Whatever became of 'iFlyEFB'

[mstanton]

Last year at OSH (Oshkosh), I began worked with support personnel to begin Beta testing a 'new' product called 'IFlyEFB'. I worked with it several months before I got busy with other stuff and had to set it aside. I really liked the way it was going and the newer interface.
Now I understand that the iFlyGPS app has renamed itself iFlyEFB, but it does not look at all like the iFlyEFB app I was testing. In fact, it looks like the 'old' iFlyGPS version. (I did read the notes on the name change.) Has the earlier effort been abandoned? If not, what is the plan to move to the version of iFlyEFB I was testing?

 

[Cobra]

Walter or Brian may want to add some information, but I'll take a hack at answering your question.

Adventure Pilot was feeling constrained by continuing development for the WindowsCE-based portable iFly devices. The limits of the hardware capability on those devices had been reached, and trying to maintain a (mostly) common code base for all the platforms they support (WinCE portables, Android, iOS, and Windows) meant that WinCE as the lowest-common-denominator was constraining what AP could do with the other platforms.

So they decided to drop development for the WinCE devices and focus on just Android and iOS. (At the time, even Windows support was going to be dropped.) Since they were making a clean break of things, they also transitioned to a new development environment that they expected to be better for the Android and iOS development they planned to pursue. AP decided to mark this occasion with a new name for the product: iFly EFB, instead of iFly GPS, to emphasize that the product had grown from its original "moving map" roots and was now a full-featured EFB.

However, after spending much time and effort in this new development environment, it became clear that the new dev env was not the shining unicorns and rainbows experience AP had expected. There were way more pits and ogres and dragons there than they had been led to believe by the marketing for the dev env product.

So AP eventually made the painful (but I think correct) decision to abandon the new dev env and iFly EFB product that had been developed there, and revert back to the last version of iFly GPS and the original development environment (and to return Windows support also). AP realized that just by dropping the WinCE support, they could implement a lot of what they had intended to do with their initial vision of iFly EFB just by continuing to build off of iFly GPS in the original development environment that they were very familiar with, while avoiding the pits, ogres, and dragons that plagued them in the other dev env they tried.

So yes, the "original" iFly EFB beta product has been abandoned, in favor of the iFly EFB product you see today. However, AP's intention is to incorporate much of what they had done/planned to do with the original beta into this second iteration of EFB. So, eventually (I think in the short-to-medium term), you can expect to see improvements in graphical performance (because the GPUs in modern tablets can now be leveraged; the WinCE devices didn't have such capability, which is an example of the kind of constraints WinCE was placing on Android/iOS development), support for native OS keyboards and cut-and-paste functions, freshened up UI design, etc., as well as the continuing efforts to add more features and capability to the product.

 

[mstanton]

Wow! Just. Wow.
That was just about the BEST answer to this question I could have possibly hoped for. It was frank, open, doesn't appear to have ANY spin (rare these days), and honest. Inspires my trust as well. Bravo.
Companies, like individuals, make mistakes. I'm glad AP was able to pull the plug before it got too far down a 'sucker hole'. Lesson learned.

My remaining comment is this: My sincere hope is that some/all of the GUI of the version I saw can be somehow merged with the existing version. It was gorgeous, and in only a few minutes, I'm sure most all would love it.

P.S. I think there's a reason they called it 'wince"

 

[mikeb7323]

Yeah I agree. I've used iFly GPS for many years and appreciate the improvements they make and they even implemented an idea I had for it. However I had the beta of the blue logo iFly EFB and man the interface was SO much nicer to look at. I just really loved the refined look of it. I wish they could at least make the styling of the Beta EFB

 

[Cobra]

My remaining comment is this: My sincere hope is that some/all of the GUI of the version I saw can be somehow merged with the existing version. It was gorgeous, and in only a few minutes, I'm sure most all would love it.

