About the GUI..

[sam c]

I have been using Reaper for a few months and it is an outstanding program with huge potential. As you know, some folks do not like the GUI. How do you feel about the UI and do you have any plans for it to look, well, different?

[Justin Frankel]

Well, I'll start by saying that the state of the UI isn't constant, and it is evolving.

However, our big priority right now is getting the feature set comprehensive enough, as well as getting the Mac port up to par...

The UI will be improved on, it's just a matter of when.

[trock]

hi justin

do you have a program GUI that you love? any idea what you might make it look like or model after? i guess that hard to answer but i just wonder what YOU like besides reaper?

thanks

tim

[mahasandi]

this is not intended to be an answer to anyone's question.
but for me the mac beta looks very smooth this is an osx thing but... it looks nice by
todays standards.

[Justin Frankel]

Originally Posted by trock

hi justin

do you have a program GUI that you love? any idea what you might make it look like or model after? i guess that hard to answer but i just wonder what YOU like besides reaper?

thanks

tim

Well I find lots of little things to appreciate in different software...

I like what google does for interfaces on things like gmail and maps..

I like VC6's IDE.. It has its own issues, but I definitely come to appreciate how it works..

I guess I value function over beauty... ;)

[Tallisman]

So, given that you prefer function to fashion, what do you think of White Tie's Sketch mock-up and Skinning ideas over here:
http://www.cockos.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8350 on the Reaper Forum?

enquiring minds want to know!
cheers,
tallis

[Justin Frankel]

see http://www.gearslutz.com/board/two-w...eaper-gui.html ;)

[steve.h]

Originally Posted by Justin Frankel

...I guess I value function over beauty... ;)

As any good programmer should! And before I say any more I would like to express how wonderful it is to have an incredibly compact, versatile, well-programmed, inexpensive piece of software available to the general public! I can't believe how close you've come to a commercially viable alternative to "the big boys". Seriously, well done!

On to my question. To be honest, the biggest reason I haven't switched to Reaper (from Sonar) is due to some of the GUI issues: specifically, the menus. As a programmer (and a musician!), it's hard to step back from your creation and look at it from a "complete n00b's" point of view. For me, the menus could use a more intuitive organizational scheme. I tried Reaper for a couple of days and, while the tracking itself was a breeze and rock-solid, it took a fair amount of time to set up and, once I tried editing a bit, I found myself spending more time navigating odd menus than actually working.

I know you've stated that the actual features and inner-workings of the program are your top priority (wish the boys at MS felt the same way hah!), I'm supremely convinced that with a little bit of GUI work, Reaper would definitely find it's way into my studio permanently! :)

[Justin Frankel]

Originally Posted by steve.h

As any good programmer should! And before I say any more I would like to express how wonderful it is to have an incredibly compact, versatile, well-programmed, inexpensive piece of software available to the general public! I can't believe how close you've come to a commercially viable alternative to "the big boys". Seriously, well done!

On to my question. To be honest, the biggest reason I haven't switched to Reaper (from Sonar) is due to some of the GUI issues: specifically, the menus. As a programmer (and a musician!), it's hard to step back from your creation and look at it from a "complete n00b's" point of view. For me, the menus could use a more intuitive organizational scheme. I tried Reaper for a couple of days and, while the tracking itself was a breeze and rock-solid, it took a fair amount of time to set up and, once I tried editing a bit, I found myself spending more time navigating odd menus than actually working.

I know you've stated that the actual features and inner-workings of the program are your top priority (wish the boys at MS felt the same way hah!), I'm supremely convinced that with a little bit of GUI work, Reaper would definitely find it's way into my studio permanently! :)

I would love to hear some specifics of where you get caught up in the menus.. to be honest I end up spending very little time in them--they work very well for me... is it the organization of particular context menus, or just the fact that there are many of them?

[steve.h]

Originally Posted by Justin Frankel

I would love to hear some specifics of where you get caught up in the menus.. to be honest I end up spending very little time in them--they work very well for me... is it the organization of particular context menus, or just the fact that there are many of them?

I will have to open up the program again when I get back to the studio tonight! As I said, I think the issues I've run into are mostly organizational. For instance, the right-click menu in the effects window brings up many, many options (most of which are used sparingly or not at all). For the most part, the only things I'd need would be "add" and "delete", with other more advanced options in something like an "advanced" sub-menu. The program's primary menus have similar organizational issues that, in my opinion, inhibit work-flow due to the sheer number of options. While in more specific situations, the options are extremely welcome, for general tracking & mixing, I feel many of the advanced features could be better organized.

Thanks for listening :)

[Cymbals]

For me, it was mostly figuring out the inital setup of the soundcard when it had multiple ins/outs. The docs helped out with that though. Mostly just saying "now where do I..." There was something about the master buss as well, but I'm blanking on it at the moment.