Ways to improve testing quality of TB

I wonder, how could I possibly donate to improving TB new features/bug fixes testing? The story with
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1036338
brought many unpleasant concerns. If bug of that scale could be left unnoticed until many angry comments started to flow in, there's room to improve QA of every fix/feature.
Personally, I can test daily builds. No problem doing that. Problem is, how to ensure that bug reports are taken into account? A single test on self-signed certificate, talking of the above bug, could indicate there's major problem with new release and perhaps postpone it till a remedy is found. Now, 2 months after the release, many users still have to use out-of-date versions, since no official report has been posted on whether the flaw will be attended to in foreseeable future.
I would like to use product (TB) knowing it's tested thoroughly, so that the cases like above could be avoided at all costs. What can I do for that, to know the results of my bug reports are indeed taken into account?

Thanks Konstantin for your willingness to look at the larger problem, and not just be angry about that one bug. I could talk with you for hours about the current issues in Thunderbird and what needs to be done, but my thoughts on the way forward are summarized in "Thunderbird Reorganization: Summary Plan" here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/tb-planning/Uoz5DOsz_KY
In short, Thunderbird needs to re-organize to be self-governed by the community, and then needs to raise funds directly from users to pay for a few full-time developers.
The Thunderbird community will be assembling in Toronto for a critical meeting to discuss the future in mid October 2014, and hopefully a concrete way forward will come from that. It will be many months though until any changes can be put in place. Right now, what is most helpful is for you to follow any discussions on tb-planning, and add your perspective. Testing is always appreciated, and might have helped in this specific case, but as you also noted there are not enough developers available to address the issues at the moment, so any long-term solution must address that problem.

Similar Messages

How to improve image quality

I've been using Motion for a couple of years now and although I'm no expert, I'm really pleased with the possibilities. I mainly use it to create animations that are then watched on a computer - either on a CD or on the web. I've also done a few animations that were later exported to a DVD. I must say, the quality of the image on a TV is terrible. It really looks like an amateur animation. I was just wondering if there was a way to improve the quality of the animation shown on a TV screen. Is it just a question of settings, compression or codec?

The color space on a TV is completely different, and much, much more restrictive, than that of a computer monitor. If you work is destined for NTSC or PAL TV, you really should use a calibrated monitor to view your project as it will be seen so you can make the right choices of color, title and action safe, and watch for interlace issues. You need to make sure your luma and chroma levels are broadcast safe as well.
Under the File menu is the new Share feature for exporting movies to different devices (in Motion 4, FCP 7)

Can improve picture quality in Dvd Pro?

I just made my first DVD in DVD Pro! Just a simple DVD with first track start.
I am disappointed about the quality.
I took it from 2k clips, assembled them in FCP, exported to Compressor, choose (MPEG 2) best quality max 90 min (Footage is only 2 min) and burned it. I am a bit ashamed to give away so soft images.....I was told, a dvd con only hold SD and not HD.
Is there any way to improve the quality?
I shot it on 4k. But most dvds I have seen have a better quality.
Dorian

no, I have not looked at a TV. Don't even have one... haha.
Only monitors. But I see all other dvds on my computer monitor.
Well, of course, it is downgraded to 720x480. But is there a way to tweak the quality a little bit? I used already 2 passes setting, all others are default settings in Compressor.

Improving Photo Quality

I have imported a photo which is 227 pixels wide by 321 pixels high. Apparently the quality of this image is too poor to have the photo made into a 4 x 6 print. Is there any way to improve the quality of this image in I Photo 09?
Thank you,
C.D.

Like TD said. Apple gives a low resolution warning when you are below 600 x 900 pixels for a 4x6 print:
http://support.apple.com/kb/TS1135
This works out to 150 pixels per inch (ppi). (This is a minimum resolution, a decent resolution is 220 ppi, and the rule of thumb is 300 ppi.) Your image would print at 321/6 -> 54 ppi, so you are way off the mark as TD said.
You can use something like PhotoShop Elements to resize the image to something like 600 x 900, but it cannot make detail appear out of nowhere, so the result will not look very sharp, it will appear pixellated.
It might be better to split the difference and use an image processing program to double the image to 454 x 642, and then print it at 3 inches by 4.3 inches leaving quite a bit of white border on the 4 x 6 print.
Of course, only you can decide what is acceptable or not. My MIL is very proud of prints she makes at the lowest size and quality setting on her camera (with lots of pixellation and jpeg artifacts), which I would never dream of showing to anybody else, unless it was a real photo of Bigfoot or something. 8^)

Improving recording quality?