Yeah I agree. I've used iFly GPS for many years and appreciate the improvements they make and they even implemented an idea I had for it. However I had the beta of the blue logo iFly EFB and man the interface was SO much nicer to look at. I just really loved the refined look of it. I wish they could at least make the styling of the Beta EFB

Just making sure you guys saw this part of my post:

So, eventually (I think in the short-to-medium term), you can expect to see improvements in graphical performance (because the GPUs in modern tablets can now be leveraged; the WinCE devices didn't have such capability, which is an example of the kind of constraints WinCE was placing on Android/iOS development), support for native OS keyboards and cut-and-paste functions, freshened up UI design, etc., as well as the continuing efforts to add more features and capability to the product.

 

[mikeb7323]

Just making sure you guys saw this part of my post:

Yeah I did, but still was disappointed they rebadged the old app with the new name before making the gui upgrades.

 

[Cobra]

Such work takes time. The reversion back to the GPS code base was not very long ago. The first-iteration demo of EFB had been worked on for many, many months before you saw it at Oshkosh. It's not just a copy-and-paste job to move it over, and AP is a small company.

 

[Brian]

Yeah I agree. I've used iFly GPS for many years and appreciate the improvements they make and they even implemented an idea I had for it. However I had the beta of the blue logo iFly EFB and man the interface was SO much nicer to look at. I just really loved the refined look of it. I wish they could at least make the styling of the Beta EFB

Since it had been about 3 years since iFly GPS was progressed, we are playing catch-up currently on feature gaps. We felt that users will be more satisfied by seeing "new life" in the form of features, rather than look/feel -- starting out.

Cobra is 100% correct, that us letting go of WinCe will fully enable us to revamp the look/feel/modernization of the UI/graphics, making proper use of the GPU. With our WinCE device, we had much older/legacy graphics, that didn't even support transparency, and was limited to 16 bpp, and nearly all of our graphics (except EFIS 3D) was implemented with C++ running on the CPU. Our next move soon, is to first translate our existing UI over to using the much-much-faster GPU, while relieving the bulk of CPU load. Once that's done, we can transition over to more modern/higher-resolution/beautiful graphics, as you saw with the original EFB.

If YOU want to help us to prioritize "Look/Feel/Appearance/Aesthetics" over adding functionality - you can add a Feature Request thread, and lobby for upvotes. (or is there already one there?) -- These votes will influence our prioritization of work.

 

[MazdaManiac]

If YOU want to help us to prioritize "Look/Feel/Appearance/Aesthetics" over adding functionality - you can add a Feature Request thread, and lobby for upvotes. (or is there already one there?) -- These votes will influence our prioritization of work.

Dunno. Is there?
Seems like if you cared about it, you would know if there was one! lol

I guess I'll go start one.

Do you want it here or in the BETA forum?

 

[Cobra]

You want it here or in the BETA forum?

Here: Feature Requests

 

[avflyguy]

Doesn't really matter what section of a forum, just make one... I'm sure there will be a LOT of upvotes for the beautiful graphics that the EFB Beta showed.

 

[MazdaManiac]

Doesn't really matter what section of a forum, just make one... I'm sure there will be a LOT of upvotes for the beautiful graphics that the EFB Beta showed.

Already did.
Not a single vote.

 

[Hook]

MM: is that the Feature Request titled "Smooth Panning"? That is such a specific request about just one aspect of the GUI that you're rightfully not going to get much of a response. I think in the post itself you broaden it out to request an overall better GUI, but the title is very specific.

If you want to campaign for a better GUI, maybe even specifically the GUI of the previous incarnation of "EFB", then that's what you should clearly state in the title. Something like "Improve the Graphical User Interface", or "Implement the Graphical Interface of the previous version of EFB". Also be sure to ask for votes in the post.

I think a bunch of people want to see the UI prioritized higher. But maybe not. Let's see.

 

[Cobra]

I don't think it matters. The UI improvements are already on APs roadmap and with a pretty high priority, if I understand correctly. I doubt we need a feature request to get this update prioritized.

