MeldaProduction are NOT going to stop supporting OSX platform.

[chk071]

Maybe the close tool is 32-bit software.

[Haptix]

thats bs. its 128-bit cryptomining malware, I tell you.

[Tagirijus]

Hey stratology,

just checked your points now:

- when you open a plug-in (say, MAutopanMB) and click on the right arrow to choose a preset, then click again to choose the 2nd one, nothing happens, because the location of the right arrow has jumped to the right. There is no consistent position of the button for preset choice.

Nothing weird happens here. If I click the right arrow (you mean the preset selectign one, right?), it just goes through all the presets. You mean with "click again" = "click again without moving the mouse", right? Yes, this might become confusing, since the next preset is one with the edit-page open. This page is something "under the hood" of the plugin. I am not even sure, how this could be avoided, since there are often times totally different controls "under the hood" of the plugins, having an edit screen, hm. I still understand your point and yet it never annoyed me in any way. Not sure if this might be a clue that I am really bad at GUI, hehe (not even having a feeling for such things - or it can be a matter of taste? Don't know ...).

- when you click a button to open a new part of the UI, like the Toolbar, the 'open' button disappears, and a new 'close' button appears a different location.

I also understand this point, but I see it similar like mentioned above.

- the 'minimise', 'close' and 'maximise' buttons are inconsistent with buttons with the same function all across the system. They look different, function differently, and are in the wrong position (top right of the window, instead of top left).

Well, isn't it like in the OS after all? The only new button on the top right of a window is the "help" button. It appears, if there is help after all. The others might be visible, if the window needs it. In Windows at least a simple dialog box also does not have to contain the minimizing or maximizing buttons. So the buttons also vary in Windows.

- when you hover the mouse cursor over these buttons, it changes from an arrow to a hand symbol for no reason. This is also inconsistent with the OS, and every other well designed plug-in.

The reason is that you can click something, I guess. While on other clickable constrols there is no hand symbol anymore ... yes, it feels a bit strange. The hand symbol could be avoided overall, this seems legit.

- when you hit the 'Edit' button in the main window, it jumps sideways to a different location in the UI. Lots of buttons jump around randomly, and change size randomly, when you click them.

Same comment as above: it's a new "mode" of the plugin with more detailled controls.

- when you have the 'Style Configuration' window open, the size of the window and position of the window changes when you switch between different styles, with the 'size' selection remaining on 100%.

I also see now what you are refering to here. Well: I see it this way: it's a completely different theme, you are selecting. I understand that this theme might have different scalings in some ways. I also understand your point that it might feel a bit more "consistent", if even the themes would let the scaling of the overall GUI stay the same, though.

- some windows have a large 'Close' button at the bottom - instead of the small, red close button that you see in every single other window in the OS. Some windows have a large 'ok' button at the bottom, that has the exact same purpose as the 'Close' button.

Yeah, I also understand this point now. I also never noticed this, though ... and again it also never annoyed me, haha.

- when you move the arrow cursor from the DAW window, or the window of any other plug-in that is open, to the window of a Melda plug-in, the size of the default arrow cursor changes (it gets bigger).

This does not happen here, so far.

[stratology]

I also did not notice such things.

That's kind of the point. When you come across bad UI design, it somehow feels awkward, slows down the workflow. But you (and I) do not consciously notice what is wrong until we start to pay attention to details.

Apple released their Human Interface Guidelines literally decades ago. So devs don't have to figure out all these details from scratch, they can just read up on best practices.
Many of these best practices are also transferrable to Windows.


If you look at a plugin like U-He Presswerk, you'll find all these things done right. Lots of options, but you can figure out what to do at a glance, without having to read a manual, or looking at tutorials.

[MeldaProduction]

stratology, thanks for the feedback, I'll check your points. But note that these plugins are no Presswerk (which is very simple compared to these, pretty much all). The few thing I quickly checked are actually necessary - like switching between easy screen and edit screen necessarily changes the size to make the plugin as small as possible. That's partly the whole point. I don't know of any other plugins out there without automatic layouted custom editor design, with resizability, stylability... You say it's not necessary, but that's your opinion, I say it is great and many would agree. There are definitely things to improve, but in such a complex ecosystem it just is hard.

In any case it is completely unrelated to this topic and if I would want to behave the way you do, by trying insult the other side to get an edge, I could start with Apple's webside and the workflow of OSX itself. But let's not get there. These are just opinions and the fact that someone someday released some guidelines is totally irrelevant.

