as now).

PTE Advanced -- currently v5.5 with continued development (as now).

PTE Full -- currently v5.5 + DVD burner with continued development (as now).

Hello everyone,

I have been trying to follow this thread but have failed to understand most of the technical stuff. I don't really mind not understanding though because I am not that much interested. I want a software program that is easy to use and simple to learn (version 4..49 for example). Way back when version 5 was first introduced, I remember saying that there was a real danger of making PTE so complicated that folk would simply abandon it for some other program - we have reached that point right now I think!

Most of the emails that I recieve from PTE users, are asking questions about how to use the complicated options contained in version 5. I always suggest that they go bac to basics and learn how to use the progam with version 4.49 before attempting to move up to version 5 - i.e. if you try to run before learning to walk, you will most certainly fall over!

The above post is exactly right, to cater for everybodies needs, just make PTE available as suggested in the post. My bet is that version 4.49 would be the one that most folk would buy.

Ronnie West

[JPD]

The above post is exactly right, to cater for everybodies needs, just make PTE available as suggested in the post. My bet is that version 4.49 would be the one that most folk would buy.

Ronnie West

Even to keep 4.49 version, we need V5... and later V6...

Why ? Because if Wnsoft doesn't offer functions that others offer, it will be finish for Wnsoft, so to keep V4.49 alive, you need Wnsoft and you need V5.. and V6 later, it seems clear.

[xahu34]

Hello all,

If there really should be a Basic Version it should be part of the actual software and not just a new name for old software without new development, and which is to be installed separately.

In my opinion, the situation should remain as it. Maybe it is possible to reorganize the menu structure of PTE v.5 in a way that it helps inexperienced users to configure the program according to their needs, but with the possibility to upgrade their projects when having learned more.

The drawback of any separation (basic, advanced, …) could be that configuration items which an advanced user would like to see in one menu will be split over two or more, not being an enhancement of usability.

Best regards,

Xaver

Munich

[Conflow]

In reply to Xaver,

Xaver wrote...

If there really should be a Basic Version it should part of the actual software and not a new name for old software without new development,

and which is to be installed separately.

Brian

Xaver, i completely agree with you, the 'basic version' is already available in Pte.5, and as we know Pte.4.49 uses a different Engine and there

is no going backwards. Thats the reason I suggested the 2.Button set-up,viz:- Select Button.1 and Pte.5 operates as if it were Pte.4.49 and

it is capable of doing just that.

Xaver

In my opinion, the situation should remain as it. Maybe it is possible to reorganize the menu structure of PTE v.5 in a way that it helps

inexperienced users to configure the program according to their needs, but with the possibility to upgrade their projects when having learned more.

Brian

Xaver, again I agree with you ~ yes it may be possible to re-organise the Menu structure but that would entail more written Code whereas the

Button solution (in theory) would simply 'Turn On/Off' those API's associated with PZR effects and yet leave the options available for those who

need to use PZR and for the 'Novice' when he/she becomes more familiar with the Program.

Of course there are other options,but what can be simpler than a Switch ?

Xaver

The drawback of any separation (basic, advanced, …) could be that configuration items which an advanced user would like to see in one menu

will be split over two or more, not being an enhancement of usability.

Brian

Xaver, not necessarily so, because the Button (proposal) simply switches from 'Basic V.5-Program' over to 'PZR V.5 Program' and within that

there are many other selectable options. Also Plug-Ins are not an ideal solution for -Beta-Testing New Ideas- but they are far more acceptable

than simply adding 'new-code' to the existing Program. I am refering to Screen-Size options and Masks and new ideas for iPod etc,etc,etc.

Ronnie's Post

Certainly when one reads the Post from Ronnie Boothwest ~ I have to say that Ronnie does represent the concensus of ordinary Users in that

the Program is becomming difficult for the 'New User/Novice' ~ I myself have a similar problem in Ireland with new (prospective) users and their

feedback is similar to Ronnie's, its not so good !

Xaver, this is my last Post to this Thread.

At this stage I wish to retire from this important discussion so Igor has some time to consider the options available as I know that he

is concerned about these issues and other schedules which the Development Team are engaged in....and time is passing here also !

Best regards from Dublin,

Brian.Conflow.

[xahu34]

Xaver, this is my last Post to this Thread.

