I think that you should make a new version of ModPlug Tracker. I think it should have 1 of the following things (or both, which would be better).
1. More patterns (meaning allow the #xx (X Paramiter or whatever it is called) effect to work with the Bxx (Possition Jump) effect to go beyond pattern 256 (with repeats). A good # would be 512 (2x the patterns, 2x the fun)
2. 65,536 rows per pattern (That # is really good, also; just like 1,024). (64x the rows, 64x the patterns/pattern) (1,024 patterns)! 65,536 rows would make ModPlug Tracker even more like Excel! Another thing that would be helpful (just like Excel) is a name box (although you do not have to call it that). With that you could allow the users to go to the specific channel, pattern, & row that they want! It could take the arrows' place (the 1's next to the pattern #'s). Split the name box (or whatever you want to call it, Excel calls it the name box) into 4 columns. 1st column - pattern # (0-511, without repeats), 2nd column - row # (0-65,535), 3rd column - channel # (1-128), 4th column - channel section # (1-3). I think that those additions sound good. You would definately make me happier if you did that; however, I am sure that you would make more than just me much happier if you did that. I am probably not the only person that edits music, & I am probably not the only person that uses ModPlug Tracker to do it. The reasons that I would like these editions include the following.
3. 256 channels (1 channel per Excel column (A-IV))!
1. Navigation would be much easier than the find & replace functions (The name box addition would provide this).
2. Mixing songs together would be much easier (The 512 patterns & 65,536 rows addition would provide this).
3. The channel thing is just for the fun of it, & to make ModPlug Tracker even more like Excel!
Doesn't that sound like a cool project for you to work on? I think that it does.
Hi wodd. I haven't voted yet, will have to think about all this.
I voted I was confused. I still am. :)
Which 1 (1's) are you confused about? Can you tell me which 1 (1's) you are confused about?
I personally don't see the benefit of having a poll about this.
It either is not possible, or Rewbs will make it someday. We can't ask from Rewbs that uses his spare time to improve modplug, to tell him how he should do what he does.
I'd say, we remove the poll, and see it as a feature suggestion instead?
Quote from: "Really Weird Person"Which 1 (1's) are you confused about? Can you tell me which 1 (1's) you are confused about?
I don't really see the benefits.
If you like to mix songs together (I do), then you see how those additions would benifit people much.
I am not trying to tell Rewbs how to do his job; it is just a thuggestion (thought & suggestion mixed together).
I have thought. :)
1. In the future I'm sure we can arrange to allow for more patterns (when we have the new file format). But have you really encountered a situation where you needed more that 256 patterns in a particular song? What is the benefit of mixing all your songs together in one file?
2. So many rows will make patterns unmanageable to us lesser mortals. Do you really need so many in order to compose a piece of music? You might want to consider using another pattern. Also, look into the following options in the general tab: "Show Prev/Next Pattern", which displays consecutive patterns in the pattern editor nearly as if they were the same pattern (should be used with "Always center active row") and "Continuous Scroll", which allows the cursor to more directly from one pattern to the next. These options can make 2 consecutive patterns nearly feel like 1 single big pattern.
3. Again, have you really encountered a situation where you needed that many channels to compose? When mixing tracks together, why not only keep the channels you want to actually play together? I can't believe you'd truely want to play 256 channels all at the same time.
To summarize, I feel these feature ideas are a consequence of your attachement to Excel rather than oppportunities to make OpenMPT a better music production tool. I therefore can't muster a good reason to put them on my todo list.
All this makes me very interested in your music. Do you have anything available for download?
Quote from: "rewbs"I can't believe you'd truely want to play 256 channels all at the same time.
