Skype 6.21 Preview: Looks terrible on Surface

Hi,
I just got a Surface Pro 3 and the latest version of Skype still does not seem to support DPI scaling properly. This makes it look very ugly on a premium Microsoft product.
Secondly, the interface is currently not very usable with touch. The modern app is of course aimed at that, but the desktop app provides much more functionality that I would like to keep. The UI should respond to touch events and scroll instead of selecting as it does currently, e.g. in the chat window or the contacts pane (the Contact pane is in fact impossible to scroll with a finger at all).

My feedback: I don't want this. Ever.
I don't want this text-bubble bullcrap. It's cluttering and annoying to look at. I don't want to see these tiny versions of avatars either, they're cluttering and won't be very visible either way. If I want to look at their avatar, I will click on their profile or talk to them 1:1. Actually, I do indeed enjoy the look of the current skype. Minimalistic. My only problem with your mess is that it's 100% WHITE. It burns the eyes and causes actual pain to tab into.
I cannot imagine how this UI is going to work out in large group chats. I'm in multiple, and all I can see is hell. Especially with image previews like this? Plain and simple, you're asking for disaster.
Why do you, Microsoft, continue to give us things we don't ask for? Why has the suggestion for themes been "under consideration" for nearly a year? I don't understand, but at this point, I don't care. I really do hope a new IM/Call program emerges from the shadows and people start moving there. I'm beginning to really despise Skype, and for good reason.
If anything, please make this "dynamic new" garbageexperience optional. That's my feedback, and I pray that you will take what I say into consideration. Then again, you probably won't. Because you're Microsoft.
In any case, I'm going to keep my skype not updated for as long as I possibly can to avoid this calamity waiting to happen. Maybe you'll learn from the backlash of the last time you forced us to update and let us use the program the way we want to, as consumers.

Similar Messages

Why do my image previews in cover flow folder view option look terrible?

Recently upgraded to OSX 10.6 Snow Leopard and have noticed that image previews look terrible in the cover flow folder view option - work with image files numbering in the thousands and really need this option to work - dosen't seem to matter how long I give the machine to process the preview and can find no consistency in the file type or format the machine seems to have trouble with

~/Library/Caches. Quit all applications then delete this folder. If a normal delete doesn't work, do a secure delete (Finder > Secure empty trash {this will take longer})

PDF exports look terrible - white lines in text

I have been u sing indesign for years and years all of the sudden my pdf exports look terrible. The images are pixelated and the text has white lines
in it.
I used these pdf previews for my clients and I certainly cant use what Im getting from INDD right now. I have no idea what happened to cuase this.
Wish I could show you but any ideas would be great.
The following text has no formatting on it yet there are pixelated white lines? help?
Thanks in advance.

Wow - thank you for all the responses. Yes it still happened with different fonts, different sizes of font etc... So I looked at my export settings and noticed that it was set to High Quality Print - Modified. I Switched it back to High Quality Print and it appear to have cleaned it up quite a bit.
Thank you all for your speedy responses.

IWeb Album preview looks awful

I use all my albums from iPhoto, when I am in iWeb all the album preview look great. When I go look online at the published site all the album preview show pixelation, looks terrible. when I click on the album to view it it looks great same quality that I have in iPhoto. I did not have this problem before the upgrade.
What am I doing wrong?

Whoa! They look terrible in the larger mode. It may be that a smaller sized version is being used for the skimming album and enlarging it that big pixelates it tremendously. There are four image files for each photo in an album, micro.jpg, thumb.jpg. mip.jpg and web.jpg in increasing size from 4 KB to 68 KB. The web is the largest and generally is scaled to 800 x 640 or so.
In my test album the file that is used for the skimming album is the mip.jpg and is around 512 x 348 or so in size. I do see degradation of the larger skimmed inage but nowhere near what you're seeing. My test album is set to have no photos available for download.