Hey,
I'm pretty new with my MacBook so forgive me if the answer is obvious. I'm recording gameplay on my Xbox with iMovie, which I realise is never going to be amazing quality but it's what i'm using. Is there any way to improve the quality slightly? It's so bad you can hardly see it sometimes.
Thanks.

Yeah, I guess that is a game specific function. I've seen it on Halo.
So the limiting factor in what you are trying to do is the camera on the MacBook. It's good enough for simple video chat but to try and get all the detail shown on a screen from a video game, it's not really gonna cut it for that.
You will have better luck with a better camera, like a good digital still that can do high def video recording, or else a dedicated video cam. If you are really serious about this and need the best possible quality, you can hook up a PVR, like a TiVo, and do a manual capture of the component video output from the XBox. That would result in the best quality of all.

Improve DVD Quality on Mac Mini?

Hello,
I just purchased a brand-new Mac Mini from my local Apple Store. My goal is to get it all set up as a media center.
OK, I hoked it up to my 42" Sony Bravia via the HDMI cable, and it works just like a computer monitor. Excellent!
But I am wondering if there's a way to improve the quality of the DVD play.
When I put the DVD in the drive, it is really easy to start playing through the DVD Player app (which comes with OS X). However, I'm noticing that the video playback is not as "smooth" as it would be through a DVD player hooked directly to the TV set. Some scenes where there is action look just a bit choppy.
Are there settings I could play with to improve this?
Also, does anyone have suggestions for better DVD-playing software?
Thanks,
Matthew

mattschenker wrote:
Hello,
I just purchased a brand-new Mac Mini from my local Apple Store. My goal is to get it all set up as a media center.
OK, I hoked it up to my 42" Sony Bravia via the HDMI cable, and it works just like a computer monitor. Excellent!
But I am wondering if there's a way to improve the quality of the DVD play.
When I put the DVD in the drive, it is really easy to start playing through the DVD Player app (which comes with OS X). However, I'm noticing that the video playback is not as "smooth" as it would be through a DVD player hooked directly to the TV set. Some scenes where there is action look just a bit choppy.
Are there settings I could play with to improve this?
Also, does anyone have suggestions for better DVD-playing software?
In terms of DVD playing software for the Mac, there is -
Apple DVD Player
Front Row
VLC
XBMC
However an area you might want to investigate is the display refresh rate your Mac mini is using to talk to your Sony TV. DVDs come with one of three refresh rates, these are -
24 frames per second (or 23.976), this is what movies are filmed at and is also used on some NTSC DVDs
30 frames per second (or 29.97), this is what NTSC TV broadcasts use, and is also used on many NTSC DVDs
25 frames per second, this is what PAL TV broadcasts and all PAL DVDs use.
If you are playing a 24fps DVD on a TV running at 30fps, then this mis-match can result in the image appearing to jerk slightly every second or so. Similarly for other mis-matched refresh rates. Newer higher end TVs including most newer Bravias can run at all three of these rates, however your Mac mini video card needs to be configured to the appropriate settings which is not always easy. Furthermore, some of your DVDs might be at one refresh rate and some at a different one meaning you would have to keep changing. Dedicated hardware DVD players might do this automatically.
Some software like XBMC can automatically do this refreshrate switching, but possibly only for Linux or Windows. This is an area that is currently not well served on the Mac.
PS. A disappointingly large number of NTSC 30fps DVDs have errors in them such that the pattern (order) of frames is messed up. The process of converting a film from 24fps to a video (on a DVD) at 30fps is called 'Telecine'. If after this conversion, the video is then edited, this breaks the conversion pattern so the sequence of frames is disrupted resulting in jaggy images every five frames. The process of converting back from 30fps to 24fps is called inverse-telecine. This sort of error is easiest to see when single-stepping through frames one at a time.

