New Mac OS X Dive App

[altaskier]

I've used both DiveLog and MacDive. I have been a happy user of DiveLog for a long time, but I see lots of ongoing activity with MacDive, and no updates to DiveLog in a year.

I agree with you that I wish MacDive could stay open even if you closed the data window, and had the option of keeping track of different files. While I disagree with Nick, the developer, on that point, he has been amazingly helpful with lots of people on their use of the program and on making improvements, which is why I've recently switched to MacDive.

There may be a solution to having multiple people use the program on one laptop: through multiple user accounts. I believe that each user account would have its own file then, as in
/Users/fred/Library/Application Support/MacDive/
/Users/jane/Library/Application Support/MacDive/
If you enable fast user switching in Accounts under System Preferences and have them both logged on, it becomes easy to, well, switch rapidly between users. I'll soon have a second computer in the family where I can test this.

 

[NudeDiver]

There may be a solution to having multiple people use the program on one laptop: through multiple user accounts. I believe that each user account would have its own file then, as in
/Users/fred/Library/Application Support/MacDive/
/Users/jane/Library/Application Support/MacDive/
If you enable fast user switching in Accounts under System Preferences and have them both logged on, it becomes easy to, well, switch rapidly between users. I'll soon have a second computer in the family where I can test this.

Sure, that's a solution - it WILL work. But it is not a very good solution - esp. when there is no reason why it should have to be that way. It's a pretty ugly solution too. I'd have to create additional user accounts on my machine, which I don't want to do, which also provides that many more access points into my system, passwords to remember, etc. etc. etc. Also, copying and pasting from one user log to another becomes a real bitch. All as a substitute for the basic ability to open multiple files? No thanks. Aside from which, I can see no compelling reason to have only one log file per user. What's the advantage there? Why not give the user a choice/flexibility?

I'm not trying to rag on the developer - I think he has done some good work and I'd like to see it continue. I'm just saying, without this basic desktop app functionality (which is practically a universal standard among desktop app software), there is no way his software would be usable to me. I'm trying to love it - I really am - but this one issue is like discovering your girlfriend used to be a guy.

Other reasons to have multiple files - which are not easily addressed by the solution you pointed out:

a). Maybe I want to have different log files for the SAME person. Pool or training dives in one log - local dives in another - trip dives in yet another. Maybe solo dives in one log, buddy dives in another.

b). Maybe I want different logs by number - for example, "volume one" is 1-100, "volume 2 is 101-200", etc.

c). Maybe I want one log for my main computer and one for my backup computer.

People want to organize themselves different ways. Personally, I want to do a b and c above. DiveLog lets me do it just fine. Now, I know the obvious response, "then go use DiveLog" - yes, that's certainly a solution. But it ignores the issue of trying to provide helpful feedback to the developer of Mac Dive. In this case, the feedback I am offering is that, for many reasons, a "one log per user" approach is simply not a reasonable approach

FWIW - I think DiveLog could certainly use a lot of improvements too - but one of the things he definitely has right is the ability to not only have multiple files, but the ability to open them at the same time. His use of standard XML files to store the data is also an excellent design choice.

Cheers!
nd

 

[t0w]

Hi,

I appreciate your feedback, however this is the way I've decided to implement MacDive. The design decisions that I've made are what I feel works best for not only myself (who this program was originally written for!) but also the majority of other Mac users.

I'm sorry it's not for you, but it works the way I want it to work. Keep the feedback coming - I do read it, and if it's something I feel will make the application better overall then I look at implementing it.

Cheers!

 

[NudeDiver]

I'm sorry it's not for you, but it works the way I want it to work. ....

Well, as long as you're writing software for yourself, I guess that's all that matters

 

[Katamuki]

Well, as long as you're writing software for yourself, I guess that's all that matters

I usually get a chuckle out of what you write NudeDiver but geez, give the guy a break, there is a difference in constructive criticism and just coming off like an *******. Its not like you have anything to offer anyone in the Mac community that your proud enough or sure enough of to put out in the public domain. The program works very well for me so its not only himself he has written it for.

 

[NudeDiver]

I usually get a chuckle out of what you write NudeDiver but geez, give the guy a break, there is a difference in constructive criticism and just coming off like an *******. Its not like you have anything to offer anyone in the Mac community that your proud enough or sure enough of to put out in the public domain.

