|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
Hoopy frood
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024 |
Cuz I just do! As I said, I don't want mIRC to be seen as some IM program. The only time I care about how people are using mIRC is when people come here thinking mIRC is for something other than what it is (ie: filesharing) In my mind not wanting mIRC to be seen as an MSN Messenger-type thing is just the same as not wanting it to be seen as a Kazaa-type thing. Regards,
Mentality/Chris
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327 |
Skins would not make it be seen as an MSN Messenger type thing.
Skins will make it be seen as an MSN Messenger type thing for those who want it to be seen as an MSN Messenger type thing, for others it will look however they want it to (think windowblinds, styleXP, winamp, wmp or any other programs that have skin support)
New username: hixxy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024 |
I was specifically referring to I think mIRC should have a user interface simular to yahoo messenger, AIM, MSN Messenger, Camfrog Edit: And the only reason I replied to your post was due to the comment about how everything is fine to incorporate as long as it can be disabled, which I disagree with. However, that was a general response to that comment rather than your skins suggestion. Regards,
Mentality/Chris
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327 |
Ah I see.
Well I agree with you there, having a specific theme set in mIRC that doesn't follow your windows theme would be annoying as hell.
I don't think that would be a problem with skins though as you could use anything you like.
New username: hixxy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,918 |
whats with all this need for vanity lately?  i'll tell you, this new generation sickens me.
- argv[0] on EFnet #mIRC
- "Life is a pointer to an integer without a cast"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,962
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,962 |
Skins will make it be seen as an MSN Messenger type thing for those who want it to be seen as an MSN Messenger type thing, for others it will look however they want it to (think windowblinds, styleXP, winamp, wmp or any other programs that have skin support) - All of the programs you've listed there are criminally slow. It's not a coincidence. Anyway, saying 'you can turn it off' is not a reason to add something, it's simply a reason to not not add something (yes, there's a difference). The entire point of skins is beyond me. I don't use an IRC client so that I can look at the window frame around the text and say 'wow, that looks good!', I use an IRC client to talk to people via IRC. Just as skins are pointless with all the programs you listed above, they would be equally pointless in mIRC. Skins do, in fact, largely negate the point of having a windowed GUI like Windows - uniformity of design so that people familiar with one program can feel instantly at ease with any other. Changing the position and look of every control to make something look 'cool' is not my idea of functionality. Yes, I could just not use skins. Yes, I could just 'turn it off' and presumably then mIRC wouldn't suffer from the crippling slowdown. But then again I'd rather not have mIRC potentially bloated because of skins, and much more importantly, I'd rather not see mIRC's development turn towards the style-over-functionality development model. I'd rather not see each release being brought down to the level of being largely a bunch of bugfixes and additions to the skinning engine. I'd rather see mIRC improve as a program than be able to have my mIRC window in the shape of a duck. But that's just me. Note: I'm not against changes of any kind to the mIRC interface, I'm just very much against skinning.
Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 150
Vogon poet
|
|
Vogon poet
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 150 |
I always see this argument that "if you can disable it, what's the problem?" I tend to disagree with this because that's just a selfish point of view. Mentality, Thats the problem. New mIRC users dont know how to deal with addons, dll and etc. So, "Why dont make it easy and add some feature with option to disable?". Wanna chat with Webcam? Go MSN. Why not mIRC? The only things that new mIRC users want: 1. an easy program 2. chat with friends 3. meet new friends 4. webcam (we are in 2005 not 1990 when nobody knew webcam) Maybe only this!! Regards.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
Fjord artisan
|
|
Fjord artisan
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 359 |
I always see this argument that "if you can disable it, what's the problem?" I tend to disagree with this because that's just a selfish point of view. Mentality, Thats the problem. New mIRC users dont know how to deal with addons, dll and etc. So, "Why dont make it easy and add some feature with option to disable?". Wanna chat with Webcam? Go MSN. Why not mIRC? The only things that new mIRC users want: 1. an easy program 2. chat with friends 3. meet new friends 4. webcam (we are in 2005 not 1990 when nobody knew webcam) Maybe only this!! Regards. mirc is easy, adding more useless junk makes it the opposite. mIRc shouldnt go into the "21century" its perfect how it is now..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,547
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,547 |
You're undestimating the mystical powers of mIRC. :tongue:
its perfect how it is now..
