Wishlist for Marine Aquarium 3 and Future

[Jigapoofy]

Can someone tell me how to display an avi. to the background with winamp? Sorry to ask the same question that someone else did, they got their question answered through their e-mail and I didn't get it.

[Coelacanth]

Here is how you do it:

1. Put the AVI file you want to use into your \Winamp\Plugins\AVS folder.
2. Go into Winamp and start AVS.
3. Double-click on the AVS display.
4. Highlight all of the existing effects in the list on the left, and hit the minus sign button up at top to delete all effects. (You don't want these for now. You can always add stuff later, but for right now, you just want to start clean.)
5. Hit the plus sign button to add an effect. Choose Render, AVI.
6. The options screen that comes up will have a pull-down list box. Your AVI file should be available in the list. Choose it.
7. Bingo!
8. Now you can add any other effects you want, and tweak it the way you like.
9. Go to Preset, Save to save your masterpiece as a preset.

Hey Jim,Is it possible to add a Racoon Butterfly to the program? I have had them in the past in my tank.They have day and evening colors.

[Jav400]

The Raccoon Butterfly is one that Jim has been told about and is looking at. It would require some special textures to do it justice and to get the changing colors to work properly between day and night, maybe tied into the lighting settings, which would also mean a bigger file size for that specific fish. But it is being considered.

Morgan and Jim,

My last post on this randomness stuff (promise!) as discussions are moving on now.

Can we get my "refresh fish selection every __ minutes" option, and Revolve360s "random fish frequency sliders" added to the "Feature Wishlist - The Tank", with a thumbs up, question mark, thumbs down or whatever, just so we know where we are on this ?

p.s. Jim - I've been looking at various marine aquarium websites recently because of interest started by the screen saver. The more I visit, the more I realise just how realistic this program is !

[Jim Sachs]

I'll consider your requests, but the features for the next update are pretty well locked down, so these features won't make it into v.99L.

[snorkler]

Is there a picture of the Racoon Butterfly?

There is a picture at www.flyingfishexpress.com/fish/racoon.htm and a little info too! They change colors for day and night.

[feldon34]

We've discussed the Raccoon Butterfly in the chatroom. It would require two textures and Jim would have to make it fade from one texture to another as lighting conditions change. Quite complicated, and the double-cost of the texture size.

[nicksteel]

Although I am guilty myself of requesting replacement of fish with others as they leave the screen, I would prefer a high priority placed on improving the background (3-D) and the details on the fish (mouth and gill movement) rather than in the creation of new fish. Each improvement in a particular fish should ultimately result in the upgrade of all existing and future fish. Although everyone has a favorite fish or two they would like to see, enhancement of the existing program features and details could be more constructive in the long run. Also, though it is nice that the program fits on a single floppy, I feel this to be a minor feature. Being a programmer myself, I understand the advantages of tight efficient code, but overall size should probably not be a overriding consideration.

[Jav400]

nicksteel,

I would prefer a high priority placed on improving the background (3-D) and the details on the fish (mouth and gill movement) rather than in the creation of new fish.

The 3D background should be coming soon. From what Jim has said most but not all of the things that he wanted to accomplish before he started on that particular aspect have been done. He has also mentioned in the chatroom that it was about time to start "dusting off" the code for the moving mouths, the gill movement may be shortly after.

Also, though it is nice that the program fits on a single floppy, I feel this to be a minor feature. Being a programmer myself, I understand the advantages of tight efficient code, but overall size should probably not be a overriding consideration.

For a lot of people that wouldn't be of great concern, for Jim's purposes it makes a big difference. In the first place he absolutely will not stand for sloppy code in his Screen Saver ( which in my opinion should be applauded, in current times it is becoming rare to find someone who strives for the absolute best as opposed to settling for what will suffice ). In the second place, a portion of Jim's sales are to people in other countries who have a difficult time obtaining computers with all the drive options that we take for granted. Jim has stated on several occasions, that for this reason he wants to contain the file size so it will fit on a floppy.

I love the screen saver, but have multiple monitors. I'm running Windows 2000. I understand that you don't support multiple monitors, but is it possible to have the screen saver run on one monitor and simply have the others go black?
Currently when I try to run the screensaver it fills up my primary monitor and nothing happens to the other monitors.
I want to purchase and run this screensaver, but it doesn't do me any good if it only runs on one screen while the other screens don't go black at least.

Thanks!!