 

[MazdaManiac]

^^ This.
That's why my request was so specific.
The choppy panning of iFly is, in my opinion, it's absolute worst feature.
It makes it truly difficult to find things on the map sometimes.
Just panning from my current location to something the next state over with the same amount of swipe can yield a jump thousands of miles in just about any possible direction, depending on how the rendering engine feels like managing its time at that moment.

 

[Hook]

Cobra: agreed, but see above, where Brian asked:
If YOU want to help us to prioritize "Look/Feel/Appearance/Aesthetics" over adding functionality - you can add a Feature Request thread, and lobby for upvotes

 

[Don Maxwell]

^^ This.
That's why my request was so specific.
The choppy panning of iFly is, in my opinion, it's absolute worst feature.
It makes it truly difficult to find things on the map sometimes.
Just panning from my current location to something the next state over with the same amount of swipe can yield a jump thousands of miles in just about any possible direction, depending on how the rendering engine feels like managing its time at that moment.

MazdaMike, do you find the choppy panning on one particular device, or on all devices? I ask because panning is usually slow and choppy on my 740 and 740b, and often on my wife's old iPad and sometimes also on my cheap, little, old Windows 10 laptop. But never on my recent iPhone and iPad. So in other words, could it be that your device isn't fast enough?

 

[Cobra]

MazdaMike, do you find the choppy panning on one particular device, or on all devices? I ask because panning is usually slow and choppy on my 740 and 740b, and often on my wife's old iPad and sometimes also on my cheap, little, old Windows 10 laptop. But never on my recent iPhone and iPad. So in other words, could it be that your device isn't fast enough?

Brian has said before that the choppy panning is due to the software design that puts all the load on the device's CPU, even if it has a GPU that could speed up the graphical performance. This was for code-commonality with the older 7xx devices, and is a prime example of how those devices were constraining iFly on more modern devices.

"Choppy" may be in the eye of the beholder. But for instance, when you pan, you might see the screen "blink" as it gets redrawn. You'll also notice that the map is not always redrawn as you pan--often you pan and reveal a blank part of the map, then when you remove your finger iFly populates the blank space with map data. It's just not a smooth, seamless experience, and this behavior occurs on all (of my) devices, even the most modern ones.

Almost every tablet and phone today has a GPU that can be leveraged to both speed up graphics performance and offload that task from the CPU, freeing _it_ up for other work

 

[Brian]

The issue we've had with prioritizing "look/feel/aesthetics" upgrades is that when we poll - we're polling current customers who are already OK/used-to the current look/feel. So when they see this feature request, their first reaction is "but if you do THAT, then that steals from your time for giving us Functional feature upgrades" -- and so it loses out when polling.

The thing we're trying to NOT ignore is the "unspoken value" of making this upgrade. It matters more than most admit, and matters even MORE for getting more adopters. When someone perusing for tools sees a 1990's-looking app -- they're done before they ever got started.

===
The order of priority we're looking at:

1. Map Upgrades - Speed/panning -- and the resolution/style of the Terrain Highlights/Shading, as well as the Vector-Mode VFR coloring.
Now that we've cutting loose WindowsCE, this becomes fairly easy, and so it prioritized first.

2. General UI upgrades - rounded buttons, more use of transparency, anti-aliasing, etc... Just to get rid of most of the 1990's look/feel.
(This is ALSO enabled by us dropping WindowsCE.)


===
Then porting in some of the new features form EFB, such as:
1. Flight Plan form mode that is split-screen so that you can see the map while editing the flight plan (of course, also keeping the more detailed full screen mode to, making toggling easy).
2. Possibly bring over the dual-map mode (instead of forcing one side to be EFIS)... I'm not sure how useful this feature really was for EFB.

The rest, TBD.

 

[Hook]

If you're playing around with Vector Mode, can you please show Class B Mode C veil in that mode? It's a requested feature.

 

[Cobra]

The issue we've had with prioritizing "look/feel/aesthetics" upgrades is that when we poll - we're polling current customers who are already OK/used-to the current look/feel. So when they see this feature request, their first reaction is "but if you do THAT, then that steals from your time for giving us Functional feature upgrades" -- and so it loses out when polling.