Um, have you even met Atlantis? :lol:
Quote from: "Really Weird Person"Another thing that would be helpful (just like Excel) is a name box (although you do not have to call it that). With that you could allow the users to go to the specific channel, pattern, & row that they want!
thats actually a pretty neat idea i think, sortof a jump-to box? a nice feature for those who would like to further avoid the mouse.
tho in addition to just having it there, i would suggest some form of hotkey... say, hold down the alt key and type 24, release, and it goes to the 24th pattern (just an example).
also, adding boxes and such to the interface brings up the issue of the area above the pattern becoming cluttered... the ability to customize that is soon to be an essential feature, if it isnt already (i for one have no use for the keyboard split, and have a high rez screen, id love to have it all crammed on one row, and have tons more room to view the pattern).
as for #1, with the current file format, more than 256 patterns is impossible, since those jump to pattern effects are determined by the limitations of a two character hex number.
i do agree that this would be a nice feature in the new file format however, i have hit 206 patterns in my 15 minute sonata (before pattern clean up, after it was 167).
along those lines, more channels would be nice as well (and has been requested before), tho i certianly have note come close to using even 64 channels.
#2 tho, i really cant think of a logical reason for, rarely do i even use patterns over 64 rows, and more than 1024... what would be the point? the whole point of patterns of limited length is to divide the song into usable and logical sections, without that, the tracker would be a lot more confusing!
as an ending note, i really fail to see your interest in making mpt more like excel tho, its an entirely different program for an entirely different purpose.
and personally, i have a thing against making mpt anything more like a microsoft product... -_-
The reason why more than 256 patterns would be needed is as follows. I am trying to mix 2 songs together, but here is my problem. Pattern 5 (the 1st song is 5 patterns with the 1st 4 being 1,024 rows long & the 5th 1 is 834 rows. If I try to do the mix (without changing the # of rows for any of the patterns), the 2nd song's rows only go up by 2 (meaning 3, 5, 7, 9, 11...). I did the math. Since the pattern is the 2nd song goes up by 2 rows each time, it would take 80 patterns just to get the 1st song to meet @ half of a pattern (not what I want); therefore, it would take 160 patterns to meet @ a whole pattern (what I want, but it would most likely not end @ the right pattern (13)). Houston, we have a problem. We do not have enough patterns! We are only allowed 239 of them (or is that 240? What ever it is, it is not enough); ahhhhhhhhhh! The 256 thing does not count in song mixing (what you do to 1 side of the equation, you must do to the other). That same rule applies here. What you do to the repeated pattern, it does that same thing to the 1st 1. & even 256 would probably not be enough, I am not totally sure. 512 would most likely be enough. If not, try doubling that (1,024). I even tried making all of the patterns 1,024 rows; however, that did not work either.
That would probably make more sense than making it more like Word or PowerPoint. Making ModPlug Tracker look like those would probably look really weird, odd, wodd, odd, weird. How would the coding be wrong for the Position Jump (Bxx), but not for the Pattern Break (Cxx)? I suppose that it was wrong for the pattern break, also. However, Rewbs probably fixed that when he made the addition of 768 rows. Another thing that I just thought of is this. I do recommend, however, that (if you do make a newer version of ModPlug Tracker with or without the additions, but especially if you do make a newer version with the additions) you fix the bug that allows the #xx command to be usable only in the 1st channel. That would be pretty much required if you do make a new version with the additions that I have listed in whichever post it was. The reason that it would be required is as follows. You may need to use it for both the Bxx & Cxx commands. If that is the case, you would most likely put them in separate channels. However, if the #xx command only works in channel 1, you would have an issue. The issue would be that only 1 effect (if any @ all) would be activated. However, you would want both of them to be active, right? Doesn't that sound reasonable.
I feel bad for Rewbs. I feel like I am trying to tell him how to do his job; however, that is not my intention @ all; all I am trying to do is make some suggestions to him.
Quote from: "Snu"thats actually a pretty neat idea i think, sortof a jump-to box? a nice feature for those who would like to further avoid the mouse.
tho in addition to just having it there, i would suggest some form of hotkey... say, hold down the alt key and type 24, release, and it goes to the 24th pattern (just an example).
