New Studio version in DIM - and lousy info as usual

columbine

OK, first off, I don't regularly read anything in the forums except The Commons. On the other hand, sometimes I resent the fact that digging through other parts of the forums is the only way for anyone to find out information which should be available through other and more obvious means. (Consider, if you will, the Studio users who never read the forums at all!)

I see in DIM today that there is unexpectedly a patch for Studio 4.22. That's nice. What version does it upgrade to? What has changed?

THAT INFORMATION IS NOWHERE. Not as such. Not like that.

The pop-up with package details which shows when you hover over the listing in DIM does not contain version numbers. All of its information is about the PACKAGE, not what's in it.

The info icon goes to the wiki page. http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/start Let's discuss that wiki page a little.

Current release version shown at the top of the page is still 4.22.0.16 -- does not reflect this new release (which I gather is .0.19, but I had to learn that from reading the pinned thread at the top of this subforum).

There's a hard-to-notice "Change Log" link above that. Clicking that takes you here: http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/change_log

Now, the headings on this page are very strange. They are not version-by-version release notes. Those links always show the last point release for that minor version number. That is, the last point release for 4.21 was 4.21.0.5, so on that page you get the changes which "led to the general release of" (more on that in a moment) 4.21.0.5. The latest cumulative log for 4.22 releases is listed as 4.22.0.19, the point release sitting in DIM right now. With me so far?

But when you go to that page http://docs.daz3d.com/doku.php/public/software/dazstudio/4/change_log_4_22_0_19

you find that it also includes all the public and private beta releases, and the topmost item in the log is 4.21.1.13. Huh?

The key is in the language at the top of the page: "... change log leading to the General Release of version 4.22.0.19."

The newest stuff is at the bottom, and the idea is that the changes in beta versions 4.21.1.13 and beyond are ones that eventually made it into the release of 4.22.0.19. ALL of what's on this page presumably affects 4.22.0.19, in terms of "how has this release changed from 4.22.0.16?"

BUT IT IS NOT ACTUALLY USEFUL THIS WAY, DAZ

What we NEED is ... first off, betas don't count. I don't care what was in the various betas. What would be desirable is if every time you did a general release, you added a page saying concisely "This is what has changed between general releases of the product." I don't care about the entire beta history, I want to know: What in 4.22.0.19 is different from 4.22.0.16? What features did you add? What did you remove? What did you change? What bugs did you fix? You know: GENUINE RELEASE NOTES, the way the rest of the world uses the term.

And I might add, these should be kept around historically. Not only should I be able to easily get at a change log that shows the differences between 4.22.0.19 and 4.22.0.16, there should also be one kept which tells the differences between 4.22.0.16 and whatever general release was before that, and so on down. VERSION-TO-VERSION comparison. For EVERY version. For RELEASES. Not betas.

And it shouldn't require having to go dig around the forums just to find out what actually happened.

This is not an unreasonable demand! I can't think of any other major piece of software on any of my computers that does not provide release notes systematically as part of every update.

Richard Haseltine

If it was in the Commons it would get buried. This forum is the very top of the list.

There is a thread giving hihglights of what has changed (not everything in the 4.22.1.x list) https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/comment/8864971/#Comment_8864971 . Most developers use forums or similar to announce changes, usually in a sub-forum dedicated to the application - the daz system is not unusual (and yes, I lament the days of PDF manuals and readmes - but the evidence is that people did not, in general, read them).

columbine

Oh, I didn't mean to suggest release notes should appear in the Commons! (Lord, no.) I just meant that since I don't routinely read anything but the Commons, I do not always see announcements and such in a timely way.

Thanks for the link. I'll take a look at that.

I am sadly, painfully aware (as a sometime software developer) that people don't read manuals or readmes ... but I'm not sure that removes the necessity of providing them. I mean, again, I have to think of the situation of the many, many users of this product who don't go anywhere near the forums and never will. Where do they go for this kind of thing? DIM directs them to the wiki ... and as noted above, the wiki often does not contain this kind of information, or when it does, doesn't do it in a particularly useful way.

