Re: some filters i have wrote.

["Werner D. Streidt" <wstreidt@ngi.de>]

Hi Tim,

>>Why does Filter Factory suck badly?
>you want a list, already?

Why write a list if everyone here knows the limitations of FF?

>>There are hundreds of great filters made with FF. It's great as soon
>>as you get the hang of it. And FF is the reason why there is such a
>>great Mailing list like this.
>yeah, and a fair few more that can't be written at all,
>due to limitations like 1K per channel code area, "cnv" is
>dodgy, sliders/maps are always labelled 0..255, etc., etc.


Duh, that's why FiFo and FM were invented... If you don't like the
limitations, go ahead and experiment with FiFo and FM. It's not use to wait
for Adobe, they will definetly not update FF (the programmer of FF is not
working for Adobe anymore).

FF is actually dead because FiFo and FM are out.


>>What do you mean with "FiFo is SenilityWare"?
>"Nag screens and other limitations might increase registrations on smaller
>programs but a look at history shows every program that became a "standard
>of the industry" have used no registration incentives designed to annoy the
>user. These include WinZIP, PKZip, AsEasyAs, Procomm, Telix, and the trend
>goes back to even PC-Talk, PC-File, and PC-Write.  These are the real
>money-makers (along with major games like Doom of course)."


Tim, these programs were used by thousands and millions of users – that is
why they are standards. So it would not matter if 5000 copies are not
registered, right? The filter programs are used by... 200 people? I think
even less than 1000. So it is crucial for programmers who invested so many
hours building an error-free compiler to sell copies. Or else, they would
easily stop their projects because money is a big problem today.

Every programmer can build up easily a WinZip program, but not a graphics
compiler which handles the C programming language (or a pseudo of it),
extended with graphic functions and which has to be compatible to the
plug-in interface of Adobe (so it can be loaded into any graphics host
program).

I think you don't know what effort has been put in these programs.

>>And what do you mean with "FM is ClumsyWare"?
>>Maybe you forgot that FM is still beta software? The final version
>>surely will have an option to compile standalone filters.
>yeah, "beta software"; consider that "ClumsyWare" means much the same
>in this case.


Do I get it right that you have not even experimented with FM nor Fifo?

All that cnv(), 1K code, scroll bar labels (0...255) and image size
limitations (plus
others) have been banned for good! FM is about 99% (should ask Alex, it
could be 100%) compatible to FF. I have successfully managed to create
filters larger than 1K and I am so happy about the scroll bar labelling and
the dialog window layout and so much else. What is it what you want more?
Only the standalone filter creation is missing, but until you build up
really great filters with FM, the standalone feature will be available.

In FM and FiFo, it's not only typing in the code and voilá. You have to
start with the design of your windows. Have you seen Harry's great
FiFo-compiled filters?

And all those features in FiFo and FM were asked by the FF programmers, so
go take a look at them and start programming great stuff. Don't look first
at the cost or object if the thing is crippled. Work with it and if you are
happy with it, pay the author for his invested time. Thing is, standalone
filters created with FM or FiFo can also be sold (FF filters, too, but they
are so easy to hack) and your invested money *can* come back to you. If you
are someone who wants to give away free filters, then that's your thing.

Just some thoughts. :-)

Greetings from Germany,

Wern