Skinning is it viable ?

[silver fox]

I think the question has to be asked why have so many Software Developers decided that "Skinning" as a tool in users hands is even a good thing.

Is this the "feature of the day" that all companys need to have to be called "Professional grade"

Most of the Skinning tools are pretty lame if they even exist and there is still limited use with end users actually doing there own.

After all when you buy a car do you start ripping off the fenders and removing the dashboard to make a new ones ?

I don't get it... and let's not talk about the obvious (People want their own skins yada yada etc)

Is it that their is really no ability for developers to put together really attractive & functional user panels?

Or they just don't want to be bothered ??

Maybe it's a higher level of support that is required and companies just don't want to commit to that any longer?

Folks go to it....your thoughts. :sqconfused:

 

[SoftJock Rick]

Is it that their is really no ability for developers to put together really attractive & functional user panels?

Or they just don't want to be bothered ??

Maybe it's a higher level of support that is required and companies just don't want to commit to that any longer?

It's actually much simpler to design a single user interface, and support it, then it is to build in a skinning system.

I can tell you quite simply, the putting together the skinning ability in my software, was the single most complicated part of the system, and the hardest to support.

But -- it sells more


It also adds tons of functional advantages, allows third parties to make money off your software, allows users to tweak things to their own liking, and allows the software to be used effectively on more systems.


Think of your analogy to a car...

Lots of people want a Mustang, but not all want them painted red; not all want automatic transmissions; not all want air conditioning, etc... Skinnable programs, allow the user to change the look and feel of the software, without having to buy a new car every week

 

[silver fox]

It's actually much simpler to design a single user interface, and support it, then it is to build in a skinning system.

I can tell you quite simply, the putting together the skinning ability in my software, was the single most complicated part of the system, and the hardest to support.

But -- it sells more


It also adds tons of functional advantages, allows third parties to make money off your software, allows users to tweak things to their own liking, and allows the software to be used effectively on more systems.


Think of your analogy to a car...

Lots of people want a Mustang, but not all want them painted red; not all want automatic transmissions; not all want air conditioning, etc... Skinnable programs, allow the user to change the look and feel of the software, without having to buy a new car every week

Thanks Rick your points are valid from a developer point of view (Profit).

What I am looking for is customers getting what they want in the end without having to customize their requirements. (Options lists excluded).

As for the features on colour , transmissions, Air etc they have in the past all been available from the Original Manufacturer almost totally.

Now they throw in the kitchen sink to be competitive and make fewer models for cost and support.

 

[Randy A]

I'm a RockIt user.

I love having the ability to tweak the skins to my liking. I've tweaked several of the standard skins to fit my needs that allow me to do my job more effective or at least more to my liking. Each of us might do something different and having the ability to simply open up a file, make a few changes and have what we need is an added bonus to the software. I don't see how a developer could even come close in creating a skin that was suitable for everyone. Skinning came about because customers were asking for it, I would bet.

But, it was secondary to my first desire and that was a stable program that did what I needed it to do without all the bells and whistles.

 

[silver fox]

I wonder (Be Honest) how many actually create their own SKINS more than a simple tweak?

Probably fairly low to the numbers sold. Maybe 5%-10% of users ?

And after the initial custom change how useful is this feature going forward I would bet very low 1%-2% ?

So the question really is if the user interface is very well developed for the group intended how different are our needs. ??

Serato users are almost Cult like in their adoration.

The instruments in a car to car really all tell us the same thing.?

So all this work that goes into developing the skinning tool is really lost on the audiance I believe based on the numbers who actually use it.

So Rick a ton of work feature wise for little reward don't you think?

 

[silver fox]

I'm a RockIt user.

I love having the ability to tweak the skins to my liking. I've tweaked several of the standard skins to fit my needs that allow me to do my job more effective or at least more to my liking. Each of us might do something different and having the ability to simply open up a file, make a few changes and have what we need is an added bonus to the software. I don't see how a developer could even come close in creating a skin that was suitable for everyone. Skinning came about because customers were asking for it, I would bet. A small number ?