Hi Brian,

Never say never!

Best regards,

Xaver

[fh1805]

Like several others, I have been following this debate with interest if not always with understanding. There would appear to be some who are wanting to see more new function added. Others are concerned that this will make the product even harder to learn for the new and novice user. Some (notably Brian) have suggested ways in which this complexity can be "hidden" until the user feels ready to activate it. I think you are all missing the root cause of the current problem of ease of use - or lack of it. I would like to make the following observations about PTE's ease of use.

Getting to grips with PTE is no different, in concept, to getting to grips with Adobe Photoshop. Both products offer a wealth of features; not all of which will be required by all users.

I struggled to get to grips with Adobe Photoshop (in my case Elements v3 and subsequently Elements v5). There were so many commands and each had so many different options and parameters. How did I eventually come to my present familiarity with it? Slowly! I took it one small step at a time. I developed a network of contacts through my local Photographic Society - who all gave freely of their time and advice. And I learned how to get the most out of the very comprehensive context-sensistive Help function.

So, how does my experience with PTE differ from my experience with Adobe Photoshop Elements? I started with a local contact who guided me through the early learning curve using v4.43. I found the product extremely difficult to understand at first because it did not have good context-sensitive Help. I worked my way up through the versions until I was using v4.48. When v5.0 betas were released I started watching the forum on a regular basis - and learned a tremedous amount about using v5 even before I plucked up the courage to download a beta code product.

The biggest single aid to my learning about PTEv5 was, without any doubt, Lin and Jeff's excellent User Guide (which I still dip into from time to time to check my understanding). But I found the potentially best source of assistance was still missing: a good quality, context-sensitive Help.

I've continued to work my way through PTE versions (participating in the v5.5 beta program along the way) and now run v5.52 -and still there is no context-sensitive Help.

In my humble opinion, a product of the complexity of PTEv5 must have context-sensitive Help of a very high quality. Until it does have this, it will continue to present a challenge to the new user.

Achieving good quality, comprehensive context-sensitive Help will be a very large project indeed. In my days leading programming teams and support teams we had some basic "rules of thumb":

- coding and testing the main functions of the software took 20% of the effort

- coding and testing the error-handling routines took 80% of the effort

- writing and proof-reading the documentation (user manuals, reference manuals and online help files) took 10 times the effort needed to provide the fully tested code.

If PTE is to continue to attract and retain new users, it must, in my opinion, address this issue of good quality context-sensitive Help.

regards,

Peter

[xahu34]

... If PTE is to continue to attract and retain new users, it must, in my opinion, address this issue of good quality context-sensitive Help....

Hi Peter,

as a first step I would recommend to raise the quality of the actual language files, including the English one. Then it would be good to have a better official English user guide, and (if possible) good translations into French, German, Italian, and Spanish (a lot of work to do).

I myself found PTE quite self-explanatory, and due to some material provided mainly by Lin Evens I had a rather easy start.

Best regards,

Xaver

Munich

[JPD]

If PTE is to continue to attract and retain new users, it must, in my opinion, address this issue of good quality context-sensitive Help.

As say Xaver, the most important is that PTE be quite self-explanatory, a good context help will help only english speaking people not the other and made translations of such help file would take a lot of time to people who make translations, not sure they have enough time.

The initial topic wasn't about this but about mode for objects.

[Cèlou]

Hello everyone,

With PTE, we gentlemen a wonderful tool.

Why would change everything?

A few adjustments here and there, I think that depth, there is no need to change anything.

Improving what has to agree, but especially not do everything and anything.

PTE should look or should be comparable to any other program.

It should remain what it is a great product that unfortunately today may be a victim of its success.

In reading everything that was said, you gentlemen that I am 100% behind JPD.

Now, this is only my opinion and it is what it is worth.

[AnKo]

Hi all,

This discussion is needed, but at this moment far away from the subject. I agree with all of you who say to keep things simple, but I understand that future development for Winsoft is main business and therefore needed to keep up with the competition. PTE is famous for its picture quality (the products of what we make) and its simplicity. This discussion is started about the way PTE presents our products, made with PTE, on TV/LCD/DVD/beamer/exe/etc. We all have problems with it, and so will all new users. To me, next to the quality of PTE slideshows at this moment (V5.52), there is a big need for solving this serious problems in producing WYSIWYG on TV/DVD/LCD.

