Anyone else miss the Max 4 loading image??

Jul 12, 2008 at 2:20pm

Anyone else miss the Max 4 loading image??

Hi,
does anyone else miss the image that used to display while max 4 was loading? The main reason i ask is that Max 5 takes a good while to load but with nothing displayed at all. I wouldnt be surprised if v5 actually loads just as fast as v4, but with nothing displayed it kinda feels like a long time,,,, or maybe its just me :) Anyone know why they decided to axe the image? It was rather iconic in a good way i though.
e

#38850
Jul 12, 2008 at 3:37pm

yeah definitely agreed!

p

On 12 Jul 2008, at 15:20, Enda wrote:

>
> Hi,
> does anyone else miss the image that used to display while max 4
> was loading? The main reason i ask is that Max 5 takes a good while
> to load but with nothing displayed at all. I wouldnt be surprised
> if v5 actually loads just as fast as v4, but with nothing displayed
> it kinda feels like a long time,,,, or maybe its just me :) Anyone
> know why they decided to axe the image? It was rather iconic in a
> good way i though.
> e
>

#135893
Jul 13, 2008 at 11:33am

Well, few times(during the performance) I definitely didn’t like the
splash screen popping out, so I vote to set one more item in
preferences for this.

One hack for this would be to put this example splash screen:

http://jit.playground.googlepages.com/_mysplash.maxpat.zip

in your init folder(max-startup is neater, but it seems to be accessed
after the init). This way max opens the patch as soon as it gets ready.

hth,
nesa

On Jul 12, 2008, at 5:38 PM, peiman khosravi wrote:

> yeah definitely agreed!
>
> p
>
> On 12 Jul 2008, at 15:20, Enda wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi,
>> does anyone else miss the image that used to display while max 4
>> was loading? The main reason i ask is that Max 5 takes a good while
>> to load but with nothing displayed at all. I wouldnt be surprised
>> if v5 actually loads just as fast as v4, but with nothing displayed
>> it kinda feels like a long time,,,, or maybe its just me :) Anyone
>> know why they decided to axe the image? It was rather iconic in a
>> good way i though.
>> e
>>
>

#135894

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.