The thing we're trying to NOT ignore is the "unspoken value" of making this upgrade. It matters more than most admit, and matters even MORE for getting more adopters. When someone perusing for tools sees a 1990's-looking app -- they're done before they ever got started.

===
The order of priority we're looking at:

1. Map Upgrades - Speed/panning -- and the resolution/style of the Terrain Highlights/Shading, as well as the Vector-Mode VFR coloring.
Now that we've cutting loose WindowsCE, this becomes fairly easy, and so it prioritized first.

2. General UI upgrades - rounded buttons, more use of transparency, anti-aliasing, etc... Just to get rid of most of the 1990's look/feel.
(This is ALSO enabled by us dropping WindowsCE.)


===
Then porting in some of the new features form EFB, such as:
1. Flight Plan form mode that is split-screen so that you can see the map while editing the flight plan (of course, also keeping the more detailed full screen mode to, making toggling easy).
2. Possibly bring over the dual-map mode (instead of forcing one side to be EFIS)... I'm not sure how useful this feature really was for EFB.

The rest, TBD.

I'm not sure there are a lot of old timers clamoring against the UI upgrades. I think most folks are all for them. There are a few features / bug fixes that have been requested for years that I think many folks are continuing to be disappointed not to see--glide rings, ADSB Weather features, and TFR displays immediately come to mind, though there are also others--but for instance while I think we all appreciate the W&B add, I don't think a huge fraction of the current user base was thrilled to see that instead of UI improvements.

I think most of the current users want AP to continue to be a going concern and want to see iFly continue to get better. Part of what enables that is growing the user base. I think a lot of potential users are (and have been) turned off by the dated look and feel of the product, and don't stick with it long enough to give it a chance. Thus, I think a lot of the current users understand the UI improvements will ultimately contribute to a better product in the long run.

But there are also practical aspects of "UI improvements" that go beyond aesthetics. Being able to use native device keyboards, native device cut-and-paste functions, and other native device UI features that have long been denied to iFLy users is something that a lot of us are desperately looking forward to.

I for one haven't been reiterating my desire for those UI improvements because I thought AP was already committed to bringing those out in the short- to medium-term timeframe. If you're telling me that my silence has been misinterpreted as apathy, then let me be clear:

PLEASE BRING ON THE UI IMPROVEMENTS--ESPECIALLY ENABLING USE OF NATIVE OS KEYBOARDS AND CUT-AND-PASTE BUFFERS--SOONER RATHER THAN LATER.

 

[Brian]

If you're playing around with Vector Mode, can you please show Class B Mode C veil in that mode? It's a requested feature.

Pushing this to Walter, as easy-low-hanging fruit.

 

[MazdaManiac]

MazdaMike, do you find the choppy panning on one particular device, or on all devices? I ask because panning is usually slow and choppy on my 740 and 740b, and often on my wife's old iPad and sometimes also on my cheap, little, old Windows 10 laptop. But never on my recent iPhone and iPad. So in other words, could it be that your device isn't fast enough?

This is a Samsung S7, which is still one of the fastest Android tablets available. (However, the performance is exactly the same on my S2 tablets.)

This is a comparison of iFly to FltPlan GO.




As you can see, iFly controls "grey-out", pinch/expand does not always center, panning transitions by reveal instead of slide and zooms have to resolve after release instead of during the zoom.

I understand that this is a result of the CE legacy, but I can assure you that this is, by FAR, the single biggest disqualifying observation made by people to whom I demo iFly.

Its difficult to point out on the ground the best features of iFly when the observer is completely distracted by the throw-back graphics.

 

[mstanton]

Already did.
Not a single vote.

And I don't check this forum often...

 

[MazdaManiac]

And I don't check this forum often...

Wasn't in this one - its in the "feature requests" forum.

https://adventurepilot.community.forum/forums/feature-requests.8/

Or do you mean this board altogether?