Source and Program preview look good, AME renders linked aftereffects very poor

I have searched high and low but cant figure this out:
I have CS4 Master Suite installed on HPZ600 workstation Windows 7 Enterprise 64bit
Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5550 @ 2.67GHz, 2661 Mhz, 4 Core(s), 4 Logical 6GB ram.
I created a 720p PremierPro (PP) sequence. I added a “Black Video” then rightClick- replaced it with an aftereffects (AE) comp. I added several screen captures to the AE file and animated a few graphics over the images. When I jump back into PP the source preview (linked Comp) looks great, the Program preview looks good and when I Export media the 1st preview (still in PP) looks good. Once it opens in Adobe Media Encoder the quality (mostly text on white background) looks terrible.
I have tried endless combinations of settings and options with no luck. I render out the AE file and it looks great. Import it into PP, looks great. Send it to AME, looks like poop. If I take the images (used in AE) and import them directly into PP I get a good export in AME but I need them in AF to animate.
If anyone has any info that might help I would be greatly appreciative.
Thanks

No, but that does seem to be a good indicator. When the preview (AME) is bad, the rendered video comes out bad. When it is good, the video comes out good. I just rendered this. The preview showed about 1 second of good quality and then the busted look (with linked AE only, video was good). This is a 1280 x 720 png in AE with no animation or effects.
The linked AE is video2 in PP on top of 720p video in video1. If I create a new sequence and place (copy/paste from the old one) the linked AE alone it previews and renders great. Once I add the video (AE fades in over the video) and have 2 720p elements, the AE will randomly look bad.
Do you think it could be a RAM issue?
Here is an example: This is a rendered WMV about 20 seconds in.
Here is the same WMV 21 seconds in. It is the same image in AE. This quality shift was also identical in the AME window.
thank you for your time and info, I appreciate it.

Previews Look Off

I really like the functionality of LR ... I love the fact that my edits don't change my original files etc. I know this is the same as for DPP but Lightroom is a lot smoother app.
Anyway, now to the problem. I am finding that the previews are really poor. I've adjusted all previews to largest/best quality and refreshed the 1:1 previews yet when i examine them, I see a heck of a lot more noise/blotchness/color skews than when I open them in say DPP.
From my understanding this is because Adobe doesn't have access to canons RAW image details to a sufficient level as to allow 'correct' display.
Is there any way around this? I want to use lightroom but man it can make some of my pics look terrible.
Thanks

Hey Lee - thanks but my monitor profile is good. Honestly I think this is a problem with the fact that Adobe doesn't/can't use Canon's SDK since DPP looks fine. I just wish there was a way to set a quick default that would compensate for the delta as the image isn't just different but bad.
Jeff - I apologize if the level of detail i provided isn't to your liking. I knew when i wrote the entry i could write it more loosly and incur the wrath of a detail guy or write it more detailed and incur the wrath of a detail disagreeing guy (I've read enough forums and managed enough developers to understand the world of geek). As per my note to Lee, I think your evaluation is correct though on the Canon SDK being the (likely forever) missing link. I'm guessing that your comment on knowing the adjustment tools better is correct too ... my issue with this though is that i don't want to HAVE to correct an image just because the tool I use is not made by Canon ... makadasense?

RAW conversion look terrible

With the upgrade to iPhoto 6, RAW conversions from my D70 now look horribly noisy after increasing exposure. For that matter they look terrible when nothing has been done to them. What is going on!?
Left is Preview and Right is iPhoto with out any adjustments.
Powermac G5 Mac OS X (10.4.4)

If you're on the Mac, there was a problem with the update. Read this http://helpx.adobe.com/bridge/kb/acr-84-bridge-cs6-metadata.html

Quick movements on DVD movie has tracers and looks terrible

When I preview the movie before burning it everything looks fine. After I burn the DVD and view it, all quick movements look terrible... horizontal lines and tracers. Please help!
Thanks,
-Paul

