Oceanlog 3?

[cummings66]

In comparison I joined the board in Jan of 2008 and in less than 700 post have been thanked 39 times and a few of those from the moderator of this forum and even in this thread.

I don't for a second believe that your impressive stats on posting gives you the right to belittle others and make fun of them. You have your opinion but you're a jerk when you make fun of others because you disagree with their idea for a program improvement.

Other brands of software allow the direct emailing of the DAN data for PDE, lots of people seem to like that. I don't know what is under your skin, but you're an arrogant jerk who doesn't seem to like others having a differing opinion. Have you ever done the PDE program? Are you registered? Do you donate dive profiles? In other words, do you help out your fellow divers by participating in the PDE program or not? Have you ever seen the ease of donating dives to PDE with the programs that support it? Have you seen how much more fun it is to do it the manual way we have to do it now?

You are wrong to have attacked the other people, WRONG!

 

[RAWalker]

My stats vs your's or Torkm's are a basis for others to judge whether our opinions are helpful to others.
You and Torkm seem to want to try and belittle me for expressing an opinion that is opposed to the op. I and others see that certain features do nothing to help the software accomplish it's primary purpose logging dive data. Because other brands of logging software directly email DAN does not mean that it is a needed feature. Didn't your parents teach you about doing things just because the other kids do? If DAN wants my dive data they can have it but I don't need extra code in my logging software. It's the diver that needs to support the PDE program and not the software. Dan could easily set up email addresses for the export of different computer models data files and use the data in their program instead they have teamed with a few manufacturers and offered a sales gimmick.
I asked the op to clearify his opinion on what Oceanlog was lacking. Once that was done I stated that I disagreed, stated my position and asked why he isn't using the product that he is impressed with. The OP took it personally and accused me of having an atitude that was just wrong.
At that point Andydragon, Torkm and yourself started the attack even though I've had plenty of support for my position. Even the OP has dropped it but not a genius like you.
You even site posts in other threads (without pointing to any posts) as ammunition against me personally but you don't like it when the forum stats can be used against you.
So let me suggest you go crawl back under your rock.
You are wrong and have attacked the wrong person. WRONG!
Worse yet you are really making yourself look bad.

 

[cummings66]

Even the OP has dropped it but not a genius like you.
You even site posts in other threads (without pointing to any posts) as ammunition against me personally but you don't like it when the forum stats can be used against you.
So let me suggest you go crawl back under your rock.
You are wrong and have attacked the wrong person. WRONG!
Worse yet you are really making yourself look bad.

You're not very persuasive in your defense. You don't understand how PDE works either, that much is apparent. When you mount a defense at least know what you're speaking about. You are the one who belittles, look at the above and tell me that's adult in nature. It's childish.

This thread is about 3.0. The future, not the present. Get off your high horse.

 

[RAWalker]

I feel I've been quite persuasive and I do understand quite well how the PDE works.
What is childish in nature is this going back and fourth.
So I'm going to do the adult thing and use the facilities available to the users of these forums for circumstance like this and suggest you act simmilarly. Since you seem to have such a problem with my posts just put me on your ignore list and you won't be exposed to my statements that others have found useful enough to thank me for.

 

[Torkm]

RA just doesn't get it does he? Does he think that the way that he treated the OP was useful and thank worthy? I just don't understand how RA thinks that its OK just to flame a suggestion that is made for a hopeful addition of a FUTURE version of OceanLog and then acts like a CHILD when called on it.. oh.. I guess I just answered my own question.

Anyways moving along. Thank you Mr Cummings for speaking of the DAN PDE. I didn't actually have full understand exactly what this was, but after your post and reading the OP posts again, I went and had a good research. Seems like a very worthwhile cause to me! Australian DAN websites don't display this project, so I am going to make sure my buddies know about it as well.

I understand you can get a program to reformat and then be able to email the info, but does DAN classify Oceanic computers as Level 2 because of OceanLog inability to send the data in format?

 

[SherlTheperl]

I understand you can get a program to reformat and then be able to email the info, but does DAN classify Oceanic computers as Level 2 because of OceanLog inability to send the data in format?

