SOT: "Docu-Centric" versus "App-Centric"

[mr_es335]

Good day,
I hope that this day finds you all very well!

I am very curious to know how many of you:

a) Launch SAW, [or SAC, for that matter...] by opening a data file [.edl or .mxs]? ...or...
b) Launch a data file [.edl or .mxs], which, in turn, launches the associated application [SAW or SAC]?

Also, if you happen to chose methodology one-over-the-other, I would be very curious to know why you have done so.

For-your-interest...and just-in-case you happened to be unaware of this point, the first [a], is referred to "App_Centric", and the second , is referred to as "Docu-Centric".

Thank you for your time and attention to the above. Both are very much appreciated!

[jmh]

I most often launch saw - then (more often than not) use the recent session menu to select what edl I want to open.

[UpTilDawn]

I most often launch saw - then (more often than not) use the recent session menu to select what edl I want to open.

Yup...

[ivanoff]

I most often launch saw - then (more often than not) use the recent session menu to select what edl I want to open.

+1

[cgrafx]

I most often launch saw - then (more often than not) use the recent session menu to select what edl I want to open.

also +1

[mr_es335]

Good day,
I hope that the day finds you all very well!

A couple of "things" should be mentioned here...

1) My question #1: "Is there anything necessary right-or-wrong with either of the aforementioned methodologies?"
* Your response #1:

2) My question #2: Just because the majority of folks employ a particular methodology - should that infer correctness?"
* Your response #2:

3) For as long as I have been working with computers, I have never employed any application - other than SAW|SAC, that is, wherein I employ the File option for launching subsequent "files".
* I have always exited the previous "file" - which in turn exists the "parent application", launching a subsequent "file" - whether that "file" be the same "type" of "file" of not...say Word, Excel...or whatever!
* In short, I very seldom...if ever...employ the app-centric methodology for the launching-and-exiting of "file data".!

4) Which brings me to my final question [#3], "Is there a potential 'issue' with the launching of SAW|SAC via the docu-centric method?" "If so, what might those issues be?"
* Your response #3:

Thank you for your time...appreciated!

[jmh]

4) Which brings me to my final question [#3], "Is there a potential 'issue' with the launching of SAW|SAC via the docu-centric method?" "If so, what might those issues be?"

In certain workflows it is probably better. Although once the initial edl open, it may be a bit faster to then utilize the menus to open subsequent documents as some portions of saw may not have to reinitialize, open dlls...

In my ahk script writing, I may be getting to the point of opening as many or more edls than anyone. Saw can get a bit funky sometimes and benefit from a restart. It also keeps a file lock on certain files from previous edls and the only way to clear that is to close the application. I am also modifying them in somewhat unconventional ways - but they either work or don't.

BTW the automated Recent-Session to build-mix(es) is coming along great. I've gotten sidetracked getting the replaygain calculation from lame which will then be used to normalize the bulk of the recording to some lower level like -12 dB. Then I will run it through another edl that can do a few things like levelizer-peak-limit any spurious peaks, then normalize to -1, then run lame to make the real mp3s. Not real masters - but good enough for a effortless mixdown of tracks you have worked on to preview in the car...

Anyway, your thread has given an idea that since the script already reads recent-session, it is trivial to have saw launch into the last edl, or be sitting at open recent-session - or both.

[Dave Labrecque]

I usually do like the others, though sometimes if I'm moving around in Windows File Explorer, I'll open an EDL directly from the file.

[Dave Labrecque]

Good day,
I hope that the day finds you all very well!

A couple of "things" should be mentioned here...

1) My question #1: "Is there anything necessary right-or-wrong with either of the aforementioned methodologies?"
* Your response #1:

Actually, your wording in the OP sounds like it's describing the same thing two different ways. But I think you mean A) open a SAW session from the data file or B) open SAW/SAC/MWS and then open the data file from within the program. Anyway, my answer to question 1), here, is no. Either approach can be useful depending on the user's current work-flow moment.

2) My question #2: Just because the majority of folks employ a particular methodology - should that infer correctness?"
* Your response #2:

Infer means deduce, not imply. I think you mean "should that imply correctness?" or "should I infer correctness of that methodology?" The answer depends on your definition of correctness. Correctness usually is based on an agreed-upon standard. But if, instead, you decide that correctness should be determined simply by majority or consensus, then there you have it.

3) For as long as I have been working with computers, I have never employed any application - other than SAW|SAC, that is, wherein I employ the File option for launching subsequent "files".
* I have always exited the previous "file" - which in turn exists the "parent application", launching a subsequent "file" - whether that "file" be the same "type" of "file" of not...say Word, Excel...or whatever!
* In short, I very seldom...if ever...employ the app-centric methodology for the launching-and-exiting of "file data".!

Ironic, because SAW may be one of the only programs with which you are not penalized (much) for taking the "docu-centric" approach. Many programs (most?) eat more time with all the needed opening and closing than if you just keep the program open and use the File menu.