Previewing a movie is simply a "link" to the uncompressed movie you have made. iDVD will compress this to MPEG 2 for DVD playback. It seems many are not happy with iDVDs compression schemes... HOWEVER, quick movements are the bane of any MPEG compression with any software. Although some software will be better than others. Why is motion difficult? DV, NTSC, is 29.97 frames per second. Basically 30 still images/second. This equates to 13GB/hour. Keep in mind that a SL DVD holds roughly 4.3GB. For playback on tabletop DVD players your material must be compressed to the MPEG 2 format (which also always it to fit on a DVD). MPEG 2 takes one reference picture about every 15 frames and then only records the motion difference between frames. So you go from almost 30 frames/second down to two with motion difference. So anything that has a lot of motion is very difficult for any MPEG compression because of the nature of the compression. If these are quick pans & zooms, I would suggest a more controlled pan & zoom. If the camera isn't on a tripod, I would suggest using a tripod. You could also make a disc image prior to burning the DVD and the disc image will actually be the compressed version as opposed to just previewing the sequence in iDVD.
Mike

QT format doesn't work, only dvstream. Resulting DVDs look terrible. Help!

I'm really frustrated with this. For years I've been using my Avid Xpress DV to edit and exported a host of movies during that time using the DVstream format and for the most part it's been acceptable. For some reason I never understood, any time I attempted to use quicktime movie as the format I have never been able to get it to work. The audio works fine, but the video is not there. It's either blank or I get a solid green screen. So, as I said I'd always used dvstream. The problem is I just did 110 minute African safari documentary and the footage looks great. But when I burned DVDs the compression looked terrible. The blacks become milky, there is very noticeable compression and it looks soft, a hollow imitation of the original DV format footage. Not at all the way it should look. I am using iDVD 8 on the "professional setting." I even cut the sequence in half to around 50 minutes and exported and burned a DVD and it looked EXACTLY the same. So I thought maybe I am using the wrong settings to export. I read around the web and was reminded of what others had been using as settings. Everyone seems to be using QT movies! I tried again to export and chose QT, picking avidDV as the video compressor and uncompressed audio. I used 720 by 480 (had been using 540) picked the recommended field (I believe the top choice) chose the 601 color etc and the same **** thing happens. In fact, when I preview the DVD in iDVD8 you can see that it won't display the video track while the audio track plays fine. I have the Avid codec installed in case that's an issue. I refuse to accept that this is the best I can get this DVD to look. It's an insult to all of our work. So I'd be tremendously grateful for any and all help or advice in this matter. I'm now sitting on my hands, at a loss to fix this. I do not have the option of using another program other than iDVD so please keep the response aware of this. Sure it;d be nice to buy a new program but it's not going to happen. THANKS!

I kind of suspected that beside the fact that I consider myself fairly smart about this stuff this was actually a fairly simple problem to fix and that in my panic trying to resolve this for hours and hours I was overlooking something obvious. Despite the fact that I thought I had put the avid codec manually into what I thought was the proper system folder, a download from Avid ti install the latest codecs into my macbook pro fixed it. Now I'm ready to burn and see if the discs look better. Fingers crossed...

Nef file corrupted but preview looks fine

Hi everyone,
That's the first time I get an error when opening an image in Photoshop and I dont really know what to do to get it to work. Its actually almost half my sd card that got corrupted, the preview image looks normal but as soon as I try to open it to start working on it, I get this error:
"Could not complete your request because an unexpected end-of-file was encountered."
Same thing happen in Lightroom, I even tried Picasa and always the same problem, preview looks normal but the NEF file does not open (Photoshop) Cant make changes (Lightroom) Open with plenty of lines, colors, etc (Picasa)
Is there a way to get past this error in Photoshop or at least be able to work on the preview files ???
Thank you for your help!

The preview you refer to is probably the jpg image the camera makes of image, as a camera can not display a raw image. This is called the embedded thumbnail.
So the NEF is probably hosed. This usually happens when a card is inserted that has been formatted with another camera. It is wise to format your card, in the camera, before each use.
The other posibility is that the transfer of imagaes from the card became corrupted. The safest way is to transfer with a USB card reader.

