iociemsaidthis

If anyone can discover a way to simply align layers, you're my hero -- but I have the sinking suspicion that Pixelmator doesn't actually support basic functionality like that. A lot of potential in this app, but the basics desperately need work.

i'm not proud to have paid for this one. i appreciate the effort, but it's got a long way to go before i could be happy with it as a useful tool.

After Adobe tried to force me to "activate" Photoshop Elements online and send watever data I gave it back. I tried Pixelmator and have to say after using it for a while it's better than I thought the first time.

Still many features to come, but other than PSE it can handle CMYK!

@tice

Actually, Pixelmator phones home with update checking turned off. I e-mailed the developers and asked them about it but never received a response. They won't get any money from me and I'm sticking to Acorn.

One thing this application need:

A Unified interface: one window for everything. (At the very least, an effort to consolidate as many windows as possible, to a maximum of 2-3 windows.) Plus, utilizing folding tabs and perhaps some window border snapping on top of that.

Appearingly, Pixelmator shows the ambition of being trendy, "delicious", as well as staying current with the latest and greatest. My impression is that recent usability trends are leaning more towards UIs providing single-window operation. Which makes me wonder why the Pixelmator developers seems to spend too much time perfecting unimportant cosmetics (interface icons and likewise), when the whole shebang has been wrapped in a very ineffective, unglorifying, spread out interface, with windows of different sizes all over. No matter how georgeous the blackish, semi transparent HUD windows and the stylish buttons may be, I've always felt disturbed having to toss around the many windows when they keep in the way of things. Plus, it makes me involved in something that really doesn't have anything with the creative process to do; where do I want this window to be? Oops, I moved it a bit, now I have to drag it back to the very pixel I once had it arranged at. And so forth.

Point of thought:

Think of a painting. It has a frame. Within it, you create your picture. For obvious reasons, you don't want any obstructing objects to stay in the way between you and your picture when creating. Not in reality, nor in a virtual computer environment.

Whereas the digital domain facilitates some unimaginable, almost surreal opportunities to surpass and alter the restrictions of its real life equivalents in many respects - empowering the creator with unlimited undos to begin with, plus all kinds of operations you simply can't do in reality - it falls natural that you can just as easily make the creative experience a lot more restrictive than standing in front of a real, physical canvas.

One example of this, is the role of the canvas in Pixelmator, where I think it's been demoted to a subordinate role in the whole application, in which it often gets covered by interface objects.

Ponder this potential UI design rule: no interface element will be able to cover (any substantial part of) the canvas.

Think of it for a moment. Quite simple, but pretty intriguing UI design goal. Granted, a few exceptions may have to be overlooked. (As they say, there's always room for exceptions.) But I definitely mean to suggest, taking a serious consideration of the current UI situation in Pixelmator. At least, decide upon some kind of UI design motto, instead of right now, where I get the feeling no substantial thoughts were really dedicated to the foundation of the interface itself.

Why not make a digital equivalent of a painting's frame resemble the actual interface? I.e. tools, options, parameter settings, layers - anything - goes onto a surrounding frame on the sides of the canvas. (Of course, styled in a fashion appropriate to the demands of the "delicious generation".)

By and large, I think simplicity-geared programs will generate more food for thought and more creative stimulance, than feature-packed monster apps larded up with gorgeousness galore. Well, to be fair, the latter might not necessarily apply to Pixelmator in its entirety, but in essence, that's towards which tendencies lean.

Just to name one of the more successful apps incorporating something in the vein of what I'm trying to describe, is Skitch. Imagine how that app would feel, if it had just one more tiny window thrown in there, somewhere...

To wrap this excessively long comment up, here's my honest thought:

Pixelmator is still very likable and I think many people (with me) are still crossing their fingers for its success. But... There's a definite need to get its UI clutterness sorted.

All this ranting aside: Pixelmator is a very positive addition to the Mac-soft market, showing great potential. And, I wish to pay reverence to the efforts of the developers. I only think it would mean such a pity if they rely on users being pleased with the current interface, as is.

Overhaul time!

Henrik Cederblad, M.F.A.