[stratology]

The few thing I quickly checked are actually necessary - like switching between easy screen and edit screen necessarily changes the size to make the plugin as small as possible.

If you look at how the advanced options are implemented in, say, Goodhertz plug-ins, you can see that it's perfectly possible to add new UI elements without moving existing UI elements around.

[sirmonkey]

Ooops, duplicate post.

[Tagirijus]

That's kind of the point. When you come across bad UI design, it somehow feels awkward, slows down the workflow. But you (and I) do not consciously notice what is wrong until we start to pay attention to details.

Interesting point. On the other site I can tell that with Meldas plugins I have even a better and faster workflow than with tools I used before that ... due to their features, I guess. Still I am looking forward to how Melda GUI may improve maybe (regarding some points you mentioned, which do not seem to have a too huge impact on the overall GUI).

[MeldaProduction]

The few thing I quickly checked are actually necessary - like switching between easy screen and edit screen necessarily changes the size to make the plugin as small as possible.

If you look at how the advanced options are implemented in, say, Goodhertz plug-ins, you can see that it's perfectly possible to add new UI elements without moving existing UI elements around.

No if you allow full customization... People just may create any kind of width... Anyways as I said thanks for your feedback.

[sirmonkey]

Wow, this thread is still open! Cool! Good time to announce a new plugin...

[sirmonkey]

Totally kidding, of course...

[sirmonkey]

Ooops, duplicate post.

[stratology]

No if you allow full customization... People just may create any kind of width... Anyways as I said thanks for your feedback.

Customisation and consistency are not mutually exclusive.

Expecting users to make choices that are the job of the developer - like choosing between 20 different types of oversampling - is not customisation. It's indecisive, and goes against usability. Meaningful choice would be the option to render audio in 'draft', 'good', and 'best' qualities - like you find in some synthesiser plugins. Quality options in between, just for the sake of having more choices, is not meaningful, not user friendly - not good design.



A core point of what I'm trying to communicate - and what comes down to what possibly may be the root cause of much of your Apple hatred - is familiarity.

Example: you have the knowledge and the skill to code a close box for a plugin settings window in Windows. But you are not familiar enough with how a close box in macOS is supposed to look like and work, to implement it correctly.

This lack of familiarity with OS conventions is visible throughout the whole UI. And I suspect it extends to core technologies in macOS as well. And may be the root cause of all the anger and frustration.

[elxsound]

@stratology, for whatever its worth... this same topic came up with another group, and another company but the discussion was the same about inclusion of user options and customizability versus developer/designer choice and it was something that made me reflect on what I've wanted and it forced me appreciate user choice in products that cater to us differently.

I personally have gone from wanting complete simplicity, to wanting all options available to again, appreciating simplicity (and working within available limitations), but for me, most importantly it is just understanding that not every product needs to be designed for a single universal user.

If you look at Melda's user base, they are quite happy. For those users working primarily with Melda products I strongly doubt they need to read a manual to understand the features, options and workflow.

This is not attempting to invalidate anything you've said regarding specific inconsistencies (which I'd like to believe are helpful to have been identified), but in overall design he's shown there is a growing market for his products that appeals strongly to his customers, so it can't be wrong. It can be different, but ultimately it works for him and his customers.

[JunSev]

No if you allow full customization... People just may create any kind of width... Anyways as I said thanks for your feedback.

Customisation and consistency are not mutually exclusive.

Expecting users to make choices that are the job of the developer - like choosing between 20 different types of oversampling - is not customisation. It's indecisive, and goes against usability. Meaningful choice would be the option to render audio in 'draft', 'good', and 'best' qualities - like you find in some synthesiser plugins. Quality options in between, just for the sake of having more choices, is not meaningful, not user friendly - not good design.

What a bunch of nonsense... the problem with many people thinking like you is that you think of innovation as if it should follow certain rules always, or if some feature is very trending in some synths or effects you think that Melda and others developers should do exactly the same.

But then what would make Melda's plug-ins special and unique if not that different approach and different ways to do things: Versatility = More Possibilities.

And even when some of those plug-ins requires some learning curve they are rewarding and not so limited as many on the markets, that's why it has multiparameters, modulators, gain compensation, more control over the sounds while doing sound design ext ext...

I don't know...I'm starting to think that apple users (not all) judge everything by the eyes, that's why many of them are always willing to drop the Cash $€£ from apple overpriced and often low quality releases, macs, iphones... like: It looks really cool so... I will buy it... even when there are better options and more affordability, but no, many of them don't even like to learn or know about the product they are getting, because of the looks they will drop the Cash $€£... This is absurd.