[nicksteel]

I'll have to start monitoring the chat. Regarding the floppies, I have worked in New Zealand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, Brazil, Korea and Saudi Arabia and observed that the locals have more advanced equipment than most assume. It seems available software is on CD's, not floppies. Just an observation. I do appreciate the tight code resulting from this decision, though. In fact, I'm as amazed with the mechanics of the package as I am with the effects.

[Shinsa]

I agree with keeping the code tight. Although I'm not a "real" programmer I have done it in years gone by. Back when 4k was all you had to program with. Programmers nowadays seem to be getting pretty lazy.

But, I must disagree with the use of floppy disks. Floppies are now almost a waste of space. Inificiant. Too limited. Too slow. And probably soon to cost more than CDs. I can buy a pack of 50 blank CD's for $7 (just did that tonight) That's 14 cents each. I think a box of floppies is about $5 for a box of 50. So 10 cents for each floppy. That extra 4 cents sure goes a LONG way!

Using a CD would be much more logical. Allowing for larger programming (if needed, for extra backgrounds, more fish, different sounds, even removing compression that might distort sound or graphics). Not to mention allowing for other programs, utilities, "advertising", or other demos. Even something as useful as a system self test to help troubleshoot the PC could be included.

As for the concern to keep it available for EVERYONE to use, on a standard media.... Well, I can't think of any 3D card that doesn't REQUIRE a CD-rom drive, just to install its own drivers. AND... I know several people who did not even bother to include a flppy drive on their PC's. They have a bootable CD-ROM, and have no need for 3.5" disks. Matter of fact, everyone I know would rather have software on a CD rather than a floppy, just for convienience sake.

I too, have been to many "third world" countries. ALL of them have similar systems that we have. I've been to the U.K., Spain, Saudi, Turkey, Korea... I was impressed with how some 3rd world nationals have so much in technology. Heck, I don't have a cell phone. Many people I know here in the USA don't have cell phones. EVERYONE I knew in Korea and Turkey had cell phones!

So, Jim, please don't limit your creativity just because you want it to fit on a floppy. Keep programming the right way, nice tight code, but allow yourself to add what will make this program what it can be, without limitations! Just because the zipped file size is greater than 1.38 MB doesn't mean it is sloppy. Digital sound and graphics do make for larger file sizes. And you have done a commendable job keeping the code from getting sloppy.

Bob -=> getting off his little soap box <=-

Just think - What would the Sistine Chapel look like if Michelangelo Buonarroti would only paint on a canvas that was 3' x 4'?

[Jim Sachs]

Some of you seem to be under the impression that the hard copy version would be distributed on floppies. The hard-copy version has always been planned to be distributed on CD.

The main way of distributing the Aquarium will remain downloading. Any type of hard-copy is only a snapshot of the program at the moment it is made, and would almost certainly be outdated by the time the user receives it. Downloading over the Internet is the only way anyone could keep up with the rapid improvements I have planned.

The reasons for the ability to fit the Aquarium on a floppy remain:
1. Rapid download for those of us stuck with 56k modems for the foreseeable future.
2. Ease of transfer from one machine to another without a CD-ROM burner, Zip drive or other big-ticket device.

[Shinsa]

Aw...gee wiz Jim... Now I feel like a jackass, sorry.

Like I've said many times before... Keep up the good work Jim!
(and don't let us whinners get to you too much )

Bob

[nicksteel]

Kinda sorry I brought up the floppy restriction thing and will hush up about it. I am much more interested in the quality of the product than the size of the media that can hold it. (.....But, I've been pkzipping across mutiple floppies for years to avoid cd burners - when necessary). Now I'm hushed.

[FishyBusiness]

Jim,

So what you are saying is that if people in other countries that do not have a CD-ROM, will still have to download it then put it on a floppy?

I remember you saying something about people not having a CD-ROM in some other countries besides the U.S.A. a little while back.

I too assumed that the aquarium would be sold on a floppy. After all, a 1mb program on a CD would be a waste of a CD. Although, because of the availability of CDs, it would probably be cheaper to distribute it on a CD.

[feldon34]

CDs are 4 cents of plastic and metal and take 8 seconds to duplicate. Floppies cost more and take a lot longer to duplicate.

Production of CDs is cheaper than floppies.

[Jim Sachs]

If they download the program, there is no need for a floppy or a CD unless they want to copy it to another machine. In that case, they are far more likely to have a floppy drive than a CD-burner.