mIRC is indeed perfect, but that's because of Khaled's knowledge and dedication to the mIRC project for 10 years and user input from the boards. mIRC can only keep on perfecting..  A general reply to everyone: Not every thought and suggestion will be implemented obviously, and not every suggestion is how you'd want mIRC to look like, i.e. the unlikeliness of (emoticons, webcam support, skins, etc...) we should respect everyone's thought because in their mind that's how they think it can be improved, and I think that them wanting to see mIRC more improved counts for something. -Andy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327 |
mIRC is still my favourite IRC client but it's far from perfect.
Slowly but surely it's starting to slip behind the rest.
New username: hixxy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 580
Fjord artisan
|
|
OP
Fjord artisan
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 580 |
Thats the problem. New mIRC users dont know how to deal with addons, dll and etc. So, "Why dont make it easy and add some feature with option to disable?".
Don't go there, I was using IRC in 1988. There is no reason why an application for any protocol has to have a certain look to it. I'm a GUI-junkie, easier to use == well organized; functionality need never be lost... And as far as speed of the app, a bunch of big scripts seem to slow mirc down more than I think skins would...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,330
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,330 |
tidy_trax: I'm curious about the API calls to change a program's shape since you say it is easy. How is that done? RE: Skinning I think giving the ability to skin mIRC is not a bad thing. It should not be difficult to add the ability without causing any slow-down of mIRC and without making it annoying to those of us who like mIRC just as it is. I personally don't use skins on much of anything because I usually find the original program layout preferable to anyone's skins. Of course, I did made a skin for ICQ back when it was used a lot and I liked that. If you make it yourself, you tend to like it better, I think. RE: Making it like IM clients No, no, no!  If I want IM, I'll use IM. I personally use Trillian just because I have people on all the major clients and I refuse to run 4 clients. If I want IRC, I'll use mIRC. And, considering I'm always seeing people on Macs and Unix/Linux asking for mIRC rather than using their own IRC clients, I'd say that most people like mIRC as it is. If someone really wanted to, they could either write a script or download one that makes it similar to IM (with emoticons and everything). It doesn't need to be added to mIRC. RE: Webcams I actually wouldn't mind this ability even though I don't have a webcam that works in XP (my old one doesn't have drivers for XP  ). That said, I'd like it to be included only as a scripting option and not really built into mIRC as a normal thing.
Invision Support
#Invision on irc.irchighway.net
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 150
Vogon poet
|
|
Vogon poet
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 150 |
Yes, mIRC is easy. But who uses mIRC for the first time dont know about dll, skins, addons, etc..
I love mIRC, I use it every days since 1994 but when I see this kind of thing in mIRC (see the example below), I get sad.
(Kate) Hi, anybody wanna chat? I have Webcam.
(John) Hi Kate. how are u?
(Kate) great.. and u?
(John) very good. I have webcam too.
(Kate) So lets go MSN?
(John) Why not mIRC? I love mIRC.
(Kate) mIRC doesnt have webcam support
I wanna see mIRC and IRC growing up and not losing users to MSN just because mIRC doesnt support webcam.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 5,024 |
I don't know why you keep referring to webcam support, that is not what this thread is about. I'm not personally against webcam support, however, I don't realistically see it getting added. This thread is about the look of mIRC. I don't think people are going to say: (Nick1): Hey Nicktwo (Nick2): Hey (Nick1): We could chat here, but this window is like, so 1995. (Nick2): Totally. Let's go to MSN. (Nick1): Yeah. Puh-leeze. People are talking about the LOOK of an IM client and incorporating that look into mIRC. Could this be the next mIRC?!  Regards,
Mentality/Chris
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 359
Fjord artisan
|
|
Fjord artisan
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 359 |
You're undestimating the mystical powers of mIRC. :tongue: The general outlook on it, not going into it's scripting capabilities, but if we go into that route. mIRC Script isn't that hard to learn..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,330
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,330 |
It isn't for someone who has the ability to easily grasp programming concepts. Many people will never really be able to understand programming in any language because they just aren't able to really grasp the logic behind programming.
