Alternate Armstrong Boot-images

[(naw)mcx]

Loading bar at the bottom, I suppose this would work?

 

 

[dflemstr]

Loading bar at the bottom, I suppose this would work?


Wait, why wouldn't the original idea work?
It would be more complicated, but why not?

 

[(naw)mcx]

Loading bar at the bottom, I suppose this would work?

Wait, why wouldn't the original idea work?
It would be more complicated, but why not?

It was just incase, I don't know how these boot graphics work!

 

[viridior]

-1 on Powered by Angstrom... not everyone will be using Angstrom and I would like to community software, graphics, projects, etc... if you really want one that says Angstrom can I use one that is either blank or has Powered by Gentoo?

Otherwise, +1, I like the light drop shadow

 

[(naw)mcx]

-1 on Powered by Angstrom... not everyone will be using Angstrom and I would like to community software, graphics, projects, etc... if you really want one that says Angstrom can I use one that is either blank or has Powered by Gentoo?

Otherwise, +1, I like the light drop shadow

Alright, that's a very good point, I never thought of that. I'll edit both version tomorrow, I'm think I'm going to bed.
edit: Is the boot screen not included with the OS?

 

[Mr.Gonzo]

(naw)mcx i must say i like the two color pandora screen.
Simple... and nice!
No need for loading bars.

Who did that nice pandora logo thing with hearts ?
it would be nice to see one from him with the Rainbow thing being the loading bar. ^^

 

[Kramy]

Keep in mind the DPI of the screen.

Actual size will be something like this:

CODE
http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/3295/pandoraexample.jpg

 

[Vorporeal]

If the loader supports image transparency and horizontally drawing an image as the loading bar, the orange->blue loading pandora words would work fine. Something tells me that you can't do that though...

 

[dflemstr]

Usually you have to draw the loading bar/progress indicator/whatever with C code. An image for that sometimes isn't possible. Now, I still don't know exactly how Ångström does this, but it would also be horribly slow to draw a masked image every frame, so it should imo be avoided.

If you need an example on how this has been done before, look at the UbuntuStudio usplash screen (search on youtube or something).

 

[arrrgh]

It could have two images exactly the same, except the second one has the progress bar full, so you just draw the right amount of the second image each time.

 

[dflemstr]

It could have two images exactly the same, except the second one has the progress bar full, so you just draw the right amount of the second image each time.

...and then you would have a 2mb big boot screen.
Optimization is very important when doing this kind of thing. And, if it is possible with C code, why not do it in C code?

 

[arrrgh]

My idea was actually for the filling-up-the-pandora-logo-text-progress-bar idea. For a standard progress bar your idea would be better.

 

[dflemstr]

My idea was actually for the filling-up-the-pandora-logo-text-progress-bar idea. For a standard progress bar that would be better.

Got you the first time
But find some video of the UbuntuStudio splash screen. There you'll see how it looks when done in C code (progress bar in the text).
It's not any different when it comes to difficulty compared to your 2-image-idea, it's just that it will be alot smaller. And it looks exactly the same, will lag less, will flicker less, and will be less CPU hungry.

 

[arrrgh]

True. But will the bootloader code have stuff to deal with antialiasing? Not that it really matters

 

[dflemstr]

True. But will the bootloader code have stuff to deal with antialiasing? Not that it really matters

It will have whatever you want it to have
You could theoretically have a OpenGL bootloader with shaders etc.
Yes, it would take ages to load, be huge, and slow down the boot process by 75% but it would be possible

 

[arrrgh]

Best to just use a solid colour for the letters, then. Any jaggies will be barely visible on the Pandora's screen.

 

[GuSec]

It could have two images exactly the same, except the second one has the progress bar full, so you just draw the right amount of the second image each time.

...and then you would have a 2mb big boot screen.
Optimization is very important when doing this kind of thing. And, if it is possible with C code, why not do it in C code?

now(mcx) pic is 3,3K. Double that and you get 6,6K. Add some code and you get a few kilobytes more. It's certainly not 2MB. Excuse me if I get it wrong, if it's not possible to implement two GIF:s and a bit of code like this, but I'm pretty sure it is.

 

[dflemstr]

It could have two images exactly the same, except the second one has the progress bar full, so you just draw the right amount of the second image each time.

...and then you would have a 2mb big boot screen.
Optimization is very important when doing this kind of thing. And, if it is possible with C code, why not do it in C code?

now(mcx) pic is 3,3K. Double that and you get 6,6K. Add some code and you get a few kilobytes more. It's certainly not 2MB. Excuse me if I get it wrong, if it's not possible to implement two GIF:s and a bit of code like this, but I'm pretty sure it is.
I am also pretty sure it is. However, why do it the heavy-weight way? If there is a faster, less CPU-stressing way, why not take it?
The end result will be the same anyways.

 

[Vorporeal]

Holy crap guys. Stop forgetting about the fact that we're talking about ANGSTROM boot images, not BIOS boot images. Angstrom already has something in it for showing a boot image, the best thing would be to use (or slightly modify) that. There's no reason to write any code for doing the displaying if we're not making BIOS boot images.

 

[dflemstr]

Holy crap guys. Stop forgetting about the fact that we're talking about ANGSTROM boot images, not BIOS boot images. Angstrom already has something in it for showing a boot image, the best thing would be to use (or slightly modify) that. There's no reason to write any code for doing the displaying if we're not making BIOS boot images.

Most boot splashes actually aren't iamges, but instead C modules. Why is everyone so afraid of C all of a sudden?
Look at Ubuntu: C modules in USplash.
Look at Fedora: C modules in Plymouth.
There are some exceptions, like Splashy, that use XML files for boot splashes, but almost all OSs I've seen so far use some kind of compiled code module for splashes (and none of them just use plain images, with nothing else). Which is a Good Thing®, because it means that your splashes won't lag.
You can of course use images in that C code, so it's not like stuff becomes more complicated just because you have to write a C module.

Now, leave the implementation of the splash animation to the programmers and continue spitting out more ideas (Just don't expect it to be possible to drop a .psd in some folder and just use it as a splash anim.)