I like the layout of this forum and the users here have been very helpful. I went to check out the forums on the magix website and it looks pretty sad :( Where will we all go to talk about future products??
Thanks vkmast . . . I can see no dots on the Composition Box.
+ Even without them I cannot re-size the Composition box . . . let alone make the Text larger when Composing.
I have (today) asked about AV Tracks . . .and used both BOLD as well as ITALIC features . .. but I use HTML markers . . . since the Composition Box offers no Mark-up alternatives . . .
Other Forums offer Text-Size, Bold, Italic and Underline . . . and if one is concerned about the "Look" of a Posting, this can be very useful.
- but that's a matter of discussion too.
In YR reply "harrie" is significantly larger than normal, I must presume there is a "Headline" option that I've not found ( will now read Sticky Post ) . . . and you underlined as well - - - nice!
Not sure about "FF" . . . . er?
The only issue for Magix, may be that they have existing Forums (Fora?) - so why would they want to have two pieces of software to manage? However, for convenience and maintenance of LINKS, +Customer Emails and so on . . . . moving this software's URL "should be an easier Task" - as it would keep the Sony-Software intact . . . as they will only need to EDIT the Text and change the Pictures as new Boxes are produced.
Nevertheless Magix has several software products that "overlap" - so soon enough these will be Rationalised - it all depends on the Profits each generates. I suspect the "Sony" brand is a real Coup . . . . but in the agreement would suspect there is a "Timeout" - so as to avoid conflict over trade-names.
If Magix is commercially clever, they will expand Spectral Layers, so folks like me can use it without the excessive "Pro" subscription that Adobe is forcing on "Cloud" customers. - if Magic forces "Subscription" then I think the Market will split - Camp One who can afford to Buy-Once ( maybe every two/three years as needs )....and PROs - who chose the Best Software - and in UK that's Adobe, because they have very cheap "Student/ Educational" offers - and once you have learnt it, why would you change - as PROs pass-on the cost.
Adobe is No 1 for Pro-Video ( IMHO ), and if it wasn't for "Price" we'd all use it ( Oh Dear! ). Their Tutorials for Audition are a model to yearn for . . . . our SL alternatives are plain, AND by comparison you want to delay Tea to watch their next one.....
BTW there is a UK-sourced "Cloud" offering called Forscene ,( also renamed something laughable-DYOR). Originally for News-Gathering, where roving reporters can sell their Media to different Channels (( AS I understand )), so each TV-channel can create their own EDIT, paying just for the clips they use.
However, If you are your own "Channel" (ie you pay the Sub only ), then it has all the Editing features you may want . . . Even via Tablet . . . so it has ( They claim) an easy interface.
I don't use this, but mention it as a fully-functioning alternative. . . . where they are "weak" IMHO is Audio - offering very few tracks.....and Titles were poor as this was intended to slip-into a NEWs Programme.
Text . . . I find I never use NewBlue - a nightmare to get super-text . . . when I really want to "Tell the Story" as Video . . . . so I suffer the poor Text within SMS - as I have written before - it's below the standard of early WP progs - 20 years ago!!!
For any would-be "Compositor" ( Printer's Term), SMS Text is woeful - er, IMHO.
Chienworks is probably right as usual.
I'm using Firefox, which has this option. I checked Chrome (which I don't usually use) and it has a similar option. My IE 8 (which I don't use either) gets the vertical scrollbar, if your message is longer but the box does not expand. All this in my Win7 HP.
Ahem...Since the default (Small) Edit window occupies about a quarter of the screen, you'd think the programmers would put some instructions/Hints on the blank area . . .those that can see, or know the Trick, don't need it, but others would benefit - it's no-cost option, for the sake of half an dozen lines of Program.
The Software that SC uses should be tested on Popular platforms - esp Windows, since that's the OS it is expecting ( Apart from Mac-versions, I know)....and this User is using the default Browser - why not expect that to work properly. I know the tiny box Is Microsoft's fault . . . (Lazyness?). . . .
SO it would be reasonable to expect any "extras" are incorporated in such a way that they are present/usable on all platforms. Where they aren't then a Hint, or Two would not be unreasonable.
Clearly, from this Thread NOT "Everyone Knows".
I use Win7 and am unlikely to change to Win10 - "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"
- in the same manner I still use Win-XP for emails, as Microsoft has not updated the driver for my printer - yet curiously the Keyboard, Mouse and Monitor still behave as expected over decades.....
One suspects it's just laziness and lack of Management-Control that allows programmers to get away with "just enough" -
So, it seems those dots are a feature of FF [Firefox] - and not SC laziness - except they should have known this and could have made arrangements for Users to benefit.
One might wonder why the FF default is the small Edit-Box . . . but that's enough to worry about for now....
Many thanks vkmast + MSmart . . . I'm now back with "CTRL 0" -- ooo-er that's VERY small . . . .++ fixes it.
BTW . . . . . not exactly "this thread" - but Magix...
I saw somewhere that Magix does have subscription Software....Sorry don't recall which....but not their main-stream Video Editor . . . . . well, not yet.
CTRL + works on the Browser I'm using . . . but NOT on my chosen Wordprocessor - also it works on Internet Explorer's, opening page - but curiously NOT on the Web-Address where mistakes are often made. I and L ( lower case) being particularly easy to mis-read - partly because the default Text-Font is Arial, which isn't exactly the best for readability, having no serifs.