Hey, I've written a new program! Check it out, tell me what you think!

Well, I think this, that and the other - and here's why, and here are the advantages, and so forth and so on (thoughtful, well-considered feedback).

Well, it works the way I want it to, so too bad for you.

Um.......yeah. Good luck with that.

 

[Katamuki]

I guess its just that most of your posts in this thread have a slight taint of sarcastic judgemental pall. Anyway, carry on, I do enjoy most of your posts!

 

[NudeDiver]

I guess its just that most of your posts in this thread have a slight taint of sarcastic judgemental pall.

One man's sarcasm judgemental pall is another's honest, well-considered feedback, provided for the purpose of offering opportunities for improvement. In any event, I'm sorry my posts are not for you, but they work the way I want them to. Keep the feedback coming - I do read it, and if it's something I feel will make my posts better overall, then I look at implementing it.

Cheers!
nd

 

[John_B]

Well, as long as you're writing software for yourself, I guess that's all that matters

I've worked in the software field for twenty-some-odd years in various capacities and thought this was worth some insight "from the trenches".

The reality is that he is writing the software for himself and a lot of other people, and that is going to mean making design decisions between sometimes equally good but incompatible requirements. Read back through the thread with another pair of eyes (i.e. not your own), and I think you'll see that t0w incorporates a lot of suggestions and requests for bug fixes. Maybe not all, maybe not your particular request, but what I'm sure he feels meets the needs of the greatest number of users including himself.

And as a general observation, you'll catch more flies with honey than vinegar. There is a big difference in how a developer will react to a "have you considered this" type of request vs. "your software is teh suxor because it doesn't do exactly what I want". Especially software you are getting for free, and on a platform like OS X which most dive computer manufacturers frankly refuse to be bothered with.

As an alternative, maybe you can write your own dive logging software for Mac OS X? I can give you some really good suggestions for Obj-C and Cocoa books if you already have a solid foundation in Java/C/C++. Plus you'll need to develop some expertise for serial communications. Who knows, if you can figure the IrDA thing out with Leopard, maybe you could write an app that could talk to my Uwatec? At least you'd begin to appreciate the effort t0w and others are putting in. At a minimum it would be more productive than crapping all over someone else's long-running support thread.

 

[NudeDiver]

"your software is teh suxor because it doesn't do exactly what I want".

If you think that my purpose is taking the time to review his app and provide honest, thoughtful and well considered feedback (including compliments) was simply to say that his software "sucks" (esp. because it doesn't do some oddball thing that I would like for it to do) - well, all I can say is that is an interesting interpretation.

As an alternative, maybe you can write your own dive logging software for Mac OS X?

I could - but I found it more time and cost efficient to spend the $30 or $40 or whatever it was for Mac Divelog - which I bought, quite some time ago. Yeah - that's right. I HAVE my solution. I don't NEED anything from this software. My goal was simply to help a fella out with some feedback. I should have known better.

At least you'd begin to appreciate the effort t0w and others are putting in.

Uh huh....

At a minimum it would be more productive than crapping all over someone else's long-running support thread.

Once again - an interesting interpretation.

Hey - look - I'm not going to get into a big argument. If you think that, somehow, I have done the OP some big disservice by complimenting his efforts so far, while pointing out that he has implemented an exceedingly non-standard approach to data storage for desktop applications (i.e. a single, hard-coded, binary file for all data, which is stored in one place) - an approach that is different from practically everything out there (regardless of type of desktop app), and the associated and numerous disadvantages of this approach, both in terms of human interface issues and user application issues, which, coincidentally, does not appear to have any advantages - other than possibly some minor ease of implementation (and at this point, requiring some major re-factoring to do it the far more standard way), more power to you.

It's also worth pointing out that the "one app, multiple documents" paradigm is hardly my unique idea - it's one that was figured out by people far smarter than me, and a long, looooooong time ago." You'd be hard pressed to traipse through the applications directory and find that the overwhelming majority of common, general-user applications (probably 95+%) do anything other than following this long-accepted standard. If pointing that out equates to "your software sucks" - well, guilty as charged.

Jezz - I guess it's a good thing I didn't "request" the ability to store data in a SQL database, so that it could be accessed and used by a variety of other applications. That would have just been evil.