HDX and Touch compatibility

[Dynon]

What I said was we try to make each product "the best version of itself". HDX has some pretty different user interface paradigms that include the things you've run into, but also include other things like the way screen layout is driven (HDX does not have a 20% vertical EMS band at all, for one). The entire bottom menu is different. HDX has knobs but no joysticks. So there are lots of things that aren't the same. SkyView Classic and Touch's interface are fundamentally different than HDX's.

To answer your question directly though, there would be significant engineering investment necessary to make HDX's UX work on Touch.

And even if it were a question of there not being any investment necessary, and it was just "flip a switch" to make Touch work like HDX, we still would likely choose not to. We can't change Touch over to the HDX interface wholesale: there is too much fleet experience with the way things work today. Not everybody that has substantial experience with Touch will prefer HDX's heavier use of the touch screen - although we're sure many would. Look at what happened when we made a change as relatively "small" as the HSI circle/oval issue.

You might say "make it an option". Well, we've been down the path of "make EVERYTHING an option", and where it leads is to more complexity in support, education, customer understanding, and future development. This is another reason that the "full" HDX experience isn't coming to SkyView Touch: an option that transforms the entire UX of a product in such a fundamental way is hard to support. In a nutshell, we're differentiating the products themselves in a variety of ways, from physical design , to the way touchscreen gestures are used, to the way we position them in the market.

 

[Langdon]

I'm still trying to get my head around what the problems would be to give Touch users the HDX screen layout and probably the Icon derived controls. You mention that a significant problem is the way that the Touch interface works in relation to the HDX but I fail to see how this is the case. The Classic has button and joystick controls that can perform all tasks, the Touch obviously has the same but also has the ability to use Icon controls which are virtually only limited by real estate. The HDX I'm guessing has more limited control in that it is far more touch orientated and therefore doesn't require the hardware complexity of joystick control.
The joystick, once an essential part of Skyview navigation, is almost irrelevant in the Touch system, I now only use this to navigate the setup menu. As I see it virtually every operating function in the Touch can be performed by multiple controls. By the joystick/buttons, touch screen or the knob, Autopilot and Com panels so I fail to see how control under the HDX screen layout would be a problem for Touch. Right now, but no-doubt ending soon after a patch download, I can operate all the functions necessary to run Touch using the HDX screen layout, I do not have access to the EMS screen across the bottom but I have little doubt that the software solution is already loaded in my system but I have not got the link to use it.
For instance I can now pull up the HDX screen layout through a faulty icon in Touch, this icon can be reprogramed to give an entirely different outcome i.e. to return you to the intended screen. Icon based controls can achieve  whatever the system is capable of which is everything I want from the HDX, what I currently have but with the engine controls across the bottom.
You speak of fleet experience and the possible reluctance of users to progress to the better situational awareness of the HDX layout. I completely fail to see your point here. To declutter and improve the screen layout makes the system more user friendly, hence your reasons for implementing the new layout. I am only talking about moving widgets to more sensible locations, essentially the screen is the same. You use the HSI issue as an example of the reaction to a small change but that was a reaction to a nonsensical change. The HSI was made oval to produce room for something we were not supposed to see.
I'm not suggesting you make the HDX layout an option as if it were something completely new, I'm suggesting you develop it as part of Skyview and make it a screen layout along with the other options just as you did with the six-pack layout. We obviously share the software so rather than making the HDX a separate system in the view of consumers, make it the latest in the SV range. I do agree with you that it is a marketing position, I believe an upsell.
I don't like having to argue with you over this as I'm really a very happy long term and returning customer.

 

[NASA515]

I'm a tester and have a lot of time with both SV-T and HDX.  They are different interfaces.  Whether HDX is "better" is a matter of personal opinion.  If Dynon wants to make the HDX interface available on Touch - that is up to them.  But ONLY if it is an OPTION.  You are arguing for an HDX interface on Touch when you really have not seen the full HDX package - which is still being refined.  I personally would not like to see Touch having the HDX GUI as its only interface.  At least in its current configuration.

Bob Bogash
RV-12
N737G

 

[swatson999]

OK, granted that I haven't seen an HDX unit nor had the opportunity to play with one, but someone tell me what I'm missing here...

I look at my SV-T, and I see 2 knobs and 8 buttons. I look at an HDX picture and I see 2 knobs and 8 buttons.

What is inherent in a SV-T that prevents the HDX UI from being implemented? Knobs turn left and right on both, and presumably push to select the same. Buttons are just buttons...they get pushed. The SV-T has *more* functionality *assigned* to the knobs via the joystick capability, but so what? Doesn't mean it's necessarily in conflict with an icon or what have you on the screen, does it?

Someone please explain...

 

[swatson999]

[quote ]
To answer your question directly though, there would be significant engineering investment necessary to make HDX's UX work on Touch.
[/quote]

Well, it's your company, and you're doing a damned fine job of running it, and I *love* the Dynon products, so I don't presume to tell you how to do things...however, this might be a case of investing some NRE up front to avoid a) longer-term costs to maintain multiple product lines over time, b) simplify your code base and support tools (bug tracking/fixes, etc.), and c) avoiding orphaning a very popular product in a few years.

Just thinking out loud here. One solution (albeit more costly, for sure) would be to have either interface available for the SV-T units for a few years, until eventually the cost of maintaining the "older" style made it clear that everyone would need to switch to the "newer" one eventually. It doesn't have to be an option *in the unit*, but rather via download for software updates....

 

[NASA515]

"....everyone need to switch to the 'newer' one eventually...."

Aye, there's the rub. Win 7, 8 and 10 eh? Still running XP on several machines, skipped 8 and hate 10. After 35 years, my need to "switch" landed me with a MacBook Pro.