But, it was secondary to my first desire and that was a stable program that did what I needed it to do without all the bells and whistles. Exactly

Randy assuming you have used it for more than six months how often to you Modify / Change the Skin design significantly ?

 

[SoftJock Rick]

So all this work that goes into developing the skinning tool is really lost on the audiance I believe based on the numbers who actually use it.

So Rick a ton of work feature wise for little reward don't you think?

Not on my end -- my sales increased a hundred fold after the skinning system was put in, and basically the program does the same thing it did before

Let's go back to that Mustang analogy for a minute...

You hop in your new Mustang, tap a screen and select an option -- we want it painted blue today, manual 6 speed transmission, and a sunroof -- hit the starter, and off she goes. Tomorrow, you want it black, with an auto transmission, A/C, and 17 inch wheels -- bang!

If Ford made a car with those built in options, they would sell quite a few, I imagine.

On the other hand, with no skins available on a car (or software), you have to carefully select what you want ahead of time, and are then stuck with it, unless you want to buy another one...


With Rockit, it comes with 18 built in skins right off the shelf, plus an additional 19 more available on the website -- and those are only the ones I've done, with one or two submitted by other users (although many users do in fact build their own skins -- they just don't always want to share them). Each of those skins is designed with a different purpose, and can easily be adapted to any new features I put into future versions of the software

But, the best part, is the skins can have only the controls the user wants on them, so for example, if they don't use the AutoMix, they can remove it from the skin, and put some other control in its place.

Very handy IMHO

 

[silver fox]

Not on my end -- my sales increased a hundred fold after the skinning system was put in, and basically the program does the same thing it did before

Let's go back to that Mustang analogy for a minute...

You hop in your new Mustang, tap a screen and select an option -- we want it painted blue today, manual 6 speed transmission, and a sunroof -- hit the starter, and off she goes. Tomorrow, you want it black, with an auto transmission, A/C, and 17 inch wheels -- bang!

If Ford made a car with those built in options, they would sell quite a few, I imagine. They don't wonder why ?? Market share ...

On the other hand, with no skins available on a car (or software), you have to carefully select what you want ahead of time, and are then stuck with it, unless you want to buy another one...


With Rockit, it comes with 18 built in skins right off the shelf, plus an additional 19 more available on the website -- and those are only the ones I've done, with one or two submitted by other users (although many users do in fact build their own skins -- they just don't always want to share them). Each of those skins is designed with a different purpose, and can easily be adapted to any new features I put into future versions of the software

But, the best part, is the skins can have only the controls the user wants on them, so for example, if they don't use the AutoMix, they can remove it from the skin, and put some other control in its place.

Very handy IMHO

Ahhh so it's about the money !!!! .

 

[SoftJock Rick]

Ahhh so it's about the money !!!! .

Yes (and no) -- but on both ends. The user does not have to buy multiple systems as well -- so it saves the user money.

On the no side, it adds much more functionality for future releases. If a user loved an old skin, they could easily adapt it to any new features I add -- thereby saving them money in the long run -- win-win


As Randy mentioned, users have been clamoring for skin based DJ systems for ages. Many more than you think, actually tweak existing skins, or make their own. Bear in mind, that 95+ % of my customer base, never even visits a DJ chat board (come to think of it, a large portion don't even reside in this country)...

 

[SoftJock Rick]

BTW Allen, I think you are focusing too much on the money end of it (even though I can't complain)

A user can choose an initial skin, and stick with it forever, with no modifications whatsoever -- and many do.

I've found that in the US, a large majority will try the different existing skins, find the one that best suits them, and stay with it.

On the other side of the pond, I find more people wanting to tinker around.


All in all, I think having the option available, makes the software far more valuable to the end user -- rather then them getting stuck with one single interface. If they choose not to use the different skins, or tweak them -- that's fine. If they want to go further, they can.

 

[silver fox]

Skins can be a diversion

I would like to see more content and features that have basic value such as supporting M3U Play lists and a good variety of sound cards with ASIO as an example.

I am sure others have a Features list that also has value that could be added and useful to more than a handful of users.

I'd like to see them (Generic) not Rocket specifically.