External Monitor looks terrible

I recently got ahold of two monitors, both DVI, to hook up to my 12 inch PowerBook for my setup at work.
On both of them I attempted to run as a mirrored displays as well as an extended desktop. I can verify that at least one of the monitors is high-quality and gives a nice crisp picture when attached to any other machine.
However the image coming from the PowerBook is pretty abysmal. The edges are dull, the colors are washed out and I'm really unimpressed with the picture.
I bought the 12" PowerBook because of the portability and because evetually I knew I would want to use it with a larger screen. Is this not the case?
Any ideas?

I've tried different profiles as well as calibrating.
They all look terrible.
It isn't an issue of the colors being off, it primarily has to do with the clarity of the picture. Both of these monitors I KNOW are capable of a better picture than they have with the PowerBook.

Text looking terrible in InDesign document...

I am running into an issue putting together a marketing report for my work. The small photo caption text (frutiger light size 8) looks terrible when I PDF it.
But in addition to it looking terrible when I pdf it, it also looks terrible in the InDesign document if I get too close to an image.
I have tried putting all the text on a separate layer that is on top of everything else (including anything that is a transparency).
The body text (which is frutiger regular size 9) looks totally fine.
I do have transparencies on my pages but I have to because my boss likes us to have drop shadows when we show sample document pages.
How can I fix this? The proposal document is going to be delivered digitally, so even if it prints ok that wont work because most likely it will only be viewed on screen.
These images show how the text changes depending on how close or far away I get.

Does it look bad in the PDF on screen only or also when printed on a high resolution device?
If the text is above all transparent objects than it is not a transparency flattening problem, although you did not tell us anything about your PDF export settings.
If it looks good on high resolution print but bad on screen only it might be an issue of the used font only. To be honest, on your screen shot I don't see the problem here what you mentioned. Could you link your problematic INDD and PDF here. Not the original file, it understnd that it is not possible for you, but a small file where you reconstruct this problem with a placeholder image and blind text, one page only to keep things small.

When I print a Word document to a shared printer, print preview looks fine but the printed page has too much blank space at the top and doesn't print the bottom few lines.

When I print a Word for Mac document to a shared printer (that is connected to my iMac) from my Macbook Pro, print preview looks fine but the printed page has too much blank space at the top and doesn't print the bottom few lines. I have tried to adjust the margins and the page setup settings but to no avail. It used to print fine until recently. Is there a way to fix it so that the printer prints what print preview shows?

I should add that when I e-mail this document to myself and print it directky from the iMac, it prints fine.

Dotted Stroke created in Indesign look terrible in pdf...

Help.
I'm creating dotted strokes in InDesign, which when exported (or distilled) to a pdf look terrible - no Anti-aliasing.
This can be fixed by creating the same shapes in Illustrator, expanding the stroke, then placing that file in InDesign. But that means each shape has to be re-created in Illustrator each time - which is not a good solution as I am setting up templates for other agencies around the world to use. Editing and creating these strokes in InDesign is the only solution. However, it doesn't seem possible to 'expand' the stroke in InDesign prior to creating the pdf...
...any ideas?
Thanks

This is a screen issue only, depending on the local Acrobat/Reader settings in antialiasing vector objects.
BTW: Don't use Distiller or any other Postscript like EPS anymore, use only export.

Mirroring (Mac Pro to TV) Watching videos from websites looks terrible

Hello! We are trying to use Apple TV to cut out cable, which is easier said than done at this point! One thing we are trying to do is watch content from CBS.com or Hulu.com (show that can only be streamed on a computer) on our TV through mirroring. For one thing the image looks terrible. It was very pixilated, delayed, and stuttery. We are hitting about a 15 Mbps download speed. We are considering returning the system if this doesn't work. Does anyone know any way to make it look better?
THANKS!

Got some links to the external videio card ?
Last one i saw was 100% diy and only worked partial under windows and not under osx at all

Skype 6.21 Preview: Looks terrible on Surface

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for