Igor give us a option to solve this problem. First we should anwser him on this subject.

For those of us, and I am one of them, who wants to keep PTE user friendly, take a look at the other forum in which users/we can do future requests. There is 10 years future development in there! And looking at PTE over the last year, there is made a giant step in programming our wishes. It is going too fast at the cost of userfriendlyness (if that is a word). I suggest we give Igor and his team more time to think about the future of PTE as main product for Winsoft. In the mean time they can optimize the features we have today in PTE.

That said I believe Igor have a good solution for one of the most important problems we all encounter today: output on TV/LCD/beamer/etc. But also has JPD. Let's concentrate on that.

Kind regards,

André

[goddi]

Now I'd like to reply on the question regarding complexity of PicturesToExe.

Igor... I found 2 cents laying around so I thought I'd give my opinion, too, on this matter of complexity with PTE. It is a wonderful program. One of my favorite! I ran into a brick wall when the Keyframes in Pan/Zoom came out, until someone in the Forum let me see the forest for the trees. I think that one solution, at least for me, is that I need to understand more why I should select a menu item or not select it. Most are understandable but many in the O&A menu items need more explanation. What might help is to have Mouse-overs that bring up a window that gives an explanation as to 'Why' and 'Why Not' I should use this button or menu choice and what the effects might be. The use of these Mouse-overs should be able to be turned off if one is beyond the 'learning' stage. I have used the great User Guides that have been assembled. But many times my eyes glaze over from so much info. When we are in the program and we are at the cross-roads to pick a menu item, it is nice to have more Help at that very moment to assist us with our choice. A Mouse-over with selections from the User Guides that pop-up could be a way to uncomplicate it a bit. Not a techie...but just with an opinion from a happy user.

Thanks...Gary

[potwnc]

I've been following this for a few days now and I didn't plan to post a response because I only produce 16:9 video with PTE anymore and I don't see that changing and I don't think Igor's proposed change will affect me... obviously I'll have to wait until the 5.6 betas to confirm that.

But, to try to bring this thread back on topic, I'd like to see the first beta of 5.6 released and then those with enough time and experience can, hopefully, start posting about how it actually impacts us - positively or negatively - with examples and explanations. I, for one, would be willing to sign up for this kind of "power testing."

Ray

[jfa]

I agree with you Ray, it would be good to have "hands on" with the change to see just how it would effect my work-flow and the end result. I suspect it would have little effect on my presentations also.

[JEB]

Hi,

Clearly there is considerable concern being expressed regarding the future direction of this wonderful package. Diverse views are being expressed and we are extremely fortunate to be in the position where we know that these opinions are genuinely being taken into account.

The original “sizing” issue raised by Igor is certainly complex and it is clear there are different ways of addressing it. However, the issue regarding usability of the product is intrinsically linked and VITALY important.

WE all know that this product produces the highest quality end result available to the general public. However, if we are entirely honest with ourselves, we have to recognise that many people coming to this product (or any other for that matter) for the first time find it daunting and the quality benefits to many at this early stage of their experience become blurred at the least. Sadly some give up at this stage, some may move to other perceived, user-friendlier products, which will have easy to use bells and whistles. It may be that in time they see the error of their ways but by then the word is out and somebody else is spreading the word that PTE is a complex and difficult programme to use. That is the reality of the situation and I guess Igor is well aware of that.

I agree that it is in our (we the users and Winsoft) best interests that Igor be given time to re-group before introducing new features. Perhaps the Basic/Advanced/Full and Jean-Pierre’s technique (though a more descriptive title would be a must) proposals should be part of that.

However, there have been many suggestions made in the past for “tidying up” PTE that in my view would go a long way to improving the initial impression of the product to the novice and they must where possible be part of this process. Sometimes we who are familiar with certain procedures don’t realize that others are unaware of the solution.

Regards

John

[Drareg]

Like other in this topic I did my best to read and understand all, no luck totally, I stranded on page 3 an wanted to add my comments to all of this.

I started to use PTE 5.1 last year, so I don't have any experience with older versions.

What I do know is the smooth working with PTE5.1, I found no troubles working and making shows with the program.