EDITED TO ADD: Now, see, that thread you linked is exactly the kind of thing I am looking for when I see a new release. Why not have that in the wiki somewhere easy to get at? When I go into DIM and there's a new release of Studio and I need information about it, and press the info icon, I want to be taken to somewhere that looks like that post you linked above: "The version you are about to download is 4.22.0.19, and here's what's changed in it." The end.

rcourtri_789f4b1c6b

columbine said:

I am sadly, painfully aware (as a sometime software developer) that people don't read manuals or readmes ... but I'm not sure that removes the necessity of providing them.

I think saying that the end user fails to read readmes at their own risk is reasonable, provided that the readme is of relatively minor import to most end users.

As to people not reading the manual, I suppose it boils down to the semantics of "reading" and what the purpose of a reference work is.  A manual should have a useful table of contents and an extensive index, allowing the reader to find relevant sections, usually small in proportion to the whole work.  A manual needn't be read in its entirety to be useful or desirable.  If software has many features which wouldn't be self-explanatory to a novice user, or if there is a certain amount of jargon involved with using the application (and both of these are true for Daz Studio), then the software's publisher is doing their end users a disservice by not maintaining a current manual. 

3WC

If you go to https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussions/ it will bring up all new threads, no matter what "subforum" they are in. Who has time to manually navigate to specific fora?

It's also under the gear at the top right under "Recent Discussions".

Pickle Renderer

I'm also a software dev and learned that nobody reads anything, except sometimes the tooltip.  For that reason all the UIs I design (I'm a front-end dev) make it completely obvious what they're for.   This is easier said than done, because it implies your UI never contains anything the user probably wouldn't want to do.  That stuff gets hidden or isn't there at all. 

 

I've always found the patch notes page very confusing too.

RexRed

I agree, it is a maze you are led to.

Other software I use, after install, I am given a link, I click on it and there is a nice tidy list of new features and bug fixes right there.

When I install an update, I should be offered a link when I open Daz leading to a concise list. 

Instead, I am led to a convoluted list of “log files” whatever they are, I couldn't figure out which ones are current and links leading all over the place and in the end, I never found the info.

I gave up. 

My excitement was turned to frustration. 

Richard Haseltine

https://www.daz3d.com/forums/discussion/666006/daz-studio-pro-4-22-1-x-highlights#latest

Richard Haseltine

RexRed said:

I agree, it is a maze you are led to.

Other software I use, after install, I am given a link, I click on it and there is a nice tidy list of new features and bug fixes right there.

When I install an update, I should be offered a link when I open Daz leading to a concise list. 

Instead, I am led to a convoluted list of “log files” whatever they are, I couldn't figure out which ones are current and links leading all over the place and in the end, I never found the info.

I gave up. 

My excitement was turned to frustration. 

When DS sees an update (you can enable/disable and configure the frequency of checks in Preferences) it will pop up a dialogue telling you so, and for General Releases that has links to the DS and Iray feature threads - the betas do link to the change log and the DS forum in general. Obviously if you see the update in DIM and download it then you won't get these, but if you take the appearance in DIM as a prompt to have DS check for updates you will (just make sure you close DS before installing the update).

laststand@runbox.com

Pickle Renderer said:

I'm also a software dev and learned that nobody reads anything, except sometimes the tooltip.  For that reason all the UIs I design (I'm a front-end dev) make it completely obvious what they're for.   This is easier said than done, because it implies your UI never contains anything the user probably wouldn't want to do.  That stuff gets hidden or isn't there at all. 

 

I've always found the patch notes page very confusing too.

I've had similar thoughts. Tooltips are a very valuable resource that is terribly underused. What I would do is, I would provide a herd of tooltips, but I would also provide, in a discrete location, the ability to switch them on or off en masse. I would also keep in mind that, when we do see tooltips implemented, they are ususlly located where they are hidden by the cursor.