Once the skinning tools have been developed it tends to be only a diversion if the progress on function is at a standstill.

This is Not meant as a criticism of Rocket but the DJ software / player Industry at large.

I just did a review on a "New" product that looked great did Video, but all the basics were really not addressed. (Flashy but weak product agenda)
it will die soon if they can't get it together.

I was hoping this would not be a Rocket only discussion but I have to accept that it is a product that is supported here.

Hopefully users of "Other" tools will chime in on what they use and views....

 

[SoftJock Rick]

I was hoping this would not be a Rocket only discussion but I have to accept that it is a product that is supported here.

Hopefully users of "Other" tools will chime in on what they use and views....

Perfectly fine with me -- I don't care what software anybody discusses.


I can only use my own experience for an example though, and one of the first things out of the mouths of many users that call or email me, is how wonderful it is to have so many different skins available -- I take that as being a good thing

Also, in my case as a developer, I have a specific target market in mind when designing features -- I don't make a product that encompasses every type of DJ (or all types of DJs).

 

[iresq]

I'm a VDJ user who does not use video. Personally, I don't fool around much with the skins. I use a skin with a white screen black text for outdoor use. Until recently, I used the factory skin for indoor/night work. I recently found a skin that does a better job (for me) in identifying songs I already played. The only thing I tweak is the font size to give my poor eyes a break.

The nice thing about skins are how functional you can make them. Play video? Develop skins that have the video tools. Have a controller? Have your skin emulate the controller.

 

[silver fox]

Perfectly fine with me -- I don't care what software anybody discusses.


I can only use my own experience for an example though, and one of the first things out of the mouths of many users that call or email me, is how wonderful it is to have so many different skins available -- I take that as being a good thing

Also, in my case as a developer, I have a specific target market in mind when designing features -- I don't make a product that encompasses every type of DJ (or all types of DJs).

I do to if I could find a skin I like, so that skinning would be redundant

 

[Randy A]

Allen,

I'm still at a loss on what you're argument is. You are admitting you haven't found a skin you like, yet the software gives you the tools to either tweak a standard or develop your own, but that's not good enough. ??? Is there a skin that even slightly appeals to you? Are you wanting someone to feel sorry for you and do the work for you?

 

[silver fox]

Allen,

I'm still at a loss on what you're argument is. You are admitting you haven't found a skin you like, yet the software gives you the tools to either tweak a standard or develop your own, but that's not good enough. ??? Is there a skin that even slightly appeals to you? Are you wanting someone to feel sorry for you and do the work for you?

Okay to restate (It isn't an argument but and invitation to discuss) after you have the skin you like what options are important that is not there in various programs that you use that you would like to see.

Simply put and Rick has said as much for the NA market DJ's stay with what they like and don't experiment much.

And without the Skinning development the product did not change and a lot of effort / time went into that.

For me the feature set is more important as I stated before with examples.

Okay maybe I should have changed the post to be SKINS programing or features set what is more important..

 

[Guest]

What Randy said... what FEATURE(S) are you looking for?

 

[silver fox]

What Randy said... what FEATURE(S) are you looking for?

Post #11 is a good start but not necessarily a ROCKIT discussion as I have said a few times...

 

[Guest]

Oh ok, thanks.

I would like to see more content and features that have basic value such as supporting M3U Play lists and a good variety of sound cards with ASIO as an example.

The software I use has those... and plenty of skins.

 

[Randy A]

Post #11 is a good start but not necessarily a ROCKIT discussion as I have said a few times...

Allen,

If you go back thru the archives or do a search, you'll note many discussions (RockIt or other software) where desired features were discussed.

My brain is fuzzy, but didn't you request the post #11 requirements from RockIt before and note that other software supported those requests already. If so, it would seem to me that your post here was kinda of baiting Rick (because of the recent skinning threads) into putthing those requests into RockIt and making fun of the fact that he has a nice selection of the skins and how you think having those skins underminds the other features he already supports. (just my point of view looking in from the outside here)

Bottom line, it took me trying SEVERAL software packages to determine which one was right for me. Although many of the other ones did work too, most had too many bells-n-whistles for my application and no easy way to turn them on or off.