I don't presume to speak for Dynon. I like them as much as you do. But maybe they're trying to create a complete Product Line - SV SE, SV, SV-T, HDX - with different costs and feature sets. Like Toyota, say, with Toyota, Scion, and Lexus brand nameplates. If you want the extra goodies on a Lexus, you pay up for it. Likewise, SV-SE is barebones (no Map), and HDX has a lot more bells and whistles.

Dynon has invested heavily creating their Lexus. What I hear are people driving Toyotas saying they want all the Lexus features for their cars too. Dynon has spoiled us.

Bob Bogash
RV-12
N737G

 

[Langdon]

I'm a tester and have a lot of time with both SV-T and HDX.  They are different interfaces.  Whether HDX is "better" is a matter of personal opinion.  If Dynon wants to make the HDX interface available on Touch - that is up to them.  But ONLY if it is an OPTION.  You are arguing for an HDX interface on Touch when you really have not seen the full HDX package - which is still being refined.  I personally would not like to see Touch having the HDX GUI as its only interface.  At least in its current configuration.

Bob Bogash
RV-12
N737G

Hi Bob, thanks for your input, you guys do a great job removing the bugs before we get to use the product.
I'm really not too fussed about the interface, much of it I have used already as you have already seen in the photos above and I doubt I'd really use much of that as "there's more than one way to skin a cat" in SV and I'd probably use those options already available through the Touch and panels. Who knows I might change but we are all currently switching the same systems and the HDX just has a different way of doing it.
What I have made no secret of is my desire to have the screen layout. You've tested it, do you think it's an improvement or a waste of effort? To me it's the distinguishing feature, although the brighter screen must be nice.
One thing about me being a "pain in the butt" is that my arguing is not negative, but an endorsement of the direction Dynon are going.

I don't like the car comparison much. Frankly when I buy Dynon I'm thinking Lexus quality, it's a feature rich system that continues to upgrade.

 

[preid]

Langdon- My car comparison was simply that when a new model car comes out, it usually has improved features- those features are not necessarily compatible with the previous year. Dynon has a new model and I wouldnt expect that improvement to be compatible with a previous version, even if they could make it work, the only upgrade option would be to get the next model.. We had numerous upgrades through the years and the HDX is a new model not a continuation of a Skyview like the Touch is.

 

[NASA515]

You've tested it, do you think it's an improvement or a waste of effort?

Although HDX has been released, it's still a work in progress (as is SV).  The refining is still going on, and as a new system, there's obviously a lot more of that than in a more mature system.  Ask me again in a few months when things have shaken out more.

Bob Bogash
RV-12
N737G

 

[swatson999]

Langdon- My car comparison was simply that when a new model car comes out, it usually has improved features- those features are not necessarily compatible with the previous year. Dynon has a new model and I wouldnt expect that improvement to be compatible with a previous version, even if they could make it work, the only upgrade option would be to get the next model.. We had numerous upgrades through the years and the HDX is a new model not a continuation of a Skyview like the Touch is.

That's a hardware-centric view of things. Part of the beauty of software is that it can change indefinitely.

Unless there is some underlying *hardware* reason that the new interface can't be available on the SV-T platform (which would seem really odd to me), then there's no analogy to things like cars.

I quit using RSTS on a PDP-11 years ago...eventually, we all have to transition to newer operating systems and such...

 

[Langdon]

Bob, I'm constantly told that it's an entirely new system with separate software. Then I discover that it's not separate software but is included in ours but we are not supposed to access it. When accessed it works seamlessly, that is the large chunk you can use. The prerelease blog states it works side by side with the Classic. What are we to believe?
Now your suggesting I buy the new one, I've only just upgraded to the Touch after my Classic had a complete meltdown with the V14 release (received the replacement about a month ago). I tried doing an exchange for the HDX only to be told that they hadn't figured out if there'll be one. As the post above states, this is a software issue not a hardware one. And the software demonstrably works.

 

[NASA515]

I'm not suggesting anything, Langdon. Whatever floats your boat.

Bob

 

[Langdon]

Bob, given your experience with both systems, can you describe the HDX interface paradigms that seem to be the problem for compatibility please? I have seen an used those that control the Autopilot, Transponder, Com and a myriad of other things without difficulty but there must be some new thing that can't be controlled by the Touch, just wondering what it might be.

 

[NASA515]

I'm a tester, and as such, I'm privileged to see some of Dynon's creations during their development.  I'm somewhat of a curmudgeon and send them lots of Tough Love reports.  But I think I would be breaking their trust in me to be the conduit for confidential information.  This is a business at the end of the day, and they have competitors who would love to have them for lunch.

So, I can't really comply with your request.  My best advice is to wait until the HDX Users Manual is released on their website.  Then you, and the others, can review the features, compare them to the existing platform, and decide for yourselves whether you think the new system is something you will want -- or not.

Bob Bogash
RV-12
N737G

 

[Langdon]

Okay, the products available so I didn't think I was asking for secrets. But I respect your reticence.

 

[dnhill]

Dynon - your upgraded website has the following information regarding mixing displays:

The breakthrough, best-selling SkyView Touch system set the standard for marrying intuitive touchscreen control with a full set of hard, tactile controls for use in turbulence. SkyView Classic, SkyView Touch, and SkyView HDX displays can be mixed in an aircraft.

 

[dynonsupport]

Duane, thank you, that is a mistake.  We will get that changed. It should read something like:

"SkyView Classic, SkyView Touch, and SkyView HDX displays use the same modules and accessories. The displays cannot be mixed in an aircraft."