There's already a go-to box, though it is not very well publicized. :)
I keep forgetting to add it to the menus...
Look in the keyboard config dialog, under "Pattern Editor - General", there is a "Go to row/channel/..." command. You can use that jump to any position in the track using just the keyboard (though I don't think this is exactly what wodd was asking for).
Quote from: "Snu"more than 256 patterns is impossible, since those jump to pattern effects are determined by the limitations of a two character hex number.
Yes, but we have Ericus' param extension effect (#xx) that can be used as a multiplier to work around such issues.
Quote from: "Wodd"The reason why more than 256 patterns would be needed is as follows.
Wodd, I'm not as good with numbers as you so it will take me a little while to understand that.
Quote from: "Wodd"How would the coding be wrong for the Position Jump (Bxx), but not for the Pattern Break (Cxx)? I suppose that it was wrong for the pattern break, also. However, Rewbs probably fixed that
Could you explain the problem you are encountering with the Position Jump (Bxx)? When you encounter problems, it is likely they will never get fixed unless you explain the problems (sorry if you already explained this one and I missed your explanation).
Quote from: "Wodd"I do recommend, however, that [...] you fix the bug that allows the #xx command to be usable only in the 1st channel.
This one should be fixed in version 1.17RC2. What version are you using?
Quote from: "Wodd"I feel bad for Rewbs. I feel like I am trying to tell him how to do his job; however, that is not my intention @ all; all I am trying to do is make some suggestions to him.
Don't feel bad (it's not my job). Here's a deal: you don't feel about making suggestions, and I don't feel bad if they never get implemented. ;)
Quote from: "Really Weird Person"The reason why more than 256 patterns would be needed is as follows. I am trying to mix 2 songs together, but here is my problem. Pattern 5 (the 1st song is 5 patterns with the 1st 4 being 1,024 rows long & the 5th 1 is 834 rows. If I try to do the mix....
ok... you lost me about there, i have absolutely no clue what you are talking about...
would not 160 patterns of 1024 rows make for an hours long song...?
isnt there some other easier way to achieve what you are trying to do?
if nothing else, to simply render each song to a wav, and use a multi track editor like audacity?
rewbs:
niiiice, that jump to dialog is pretty sweet, ill definitely use it! its amazing how many commands like this are in mpt. i always have a hard time committing new commands to memory tho, guess i should do some studying of the keyboard config!
the great thing about mpt is that its so simple on the surface, but when you get into it, there are so many hidden things, and so many different ways to do things, i love it.
also, along those lines, i hadnt thought about the #xx effect... i have yet to use it, so i guess it hadnt occured to me! oops.
An hour long song? That is not much. Especially if you consider the fact that I have mixed a 69 pattern song (patterns 14 & 15 are 128 rows, & all of the other 1's are 64 rows) with a song that is 13 patterns (13 straight 64 row patterns). That mix is done (80 patterns, every 5th pattern, rows = 320, every other pattern, rows = 1,024), & I can promise you that is probably @ least 3 hours (maybe more, maybe less). I have not actually listened to the whole song itself in 1 sitting; however, I believe that it is probably @ least 3 hours. ModPlug Tracker does not to the most excellent job @ calculating the time for a song that has position jumps in it. ModPlug Tracker says that the song is only 3:46, but I know that it is much longer than that. I have other songs that are over an hour. For example, I have 1 song that is 1:18:00 (78:00) long! It is actually a mixture of 3 songs in 1! I have another 1 that is probably @ least an hour. Again, just like the other song (the 2 part mix), I am not sure because you have that position jump problem.
Wodd, can you make this 3h song available for download?
I'd really like to check it out. It might provide me with insight for ideas to improve MPT for the way you use it.
How do I do that? I have a web site (which can be found @ http://caleb.dnsalias.com/caleb). I do have it open in Dreamweaver? 8 right now (& I plan to keep it open until I get some info on how to make a download link).
You present a rather complicated nested structure of a song, which could be presented in another serial way within the current options.