It feels light to work with.

When you get a new program it takes a while to get used to it, but when used to it it goes smoothly.

I have no problems with the suggested updates of which this topic started by Igor.

But I have one wish, keep it simpel and light, that's all.

Gerard

[Igor]

"Slide size" as a replacement for "Original size" mode

Barry,

We'll think how to add customization for non-slide area ("black strips"/"borders") to be able choose a color or texture image.

Beta 1 will be at the end of September, I think.

We didn't change "Original size" mode yet at this moment. It's in stage of idea and discussing.

Jean-Pierre,

Will it be possible that the mask is the result of several others mask, with all the option of a normal object (PZR ect), for instance 2 circles which move differently in order to make two spotligts

While not, but we'll think about it.

Would it be possible to use the same mask for several objects and will what you call mask have 256 levels of opacity as an alpha layer do.

Yes. Also you can change opacity to Mask to change common opacity of all embedded objects associated with this mask.

Mask could have the same structure as object have : parent-child, we would have to say which object (parent or child) is the mask to use.

There will be "Container" which contains "Mask" image and other objects. So you can create any combinations of movements.

Complexity/simplicity of PicturesToExe.

We'll try keep simple the base inteface. And hide new professional features under "Advanced" buttons, for example.

Brian,

Thanks for your advices!

I need more time to think.

John,

Simply make PTE v4.49 available renamed as PTE Basic which has no further development as presently is the case.

It wouldn't be good solution, because we won't issue new v4.4x versions (too old code - difficult to continue improvements) and v5.5 has many advantages in base interface (DVD-Video output, mini-player, scalable objects).

I'm grateful to all who have wrote here on raised questions and problems! It helps us better understand the situation.

[Igor]

Jean-Pierre,

It seems I've understood your method now. You use "Original size" mode for intermediate steps and resulting slide scalable (not fixed size). Am I right? So even if we add "Fixed size of slide" option, it will not be useful for you because you don't produce fixed sized slide.

Please could you publish an one slide's project with minimal number of objects which maximally well illustrates your method. I'd like to better understand it.

[xahu34]

Igor,

You may try this link, but for sure, Jean-Pierre can provide much more examples. This is the one from which I learned the method.

Best regards,

Xaver

Munich

[Igor]

Jean-Pierre,

It seems that we've found a good alternative for "Original size" mode. Maybe even better. And it is almost as your "Cale" method.

[JPD]

Jean-Pierre,

It seems that we've found a good alternative for "Original size" mode. Maybe even better. And it is almost as your "Cale" method.

I am afraid that you kill original mode, PTE can't be so perfect as to day without this function, it would be a mistake. I have made many tests about that. As I wrote you, it's possible to define a nominal format and work only with pixels (it's easier than in percent) and have for all the project a function to chose to make the format full screen or original size, so no need to chose between two mode (fit or recover).

Many people work like that, I am not alone to use this function.

[Lmoreels]

I think this will be a very good idee.

this way objects will have always the correct size.

Luc M

[HUMJC]

I just download the new version 5.6 beta, and I notice of abandonment in Object animation and original format, serious mistake, I hope that only passenger

I am to keep this format, essential.

HUMJC

[Lin Evans]

See the block below which says (size/position in pixels). You can put original size in at this point.

Best regards,

Lin

I just download the new version 5.6 beta, and I notice of abandonment in Object animation and original format, serious mistake, I hope that only passenger

I am to keep this format, essential.

HUMJC

[Igor]

Jean-Pierre,

I very appreciate your opinion, but it also would be interesting to hear other users what they think about this change?

Instead of "Original size" mode for objects I recommend to use new features:

- "Fixed size of slide (in pixels)" mode (Project options | Screen tab).

- And "Size/position in pixels" tool window via button in Common tab of object properties.

I know it's difficult to retrain, just judge it as you first time see PicturesToExe.

New replacement is more useful for stability of PicturesToExe and in terms of future improvements. Support of "Original size" mode become more and more difficult with every new version and unresolved logical problems. So I've found enough good as I think replacement. If I missed something please help to improve it.

[HUMJC]

See the block below which says (size/position in pixels). You can put original size in at this point.

Best regards,

Lin

Ok

All new change requires an adjustment.

So wait and see

HUM JC