4) Which brings me to my final question [#3], "Is there a potential 'issue' with the launching of SAW|SAC via the docu-centric method?" "If so, what might those issues be?"
* Your response #3:

A) time to open and close SAW/SAC/MWS, though, as I said, not so bad
B) can't think of any more

Potential advantage: if you're in File Explorer and launching SAW from an EDL file for which the paths for assets have changed (happens to me all the time when going back to older sessions--especially archival stuff), you're in a much better position, visually, to try to track down those assets for the needed repathing or, God forbid, renaming. It can be a PITA to have to navigate to the session path in a fresh File Explorer instance (which is often the case using the "app-centric" approach when opening an EDL whose audio or video file links are out-dated).

[Dave Labrecque]

Good day,
I hope that the day finds you all very well!

A couple of "things" should be mentioned here...

1) My question #1: "Is there anything necessary right-or-wrong with either of the aforementioned methodologies?"
* Your response #1:

Actually, your wording in the OP sounds like it's describing the same thing. But I think you mean A) open a SAW session from the data file or B) open SAW/SAC/MWS and then open the data file from within the program. Anyway, my answer to question 1), here, is no. Either approach can be useful depending on the user's current work-flow moment.

2) My question #2: Just because the majority of folks employ a particular methodology - should that infer correctness?"
* Your response #2:

Infer means deduce, not imply. I think you mean "should that imply correctness?" or "should I infer correctness from the popularity of that methodology?" The answer depends on your definition of correctness. Correctness usually is based on an agreed-upon standard. But if, instead, you decide that correctness should be determined simply by majority or consensus, then there you have it.

3) For as long as I have been working with computers, I have never employed any application - other than SAW|SAC, that is, wherein I employ the File option for launching subsequent "files".
* I have always exited the previous "file" - which in turn exists the "parent application", launching a subsequent "file" - whether that "file" be the same "type" of "file" of not...say Word, Excel...or whatever!
* In short, I very seldom...if ever...employ the app-centric methodology for the launching-and-exiting of "file data".!

Ironic, because SAW may be one of the only programs with which you are not penalized (much) for taking the "docu-centric" approach. Many programs (most?) eat more time with all the needed opening and closing than if you just keep the program open and use the File menu. Of course, then you may have to go find the file. So there's that. That's where Recently Opened Files comes in.

4) Which brings me to my final question [#3], "Is there a potential 'issue' with the launching of SAW|SAC via the docu-centric method?" "If so, what might those issues be?"
* Your response #3:

A) time to open and close SAW/SAC/MWS, though, as I said, not so bad
B) can't think of any more

Potential advantage: if you're in File Explorer and launching SAW from an EDL file for which the paths for assets have changed (happens to me all the time when going back to older sessions--especially archival stuff), you're in a much better position, visually, to try to track down those assets for the needed repathing or, God forbid, renaming. It can be a PITA to have to navigate to the session path in a fresh File Explorer instance (which is often the case using the "app-centric" approach when opening an EDL whose audio or video file links are out-dated).

[UpTilDawn]

Driving your points home with emphasis by posting twice, eh, Dave?

[Dave Labrecque]

Driving your points home with emphasis by posting twice, eh, Dave?

How is that even possible? Leave it to Daver.

Looks like in my effort to clean up my first attempt, I created a whole new post. How I was able to thread it differently than its predecessor shall remain a mystery. To me, anyway.

The first one has now been killed. Thanks for the heads-up. And apologies for this egregious oversight.

[jmh]

And apologies for this egregious oversight.

...you can say that again!

[Todd R]

Wow, I guess there are less than ten of us! Yikes

In my usage: No matter the application (.exe), I'm from windows camp and seldom, if ever, open a data file before opening the .exe

I don't think I've ever even tried to open a SAW .edl before opening the SAW .exe

Possibly the only exception is with Reason DAW, where very occasionally I might open a .rsn or .reason file to then "automatically" launch the .exe


I used to very often use the Recent Session FileList, yet lately I've been using Open Session more and more due to workflow/ folder structures

[Ian Alexander]

I always open SS, then click File, Recent, and the edl file. That's one double-click on the Windows Desktop Icon for SS, then three single clicks.

I think it would take longer to open Windows Explorer, Drive D, Client Name, Project Name, and find the edl.

[ivanoff]

That's one double-click on the Windows Desktop Icon for SS

Only one click if you put the desktop icon in the toolbar....

[mr_es335]

Ian

You stated, "I think it would take longer to open Windows Explorer, Drive D, Client Name, Project Name, and find the edl."

I have always been "project oriented"...and as a computer consultant since 1992, I have taught my clients to at least consider working in such a manner.

For example, I have created numerous "master" Word documents - all of which are set to "read only" status. I have also created various "master" projects folders, with each folder containing that which would be required to complete a particular project [Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and so on.]

The "long-and-short" of all of this is - is that I very seldom - if ever, employ "File, Open" and have thusly employed launching the application from the associated data file.

Hmmm, in consideration of Bob's employment of "Startup Command Line Options", I have, in reality, answered my original question, and will thusly, continue to employ the "Docu-centric" approach!

Thanks to all whom have responded....and will consider this posting as being "resolved".