So I don't see a reason for a new version here.
ahah dude! wodd, you have omf 2097 music on your webpage. awesome.
btw, wodd, how old are you? i'm just really curious.
I have now made 2 links on my web page.
1. ModPlug Tracker download (works)
2. Strangestest.it download (does not work)
My dad & I have tried to make the 2nd link work, but we couldn't.
I am using Dreamweaver? 8 to edit my web page.
My dad & I tried several things to get the song download to work for you, but we could not do it.
Have you heard of &/or played OMF 2097? I used to play that game all the time! That is until I got Winoows? XP installed on my computer. I like Windows? XP, though. However, just like everything else, it has its pros & cons. BTW, I am 15 years old. My birthday is February 26th. Another game that I liked to play is Rayman?. Have you ever heard of &/or played Rayman?? I am guessing that you went to my page and played some of the MP3 files that I have. Is that a pretty good guess? Did you look @ any of the links, or did you just listen to the music? I like to listen to music. That is the other thing that I use ModPlug Tracker for. BTW I used ModPlug Tracker to do all of the mixes on that page. Have you ever heard of &/or played Insaniquarium? The 3 hour song is a mix of the Danger Room arena's music (from OMF 2097) & all of Insaniquarium's music. I think I will add 2 things to my site right now.
1. Elegost!.mp3 (actually the music from Insaniquarium, not The Lord of the Rings: The Third Age)
2. a link to a really cool site (www.sudoku.com).
Have you ever tried to solve sudoku puzzles? I have a game for my computer called Sudoku (found on www.sudoku.com).
Sudoku allows you to make up to a 16x16 grid! That is really weird!
I like sudoku except that I get angry if I can't solve it within reasonable time.
I have made some minor updates to my page now. You can go to caleb.dnsalias.com/caleb to find them.
That was weird. When I found my topic, I noticed something weird. The poll has disappared! I guess someone was getting annoyed with it, so they removed it.
Quote from: "Really Weird Person"That was weird. When I found my topic, I noticed something weird. The poll has disappared! I guess someone was getting annoyed with it, so they removed it.
That person was me :P
Oh, okee dokee.
Don't worry, LPChip is a Really Weird Person too, he was just jealous.
Quote from: "rewbs"Don't worry, LPChip is a Really Weird Person too, he was just jealous.
Shh... That supposed to be only between us... :P
So, LPChip, what does someone have that you want? Does someone have a song that sounds cool, so you want a copy of it?
Quote from: "Really Weird Person"So, LPChip, what does someone have that you want? Does someone have a song that sounds cool, so you want a copy of it?
Music wise, that someone needs to have a special vibe in his tracks. A melodic structure should be there, although its not that important. Most of all the song may not be repetive. If the vibe is like a tone resonating in the same key, then you have me pinned.
Eg: a rythmic structure on a D or whatever note that is strong...
Quote from: "Really Weird Person"How do I do that? I have a web site (whcih can be found @ http://caleb.dnsalias.com/caleb). I do have it open in Dreamweaver? 8 right now (& I plan to keep it open until I get some info on how to make a download link).
Wodd sent me the song, and I've uploaded it to my site.
here's the link: http://lpchip.com/sharing/Strangestest.zip
Did you listen to the song? It is pretty long, isn't it? The songs length is 80 patterns! See, 16 patterns is not nearly as much as it sounds like. When I 1st saw that your newer "Open" MPT (whatever the open part means) allowed up to 1,024 rows/pattern, I thought that it was cool. However, I now realize, after doing Strangestest.it, that 16 patterns is not much. Granted, after doing the 1st long mix with an updated version that allows up to 64 1,024 row patterns/pattern or 1,024 64 row patterns/pattern (65,5536 rows), if you do make an update) I will probably realize how little that will probably be, also. Although, I am not sure yet.