Improving bitmap quality

Hi,
I am developing a website you can see here :
http://www.italiaconsulting.eu/showcase/gustar/
You will see that the head banner showing a picture with
scanlines and the red background of the main menu containing also
scanlines, has a bad quality. Some scalines are emphasized.
It appears as well with firefow as IE.
When I test it directly by launching it under Flash CS3
without browser, it is ok.
Formerly, with as 2.0, there was the "_quality" keyword which
fixed such quality problems.
But know, under AS 3.0, is there any way to fix that quality
issue, to improve it?
Thanks forn your help
In the library, I used no compression for the image.

ritpas,
> Thanks but quality didn't give me the expected result,
the
> "quality" is still bad when viewed in a browser.
It may be that I'm not seeing the poor quality you're
seeing. You
mentioned, in the original post, that the image had
scanlines. I see
vertical stripes in the top image that might be artefacts or
might be a
design choice. That sort of thing can happen if the imported
image is not
being displayed at actual size. But you say they are, and I
believe you, so
maybe you're seeing something else. The image doesn't look
poor quality to
me.
> To be honest, I don't like the way flash cs3 imports the
> fireworks elements, I think it was easier before to
modifyb
> theme directly under fireworks... but may be I missed
> something...
You can still modify them in Fireworks; that hasen't
changed. The
import gives you more control over what layers you'd like to
show in Flash,
but the original Fireworks PNG is still fully open to your
revisions.
David Stiller
Contributor, How to Cheat in Flash CS3
http://tinyurl.com/2cp6na
"Luck is the residue of good design."

Is there a way of improving my graphics on my early 2011 macbook pro 13"?

Does anyone know a way of improving the graphics capability for OpenGL with the Intel 3000 chips in the early 2011 MBP 13"? I bought it not realising the graphics chips had been downgraded and now as a result struggle to do any CGI work that I rely on my computer to do.

CHRIBAM wrote:
I'm more inclined to go with Ogelthorpe's advice (if I had the cash).
I agree with Ogelthorpe as well, the 15" and the 17" MacBook Pro also have dedicated graphics cards which give more performance than the Intel HD 3000 only graphics, which is really of MacBook type performance for consumer user. (playback of video and that's about it)
Still wondering why Apple went backwards for graphics in the 13", I completely missed the change.
I'm peeved at Apple for the fact that they didn't make a clear distinction of the disadvantages of the 13" with no dedicated graphics card then lumped it in with the 15" and 17" which do.
To Apple it's a matter of performance for price, the 13" scores 11 on Cinebench, the 15/17" score 30 and 45, so the 13" doesn't even come close. But it comes in the same silver case, the same "MacBook Pro" name, when in fact it's not so.
Apple knows people would be attracted to the performance of the MacBook Pro name in a small size factor, the price is also attractive to the younger crowd, the younger crowd are also interested in running 3D games, which need a more powerful video card.
Your not the first who's complained and feels burned, you trusted Apple was selling you a powerful MacBook Pro machine and you've got a consumer machine instead.
The 13" Mac laptop should have gotten it's own category, called it a MacBook instead and it should have come with white or black case. But that would have angered Intel most likely, who are trying to push integrated graphics on their CPU's so they own the whole show eventually.
It's going to take a long time before CPU integrated graphics is ever going to beat dedicated GPU graphics, because 3D game detail is always going to go up until it finally reaches 3D raytracing at 200 fps.
What Apple is doing is trying to get folks hooked on lessor quality/detail games, the ones you see on iPads and iPhones, and away from wanting rich detail which needs a powerful dedicated video card.
So Apple lumps the 13" MacBook in with the MacBook Pro line, try to force the issue, next they will try it with the 15", integrated graphics on the low end model. Then again only dedicated graphics on the 17" model and so forth. Eventually developers won't make as many 3D games for Mac's because most people buy laptops, cuts into their potential sales.
If you really want to run 3D games, you have to go with a Windows 7 desktop where the video card can be swtiched out.
http://www.cbscores.com/index.php?sort=ogl&order=desc

Is Apple going to manufacture IPAD with improved sound quality?

Is Apple going to manufacture IPAD with improved sound quality? I don't like to stream movies on IPAD due poor sound quality.

We have no way of knowing Apple's future plans. Speakers or headphones make a huge difference, maybe you can give either of them a try.

Does Encoding AAC Files with VBR on Improve Audio Quality ?