Invision Support
#Invision on irc.irchighway.net
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327 |
There are a few API functions for creating and modifying window regions, here are a few: SetWindowRgn()
CreateRectRgn()
CreateEllipticRgn()
CombineRgn()
New username: hixxy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327 |
- All of the programs you've listed there are criminally slow. It's not a coincidence. Two of those applications install system wide hook procedures to catch certain window messages and paint the window, an application wide hook isn't nearly as slow. Winamp and wmp aren't slow on this computer. Anyway, saying 'you can turn it off' is not a reason to add something I never said it was. Being able to turn skins off should solve the problem of not everybody wanting to use skins though. I don't use an IRC client so that I can look at the window frame around the text and say 'wow, that looks good!', I use an IRC client to talk to people via IRC. Me too. When I use a program for long periods of time I'd like it much better if the program looked good. Yes, I could just 'turn it off' and presumably then mIRC wouldn't suffer from the crippling slowdown. I've not once used a program with skin support (only for its own windows) that had a crippling slowdown, maybe the program you used was badly written or your computer is a bit old. But then again I'd rather not have mIRC potentially bloated because of skins, and much more importantly, I'd rather not see mIRC's development turn towards the style-over-functionality development model. Why will style will take over functionality if skin support is added? If that was the case I'd imagine there would be 20+ new things added for picture windows with each release. I'd rather not see each release being brought down to the level of being largely a bunch of bugfixes and additions to the skinning engine. Hopefully nothing *big* will be added to mIRC then. mIRC should just stay exactly as it is while the other clients add new cutting-edge features. I'd rather see mIRC improve as a program than be able to have my mIRC window in the shape of a duck. Skinning is not really that hard to do. You seem to think that adding support for skins will take over most of mIRC's development when it won't really take much at all.
New username: hixxy
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,962
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,962 |
Yes, the programs I've previously used with skinning had their share of poor coding (Winamp and WMP) but that's beside the point. I'm quite satisfied that my computer is not the source of any poor performance.
Style would likely take over development because, contrary to your claims, it is not easy to add bug-free skinning to a large and well-established project with the (I assume) complexity of mIRC. Somehow I get the feeling you've written one or two tiny programs from scratch with simple skinning capabilities included from the get-go and you've decided that it must be equally simple to add skinning anywhere and everywhere. I can assure you that's not the case. As for picture windows, they actually add to the functionality of mIRC, so I'd hardly put them in the same boat with skinning.
I've got nothing against adding big features, I simply think that the big features to be added should be useful. Clearly we have differing definitions of 'useful'. You seem to be implying that mIRC is an ugly blemish on your work-of-art desktop and that skinning must be added to protect your virgin eyes from it's hideousness. Whereas I think it looks fine as it is and does it's job well, and would be far better served by becoming a program that looks fine and does it's job very well.
Spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and stupid comments are intentional.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327
Hoopy frood
|
|
Hoopy frood
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 2,327 |
Somehow I get the feeling you've written one or two tiny programs from scratch with simple skinning capabilities included from the get-go and you've decided that it must be equally simple to add skinning anywhere and everywhere. The only thing you're right about is it was a tiny application, however, the skinning was dynamic (I could create a new window and add a few controls to it without having to change the skinning engine and the new window would still be skinned), the only problem with it was that it didn't handle invalid skins (eg: supplying a number when a filepath is required) very well. I can assure you that's not the case. I can assure you it is. As for picture windows, they actually add to the functionality of mIRC, so I'd hardly put them in the same boat with skinning. I agree, that was a bad example. You seem to be implying that mIRC is an ugly blemish on your work-of-art desktop and that skinning must be added to protect your virgin eyes from it's hideousness. You couldn't be more wrong...  Whereas I think it looks fine as it is and does it's job well, and would be far better served by becoming a program that looks fine and does it's job very well. I think it looks fine too, I don't even have a problem with the mIRC interface. I just like to load skins or themes sometimes.
New username: hixxy
|
|
|
|
|