So, LPChip, I see that you have a link to the song now. I see that you also compressed it (meaning put it in your pocket, then zipped your pocket). That pocket thing is a joker, not an ace, a 2, a 3, a 4, a 5, a 6, a 7, an 8, a 9, a 10, a jack, a queen, or a king.
Quote from: "Really Weird Person"So, LPChip, I see that you have a link to the song now. I see that you also compressed it (meaning put it in your pocket, then zipped your pocket). That pocket thing is a joker, not an ace, a 2, a 3, a 4, a 5, a 6, a 7, an 8, a 9, a 10, a jack, a queen, or a king.
Im not entirelly sure what you mean, but I compressed the file so people with a less faster internet connection can still download the file without having to wait an additional time.
Don't you love that infuriating little feeling you get when you witness two people completely failing to understand each other? :)
This thread is awesome!
Quote from: "rewbs"Don't you love that infuriating little feeling you get when you witness two people completely failing to understand each other? :)
This thread is awesome!
i dont get it....
:)
u know... i even thoght 64 channels was more than enough...
also.... rewbs... how do u pronounce ur name?
Quote from: "Dj Cruk CHIKIN"also.... rewbs... how do u pronounce ur name?
Like bewbs, or pewbs.
dont forget lewbs
I did not think that 64 channels cut it for putting songs on 1 pattern. I have put 2 songs on 1 pattern now (separate songs). I took the stadium music, & put all 24 patterns on 1 (96 channels), & I took the Danger Room music & did the same thing (65 channels). So 128 channels did it for those.
Why do you need to only have one pattern per song? That doesnt make sense
I think the whole point of patterns is to keep the song organized and sounding good, usually using multiples of 2 or 4. one pattern per song will make it big, bulky and hard to manage. When you want to go back to a certain place to fix up a few errors or bugs in the song, theres too many rows and numbers to know where the bug was. So really, patterns should be kept at a good length like 256 or something MAX. Also, if you really wanna mix other songs together, the songs can still be played with patterns blockin the way :?
They were done just for the fun of it; & for the weirdness of it. Trust me, they do definitely sound weird.
I thnk another thing u can add to MPT is a shortcut for the octave things.. unless there already is one 8)
Quote from: "Dj Cruk CHIKIN"I thnk another thing u can add to MPT is a shortcut for the octave things.. unless there already is one 8)
If you mean shortcut keys to change octave, yes that's there already - check your keyboard config.
Ctrl+Shift+[A or Q] are the defaults for that as far as I'm aware - the trouble is that if Trillian or ICQ is open in the background, Ctrl+Shift+A doesn't work. Has anyone else had this problem?
found it as "*" and "/"
Ctrl+Shift+[A or Q] changes the octave of the selected notes in the pattern editor, / and * change the active octave (the octave of the new notes you enter in the pattern editor).
Wong, see here: http://www.nucleuscms.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=3&view=next&sid=b3242aad08a936729abd90d4e354523a . You should either change that key binding in Trillian or in MPT.
Aha, thanks. That's fixed it. I suppose it's the kind of thing I should have Googled, really.
Quote from: "Wong"Ctrl+Shift+[A or Q] are the defaults for that as far as I'm aware - the trouble is that if Trillian or ICQ is open in the background, Ctrl+Shift+A doesn't work. Has anyone else had this problem?
hehe yeah. that is until I uninstalled Trillian and ICQ.
Sacrifices. "ut oh"
Well... I learned a few useful things there.... But... i know of somehitng else you can maybe add to MPT... Maybe... you can put on the side all of the samples in your sample library, and have them single click and selsected. i find it annoying having to keep goin to "load" and find the sample. it would be more convinient if we had it similar to the way friutyloops does it... Just a suggestion :)
Quote from: "Dj Cruk CHIKIN"Well... I learned a few useful things there.... But... i know of somehitng else you can maybe add to MPT... Maybe... you can put on the side all of the samples in your sample library, and have them single click and selsected. i find it annoying having to keep goin to "load" and find the sample. it would be more convinient if we had it similar to the way friutyloops does it... Just a suggestion :)
Hmm, I think I know what you are talking about, and thats what the tree views on the left are for, most specifically the bottom left one. You can browse your collection there, double click to preview, and if you like it, drag and drop on the instrument or sample editor window pane. Is that what you mean?