Does Encoding AAC Files with VBR on Improve Audio Quality ?
Are there Disadvantages ?
Bonus Question 1:
Usually, an 'auto' type encoding tool will screw up the natural flow of the music and miss subtle changes in the energy, volume, etc.. -stuff that is just to subtle for it to catch -Generally I wouldn't trust an 'auto' type setting to pick up this subtle stuff. Yet people say using VBR improves sound quality (and NOT file size). Why and how ?
Bonus Question 2:
What is the max bit rate VBR uses ? If I set my AAC encoder to 320 kbps and turned VBR off, wouldn't the sound quality be superior to encoding with VBR on (simply because the kbps are set at 320 the whole time...) ? Sure, the files encoded with VBR off would be larger, but wouldn't the quality be better ?
Bonus Question 3:
Lastly, I did a little test and encoded one song with VBR off and one with VBR on. The VBR song was 1.5 MBs bigger - Huh, I thought, is that increased file size the result of improved resolution throughout the whole song, or just one little section (haven't had time to listen to them)?
Message was edited by: temptemp9

These are some pretty tough questions. I like VBR encoding in general, as it does allow for more complex passages to take advantage of higher bit rates while less complex passages fall back to a lower bit rate, while keeping within fairly consistent file size parameters. Whether VBR yields better results at different target/average bit rates is another matter, and really requires that you encode and properly test output files before deciding on anything but "recommended" settings.
At maximum lossy bit rates of 320 kbps, it doesn't make sense to use VBR. If I recall, the LAME MP3 encoder presets actually preclude VBR encoding for the highest quality files, and the same may be true for iTunes AAC.
I have to admit that to speak with any certainty or confidence about the issues surrounding your various questions, one would really need to encode a bunch of files with iTunes from lossless sources and test them in software such as foobar2000. I could investigate this easily on my own PC, but I don't encode music at 320 kbps AAC, since I have enough disk space to just listen to lossless files. iTunes doesn't display dynamic bit rate changes as foobar2000 does, and I haven't come across any Mac software that does as good a job of allowing for proper testing as foobar2000 for Windows does.
If you really need definitive answers to these three questions, then I think your best bet would be to do as I've hinted and use iTunes and foobar2000 if you've got access to a Windows computer to do this testing and evaluation for yourself, or sign up for a user account at Hydrogenaudio and post the same message there.

Shift + R improves the quality of this image

Does anybody know how to get rid of ' shift + r improves the quality of this image', this is affecting most of the images i look at. It never used to be an issue??
Thanks

Hi
that is exactly what you see with some usb modem connections - the 'Modify Headers' add-on should sort Firefox out (at the expense of slower loading & more data usage).
a safari solution is mentioned here, but it's a bit old, with no documentation I can see. I'd hope there to be an extension by now which will deal with it - try https://extensions.apple.com/en-us/ or even the isp's pages may have a way to disable it.

Improving audio quality from a subscriber point of view

Hi,
I am building an application that requires audio chat. When the chat is happening between an Android user and a PC user, the PC user can hear clearly when the Android user speaks. However, when it is the other way around, the Android user hear distorted sound,with noises. Is there any way to improve audio received from a subscriber point of view?
Please advice, thanks!
Regards

Hi Raff,
The Android device is a Samsung Galaxy S i9000 and it is running AIR 2.6, attached below is a snippet of the code related to the audio i am using
<mx:Button x="121" y="700" height="34" width="117" label="Audio" toggle="true" id="audioButt"
click="(audioButt.selected) ? audioPub.publish(): audioPub.stop()" includeIn="LoggedIn"/>
<mx:Button x="242" y="700" height="34" width="117" label="Quality" toggle="true" id="audioButt1" includeIn="LoggedIn"
click="(audioButt.selected) ? audioPub.microphoneManager.encodeQuality = 3 : audioPub.microphoneManager.encodeQuality = 4"/>
<rtc:AudioPublisher id="audioPub" codec="{SoundCodec.SPEEX}" useEchoSuppression="true" silenceLevel="0" />
<rtc:AudioSubscriber/>
I think the problem is related to the script I am writing,I created a button called Quality to reduce the encodeQuality of my PC microphone, will it helps to improve the audio recieved from my Android device?Please advice, thanks!
Regards

How to improve render quality of FXG graphics (gradients, paths, alpha)

Hi
I created a FXG graphical asset in Illustrator. Basically, it has some radial gradients along paths in it. Overlapping gradients have alpha values and blend over. I would assume this is a pretty common use case if you create glassy/half 3D designs.
After importing this FXG into flex i can see that the code is clean, e.g.
            <s:Group x="0" y="0">
                <s:Group x="0" y="0">
                    <s:Path data="<.. some coordinates... >" winding="nonZero" x="0.5" y="0.5">
                        <s:fill>
                            <s:RadialGradient scaleX="213" scaleY="213" x="106.5" y="106.5">
                                <s:GradientEntry alpha="0.15" color="0xffffff" ratio="0.913963"/>
                                <s:GradientEntry alpha="0" color="0xffffff" ratio="0.932299"/>
                                <s:GradientEntry alpha="0" color="0xffffff" ratio="0.976023"/>
                                <s:GradientEntry alpha="0.15" color="0xffffff" ratio="1"/>
                            </s:RadialGradient>
                        </s:fill>
                    </s:Path>
                </s:Group>
            </s:Group>
There are several groups with the gradients in my application and they overlap.
In Illustrator it looks all very nice blended. In Flash 10/Flex 4 beta 2 the render quality seems to be not that nice, is there a way to improve that with some sort of setting maybe?
The left one is the Illustrator rendering, the right one is the flash one.
I tried:
stage.quality = StageQuality.BEST;
and added those lines to the addedToStage Handler of an AIR 2.0 application. It does not seem to make any difference.
Any help would be very much appreciated.
Thanks,
Philipp