Functionally, Aurora does everything I want it to. Aesthetically, it would be nice to have a view of what time it was that I could see from my bed, a la Awaken. Additionally, the Menu Icon doesn't mesh well with the simpler Leopard Menu items such as iChat, the volume icon, and the Spotlight icon.

(For those of you who are seeing Aurora here for the first time, I should explain: Aurora 4 came out yesterday, and the license was changed from donationware to shareware.)

I use this program every day, but I will never pay for the privilege of doing so. Judging from most of the comments here, it looks like many users agree with me on that. If the developer does not return to a free license, I just might end up writing an open-source version of this. I would much rather not have to spend that much time and effort for something that's already been written, but I will if I have to.

good app, but it should play over airtunes like it used to..

Not using iTunes has some drawbacks, but it has one big advantage: you can make it really reliable, which you can't using iTunes. This design decision has been taken in favor of reliability, as we believe this is the most important thing you want from an alarm clock. It might be possible to have AirTunes support in Aurora in the future, but I can't make any detailed promises right now.

Great program (v3) but unfortunately I won't be upgrading at the moment due to the change of licence and Leopard requirement. The developer should at least provide the latest v3 build under the old licence for those that don't need the feature bloat. Thanks for everything up to v3 though. :)

Don't buy this. Version 3 works just fine, google it. I use this every day and love it, but It's an alarm clock program, which is infinitely replaceable, so don't even think about paying for this. Big thumbs down to the developer for the donationware --> shareware switch.

Yes, don't pay for this, because God forbid that diligent independent Mac software developers actually get compensated for their hard work...

/sarcasm

I'll only pay for this if they fixed the issue where I have to disable screensaver password protection.

That's the only issue which keeps me from thinking this alarm clock is 100% useful.

@critux: I'm really sorry about this. If you have the password enabled and your Mac wakes up, it will go back to sleep when no password is entered. This is part of Mac OS X's security and especially that part is made to not be tampered with - in everyone's best interest. Aurora can't just enter your password, and it cannot prevent the Mac to go back to sleep - file a bug with Apple about this, as I cannot provide a solution other than automatically disabling the password if you wish.

What might help you keep your security up: Disable "Enable Alarms when Aurora isn't running" in Aurora's preferences. If that is not set, Aurora will re-enable the screen saver password on quit. That means you have to have Aurora running all night, and there will be no protection in that time, but as soon as you wake up, quit Aurora and head to work, your Mac will be safe again.

@metaquark: I tried as you suggested and Aurora keeps re-enabling it's menubar item, all by itself. Also Aurora needs the option to repeat the playlist.

@critux: Aurora always repeats the playlist, even if it doesn't explicitly say so. I figured you wouldn't want to risk not waking up because of a too short playlist.

here's a workaround for the screen-password issue

compile the following c-code (you will need xcode-tools) and call the programm "notif"

######################################
#include

int main(int argc, char ** argv)
{
CFMessagePortRef port = CFMessagePortCreateRemote(NULL, CFSTR);
CFMessagePortSendRequest(port, 500, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0);
CFRelease(port);
return 0;
}
######################################

than create an apple-script with the following code (remember to set the second part to the location you stored "notif" in)

######################################
do shell script "defaults -currentHost write com.apple.screensaver askForPassword -int 1 ;~/Library/Scripts/ScreenSaver/notif"
######################################

all you have to do now is, to tell Aurora to run that script on wake-up
the scrip itself will re-enable the screensaver-password but the change will not take place until the preferences are opened or the OS notified in another way (which is done by "notif")
maybe the Aurora-guys should come up with a similar solution, that doesn't require anyone to install xCode-Tools?

by the way: this is based on something I found on the internet. Just don't remember where. So don't credit me ;)

While the workaround posted below would work, Aurora already includes this functionality. The reason it doesn't do that after waking up is that it wouldn't be able to run the next alarm if it switched screensaver password protection back on, making the whole feature useless.

If you disable 'Enable alarms when Aurora isn't running', Aurora will re-enable the password when you quit Aurora, and your Mac will be safe whenever Aurora isn't running - keep in mind you need to have it running in order for the alarm to go off then. If security is a concern, I recommend going that route, and leaving Aurora running overnight only.

I've tried a few other alarm clocks. This is my favorite. It does everything i need it to do.