Hmm... Slightly... However i would perfer the tree if it were like... just click and the sample plays. Just like in friuty so u can make a simple beat on there more quickly and come up with something faster. With the tree, it just loads the sample up. Another thing, the tree can maybe look a little more.... catchy. a bit basic right now. But ill save that for the new system :P
Quote from: "Dj Cruk CHIKIN"i would perfer the tree if it were like... just click and the sample plays.
Uh, you can, just click it again, really fast, then it will play :D
A whole different item :
In the instrument tab, there is the window at the bottom, where one can edit the volume or panning envelope of a sound.
Since there is no indication in that pane about the length of the sample, or a vertical line to show the end of it, it has always been a kind of try and error to make the envelope valid for exactly the whole sound.
Quote from: "Sam_Zen"A whole different item :
In the instrument tab, there is the window at the bottom, where one can edit the volume or panning envelope of a sound.
Since there is no indication in that pane about the length of the sample, or a vertical line to show the end of it, it has always been a kind of try and error to make the envelope valid for exactly the whole sound.
This is because an insrument can contain several samples and samples can be played at different pitches, which changes their duration. The unit of the resolution of the envelope editor is ticks, which means that at the default speed (6) six steps equal one row in the pattern editor.
Quote from: "speed-goddamn-focus"This is because an insrument can contain several samples and samples can be played at different pitches, which changes their duration.
Although I was talking about a simple instrument containing just one sample, I'm aware of these complications. But even so, in the end, such an instrument has a defined length at the default pitch (C5 I suppose) which could be translated into the full panorama of the envelope editor pane.
Thanks for the useful remark about the connection between the set speed and the number of ticks in a row. Didn't know that.
Quote from: "Sam_Zen"Quote from: "speed-goddamn-focus"This is because an insrument can contain several samples and samples can be played at different pitches, which changes their duration.
Although I was talking about a simple instrument containing just one sample, I'm aware of these complications. But even so, in the end, such an instrument has a defined length at the default pitch (C5 I suppose) which could be translated into the full panorama of the envelope editor pane.
Thanks for the useful remark about the connection between the set speed and the number of ticks in a row. Didn't know that.
Yes. In fact, the grid is the same as the row highlighting. If you have 4/16, then every 4th line will be thicker.
First I thought : Grid ? What grid ? But after more close investigation I noticed for the first time four extremely thin, so badly visible, vertical lines in the envelope pane. This with a color-setting of :
Highlight songs' time signature off, and Primary Highlight at 16. I can't seem to be able to make this line thicker or change the color.
I noticed also in other songs a different numbers of these vertical lines, but I guess this is the ticks/row connection.
But, at least, this gives progress, because it is some relation between the length of the envelope and time.
Quote from: "Sam_Zen"First I thought : Grid ? What grid ? But after more close investigation I noticed for the first time four extremely thin, so badly visible, vertical lines in the envelope pane.
This is because your screen or eyes are crap. :)
QuoteBut, at least, this gives progress, because it is some relation between the length of the envelope and time.
It gives exact relation. :)
Quote from: "Dj Cruk CHIKIN"Well... I learned a few useful things there.... But... i know of somehitng else you can maybe add to MPT... Maybe... you can put on the side all of the samples in your sample library, and have them single click and selsected. i find it annoying having to keep goin to "load" and find the sample. it would be more convinient if we had it similar to the way friutyloops does it... Just a suggestion :)
You don't have to go to "load", just drag and drop samples or instruments from the treeview to the sample editor or the instrument editor. You can even load samples or instruments from other songs this way. If you just want to preview a sample in the tree, either double click it or select it and play on the keyboard. Personally I think the "load" button should be removed just because the treeview is so much better than the other options.