I can't reproduce the path in the screenshot with the code you provided so I'm just blindly guessing, but can you try this on the latest nightly build: http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/flexsdk/Download+Flex+4
We recently made changes to how blendMode works on a Group that might affect this.

Is it possible to improve the quality of an MP3 file by converting to aiff?

itunes 11.0.4 (4)
I am contemplating the costs/benefits of purchasing digital downloads of mp3/mp4 files instead of purchasing actual cds. I am aware that the MP files are compressed and are thus lower quality. I have already purachased some digital music, from Amazon, and am now burning cds. While creating playlists and burning, I noticed the option 'convert to aiff'. I did this with one album. I now have doubles of each track of that album, the original mp3 and the converted aiff. The aiff file size of one song, for example, is 71MB compared to 12MB for the mp3 version.
Did my aiff conversion do anything to improve the quality of my mp3 files? If so, to what extent? E.g., how close is the quality to that of a cd? The added file size of the aiff must represent some difference. I am asking because I am skeptical that my converting an mp3 using itunes could improve the quality of that with which I began...i.e., the mp3 file. Is this conversion effectively 'uncompressing' the mp3?
If an aiff conversion increases quality, I see no reason to worry about mp3 compression. It would make sense, economically, to purcahse mp3s and then convert to aiff, saving time, money, and transportation costs.
Finally, is there anyway to convert to aiff just for the purpose of creating one playlist and then burning so that I do not have to maintain double files in my library? Thanks for answers.

All you accomplished by converting the file to AIFF was to make the file much larger. As AnaMusic said, there's no way to put back the information that was lost during the process of compressing to MP3. If you want CD quality, you'll either need to buy the CDs and import them yourself or see if the album is available through one of the download stores that sell music in CD quality or better, such as iTrax, HDTracks or eClassical. They've only been able to license a small subset of what's available, but you might be fortunate.
Regards.

How can I improve picture quality...now grainy after IOS update!

How can I improve picture quality...now grainy after IOS update!

Hello, dreamer5th.
Thank you for visiting Apple Support Communities.
Here are some troubleshooting steps that I would recommend going through when experiencing this issue. They are labeled for the iPhone; however, the steps also apply to your iPad. Also, make sure to test the camera in well lighted conditions as this can affect picture quality.
Camera isn't functioning or has undesired image quality
If the screen shows a closed lens or black image, force quit the Camera app.
If you do not see the Camera app on the Home screen, try searching for it in Spotlight. If the camera does not show up in the search, check to make sure that Restrictions are not turned on by tappingSettings > General > Restrictions.
Ensure the camera lens is clean and free from any obstructions. Use a microfiber polishing cloth to clean the lens.
Cases can interfere with the camera and the flash. Try gently cleaning the lens with a clean dry cloth or removing the case if you see image or color-quality issues with photos.
Try turning iPhone off and then back on.
Tap to focus the camera on the subject. The image may pulse or briefly go in and out of focus as it adjusts.
Try to remain steady while focusing:
Still images: Remain steady while taking the picture. If you move too far in any direction, the camera automatically refocuses to the center.
Note: If you take a picture with iPhone turned sideways, it is automatically saved in landscape orientation.
Video: Adjust focus before you begin recording. You can also tap to readjust focus while recording. Exiting the Camera application while recording will stop recording and will save the video to the Camera Roll.
Note: Video-recording features are not available on original iPhone or iPhone 3G.
If your iPhone has a front and rear camera, try switching between them to verify if the issue persists on both.
Hardware troubleshooting
http://support.apple.com/kb/ts2802
If the issue persists see the last section labeled Issue not resolved.
Cheers,
Jason H.

Ways to improve testing quality of TB

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for