View Single Post
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 12-12-2008, 12:28 AM
dmx0's Avatar
dmx0
Lurker
Offline
Threadstarter
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 8
Reputation: 5
dmx0 is a n00b
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Re: A critique of M2D and how it could be improved...

Quote:
Originally Posted by tatnai View Post
3. M2D is hard coded, and simply adapted for use on other phones - it is not simple to make most of the changes you listed. It has taken multiple developers (many thanks to mpenguin14, herg, and many others) a lot of time to get it to where it is now, just to make it work on our phone and others. Eventually, further options and other ways to configure it will be figured out, but understanding how we got M2D and what it took to get where we are should temper complaints about it. It is what it is because of the way it is hard coded, and to alter that takes time and work. If you want to see things change, the place to post your thoughts is over at xda devel where it is being developed, in the main M2D thread, and in the M2DC thread, with the understanding that there is a significant amount of time and effort being placed into development by good-willed developers, and that there are many more bugs and issues to address besides your wish list. Better yet, since you have wishes, learn some code, and develop a tool for us all to implement your changes - this is what other people who want to see changes have done. Then you might appreciate what it takes to make such changes.
There is a reason I did not make this post at xda-developers in the thread where M2D is being ported - it's because I am NOT asking anybody to implement these ideas. I thought I had made this clear, but apparently I did not. I'm quite well aware that M2D is "hard coded" and of the time and effort that would be necessarily put forth in order to implement the aforementioned ideas, which is precisely why I am not asking anybody to essentially reprogram M2D to work in the specified manner. That is NOT the point of this thread. I thought I had also made that clear, but apparently I did not.

Because it appears to difficult for many of you to not look at a little constructive criticism and see some sort of insult directed at the programmers, maybe it will be easier for your brains to understand what I am suggesting if I rephrase it in the following manner: if you want to look at this as a critique of anyone (which it is not), it would be a critique of HTC's engineers who created M2D. This would in no way, shape, or form be a critique of the online community that ported M2D to other devices. The folks that have done the porting have done an excellent job. However, HTC's programmers have failed to realize M2D's full potential. All I'm doing is merely pointing out the flaws. I am not asking anybody to fix these flaws. And if I had asked anybody to fix these glaring omissions, it would be HTC's programmers, and not the online community that ported M2D to other devices.

Look at the original post as a sort of M2D review that you would see in a magazine. Except, of course, this review looks merely at the negative aspects of the software and how it SHOULD function.

Now that that's out of the way, and you (hopefully) understand that I am critiquing M2D itself and NOT the porting of M2D, I have another analogy for you. If a video game player, for example, pops a Halo 2 DVD into his computer, loads the game up, and says "Wow, these graphics could have been better if they would have used a higher resolution," that is NOT an attack on the programmers. That is also not a request for the resolution to be increased. It would be downright RETARDED for someone to tell the player that, because they think the resolution should be higher, they should "learn some code, and develop a tool" to increase the resolution so that they would "appreciate what it takes to make these changes." That is simply and utterly retarded.