That is the point that RAWalker has made and reason that I and others agree with him that it would be an unnecessary "bloat" addition to Oceanic's Oceanlog logging software.
In the past DAN used the data from many different manufacturers computers before starting their PDE program. Creating the standard was a good way to sell the program to manufacturers.
After all manufacturers like having new features to sell to consumers.
That doesn't mean they can't use the data from computers that don't use the standard nor does it mean the program doesn't have value.
Outside of the PDE program the data from computers is used to provide medical intervention regularly whether standardized or not.

RA may have been somewhat insulting but he is again correct. It's not him that doesn't know when to stop.
On that note I don't think any further posts by me on this subject or your sensitivity to RA's replies are needed either.

 

[Torkm]

On that note I don't think any further posts by me on this subject or your sensitivity to RA's replies are needed either.

I will comment where I see fit. AGAIN, it has nothing to do with if the addition was bloatware or not, it was the way RA commented on the OP suggestions. He 'MAY' have be insulting? Open your eyes! It was pure attacking of a idea.

Do you know how easy it would be to make a function inside OceanLog that will send an email to DAN that would be in the format that DAN needs? IF they can provide a program that does this, then certainly it can be added to OceanLog. Still with the Bloatware.. My goodness, I have never seen so many people that are so resistant to change. If we took RA and Sherl's approach to everything we would still be using Windows 3.1 and driving around in crank-and-wind cars! The idea is to be improving the application. It also comes down again to whether or not the feature is valuable to its user - RA may not use it, but it CERTAINLY looks like a fair few other people, newly including myself, would like to see this feature and will use it. That ISN'T bloatware. Bloatware are additions that NO ONE uses. I don't see why we need a gear section on OceanLog, does that make it bloatware? Just because I don't use it, doesn't mean others don't. Stop being a puppet and think before siding with the losing side.

On your way then.

 

[cummings66]

I think that's the key, what's bloatware to one isn't to another. There are features I consider to be useless, for example the ability to store photo's with the dive log. That's bloatware to me as is the Dive Op's name, Captain, etc. That's what the memo field is for. Look at a real paper logbook and then look at this program. Things not in the paper log are bloatware.

However, some people find those extra's useful and want them so there they are. It's a computer program, it doesn't slow down because you added a feature. With memory being so cheap, large hard drives being so cheap, a few more megs of size are not an issue either. So add the features that users want, it won't slow down the program because only a routine executed during the function will slow down a program. So, if you click add a dive then the PDE feature doesn't slow down the computer because that routine wasn't called.

I don't care how much bloatware is there as long as the program does what I want it to. So far, it's still broken when it comes to temperature logging and I'd like that fixed. My lowest temperature which is recorded in the dive log is not listed in the temp section. I want that fixed. I can't print the lifetime dive number on the log page printout, I want that fixed. I can't easily export my dive log to DAN, I want that fixed.

However, it's a dive program that honestly isn't even needed. Paper does just fine. I like bells and whistles, so I use this program.

IMO there has been no logical well thought out reason presented not to include the things I want added or fixed. For the TWO who don't want it, tell me why? Tell me what the addition of the items I want will do to impact the computer programs operation? The implementation of what I want won't even add a megabyte of code to the executables size. It's all there already, it just needs another sort and email routine added. Very little extra coding would be needed. The button needed to export it wouldn't take up valuable real estate either, there's room on the dive log page for a button.

Tell me what negative impact would result? I am experienced in a few computer languages and I do know of which I am speaking when it comes to program operation. I have a foundation upon which I am speaking because I can design and implement computer programs. Based on my background I say it will have no negative impact.

To be rational, tell me why based on your background it's an unreasonable request for Version 3 to add a couple features.

 

[siikik]

Being a computer geek, I see the problem is that Oceanic is in the hardware business... not software (like Apple). My suggestion for Oceanic is to release the source code for the oceanlog software (under GPL or the sorts) to the diving community and let computer savvy divers make code changes, etc. I've been all over the database (which, BTW, is password protected) and... well... to put it bluntly... I wouldn't do it that way.

Otherwise, you wait for updates and suggestions may or may not get noticed. My gripes are primarily the UI. It doesn't "flow" easily, which I think was mentioned in a previous post. But not willing to spend the extra time writing a brand new program, I'm content with what I have. I suppose my expectations are lower than most.



Ken

 

[Doug Krause]

It took a while, but I found some worthwhile feedback here that will certainly be considered.

As for DAN PDE support - it is an export option currently.