2 speed-goddamn-focus
Probably both screen and eyes, but this is no excuse for presenting a line with a width of 1 pixel. :)
Quote from: "Sam_Zen"2 speed-goddamn-focus
Probably both screen and eyes, but this is no excuse for presenting a line with a width of 1 pixel. :)
I see many lines of a width of 1 pixel in that sentence. :P
IMHO the main thing that is missing from the tree view (and the load dialog) is the ability to load many samples/instrument into a track very quickly.
Quote from: "speed-goddamn-focus"Personally I think the "load" button should be removed just because the treeview is so much better than the other options.
Not for me. I'm visually impaired. The load button/shortcut is much more convenient in my case.
Quote from: "Diamond"Not for me. I'm visually impaired. The load button/shortcut is much more convenient in my case.
I was just half joking, cause it seems so many users are unaware of how useful the tree view really is (unless of course you're visually impaired, then I guess it's pretty much useless). Removing features for such reasons is just too Apple tho. Think different my ass. Think same is more like it.
What do you mean by "Removing such features is too Apple, though."?
Quote from: "Really Weird Person"What do you mean by "Removing such features is too Apple, though."?
He's referring to the way in which Apple Macs readily abandon mildly superfluous features (e.g. the right mouse button).
That is definitely true. They also abandon the use of a wheel (meaning on a wheel mouse, duh). The PC allows users to scroll with a wheel instead of having to click & drag the scroll bar up & down every time. However, the Mac does not allow that.
The lack of a eject buttons is another off-topic example ;)
BTW, the Mac does have a "right click". If you hold the mouse button down, your result is the right click (in certain applications). BTW, I do not use a Mac @ home, however, I do when I am @ school most of the time (in fact, I do niot think that we will be using them @ all this semester). Last semester I used a PC for both my 2nd & 6th periods. 2nd period was Web Design, & 6th period was Intro to Computer Applications. 2nd period is now Current Events & 6th period is now Phy Ed.
HEEEEH MACS ARE SLOWWW AND THEY CRASH ALOT :D
So do PC's (especially if you are using Windows? 98)! Windows? XP is a much better choice (unless, of course, you absolutely want to play things like OMF 2097 & Rayman (neither work very well @ all in Windows? XP, but work excellent in Windows? 98, unless, of course, your computer crashes)! Windows? XP is much more stable than Windows? 98! I have both Windows? XP Professional & Windows? 98, but I do not really use the Windows? 98 part. That is mainly because I do not believe that it even works. Even if it did, I would not be able to use the Internet on it. My birthday is a week from yesterday! I will become a 16-year old self instead of a 15-year old self!
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75!
That's weird, odd, wodd, odd, weird! I submitted my post, & the 1st 8 was a "cool" smilie, not an 8! That is weird, odd, wodd, odd, weird!
Bad post! We have used them this semester. We have gone to the computer lab (a room with a lot of desks with Mac computers on them). We also did some presentations today (using a smart board (kind of like having a tablet Mac (tablet Mac? Weird!)
Quote from: "Really Weird Person"That's weird, odd, wodd, odd, weird! I submitted my post, & the 1st 8 was a "cool" smilie, not an 8! That is weird, odd, wodd, odd, weird!
Aha! That's where Wodd came from, Weird + Odd! Cool!
I have really found a use for more rows, patterns, or both now! I was planning on taking 3 songs & mixing them together; however, that will not work. The reason I say that is because Strangestest (2).it is too long for that. I wanted to add the Danger Room music from One Must Fall 2097 into that, but mathematically, that will not work unless I have more patterns, more rows, or both due to the fact that the Danger Room song is 13 patterns (13 is a prime #)! As I told you in the e-mail I sent (with Strangestest (2).it attached), it is 207 1,024 row patterns! I do not have 69 patterns left! I only have 32 left! The max is indeed 240. I always forget about the 0 because I start my songs @ 1, not 0.