Following some discussion with Art Yerkes via email, I've been toying around with a resource editor and shifted XP's network connection configuration dialog around:
www.furrybeans.co.uk/stuff/netdlg.jpg
Note that this will not be the final dialog, nor will that exact one be used - I'm using a resource editor just so I don't have to painstakingly recreate each control just to see what it looks like. It's just convenient for laying out a prototype.
Ignore the image at the top left - that was there already.
Compare with XP or 2000's dialog and let me know what improvements you can think of.
-Andrew
I personally would start with a simple dialog that addresses the current state of networking. A dialog that had a radio toggle between DHCP and static, and the required static fields. IP Address, NetMask, Default Gateway, and DNS Server(s).
On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 14:01:33 +0100, Andrew Silver Blade Greenwood lists@silverblade.co.uk wrote:
Following some discussion with Art Yerkes via email, I've been toying around with a resource editor and shifted XP's network connection configuration dialog around:
www.furrybeans.co.uk/stuff/netdlg.jpg
Note that this will not be the final dialog, nor will that exact one be used - I'm using a resource editor just so I don't have to painstakingly recreate each control just to see what it looks like. It's just convenient for laying out a prototype.
Ignore the image at the top left - that was there already.
Compare with XP or 2000's dialog and let me know what improvements you can think of.
-Andrew _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
It looks too much of being copied. I don't like the idea of cloning all concepts of M$ (some are good, other can definitively be made better while staying compatible).
In my opinion the dialog should be reduced to what actually is possible. People dislike grayed checkboxes. It should be enhanced with time
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
Following some discussion with Art Yerkes via email, I've been toying around with a resource editor and shifted XP's network connection configuration dialog around:
www.furrybeans.co.uk/stuff/netdlg.jpg
Note that this will not be the final dialog, nor will that exact one be used - I'm using a resource editor just so I don't have to painstakingly recreate each control just to see what it looks like. It's just convenient for laying out a prototype.
Ignore the image at the top left - that was there already.
Compare with XP or 2000's dialog and let me know what improvements you can think of.
-Andrew _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
It looks too much of being copied. I don't like the idea of cloning all concepts of M$ (some are good, other can definitively be made better while staying compatible).
In my opinion the dialog should be reduced to what actually is possible. People dislike grayed checkboxes. It should be enhanced with time
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
Following some discussion with Art Yerkes via email, I've been toying around with a resource editor and shifted XP's network connection configuration dialog around:
www.furrybeans.co.uk/stuff/netdlg.jpg
Note that this will not be the final dialog, nor will that exact one be used - I'm using a resource editor just so I don't have to painstakingly recreate each control just to see what it looks like. It's just convenient for laying out a prototype.
Ignore the image at the top left - that was there already.
Compare with XP or 2000's dialog and let me know what improvements you can think of.
-Andrew _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
We are cloning Windows... right?
I argee about trying to make things better.
IMO the only thing I think could be infinitely improved is the top box - the "connect using" box. What's the point in having an edit box there? A text label would do fine, surely?
I had toyed with having the protocol descriptions as tooltips, or have a "description" button to the right to pop up information about a protocol....
Can you come up with a design?
Robert Köpferl wrote:
It looks too much of being copied. I don't like the idea of cloning all concepts of M$ (some are good, other can definitively be made better while staying compatible).
In my opinion the dialog should be reduced to what actually is possible. People dislike grayed checkboxes. It should be enhanced with time
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
Following some discussion with Art Yerkes via email, I've been toying around with a resource editor and shifted XP's network connection configuration dialog around:
www.furrybeans.co.uk/stuff/netdlg.jpg
Note that this will not be the final dialog, nor will that exact one be used - I'm using a resource editor just so I don't have to painstakingly recreate each control just to see what it looks like. It's just convenient for laying out a prototype.
Ignore the image at the top left - that was there already.
Compare with XP or 2000's dialog and let me know what improvements you can think of.
-Andrew _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
...
Can you come up with a design?
I don't know about others, but one thing that has always bothered me enormously is that it's hard to get an overview. Perhaps it would be possible to list all connections at once in a tree view for example, instead of forcing the user to open and close dialogs all the time. It might even work to put some of the options in this tree view. Or perhaps it would be better (as in more attainable) to just open property sheets next to tree view instead of forcing the user to navigate through multiple windows (first selecting the connection in "Network Connections" and requesting its properties, then selecting the desired item, click on properties, and then possibly even a click on advanced).
To illustrate my thoughts I've created a mock-up that shows a lay-out that would at least be an improvement over the XP layout for me: http://home.hccnet.nl/th.v.d.gronde/networkconnection.png For the mock-up source (Glade+Python, if anyone is interested in expanding on this idea): http://home.hccnet.nl/th.v.d.gronde/networkconnection.zip
You'll have to imagine the details like icons and so on, but it shows the general idea of putting all the connections in one tree view, which makes it easy to quickly navigate to the desired property page, to switch between property pages (of different connections) to compare settings and last but not least it avoids screen clutter! (try navigating to the list of IP addresses under Windows, you'll have four windows open!!!)
There would definitely be some details to fill-in. Like what to do when navigating to a different property page when the current one has been modified but not yet applied? But these issues should be possible to resolve, either by looking at what other people do or (when lacking satisfactory examples) by devising new solutions.
Nice design. I hadn't considered a tree-view!
Only thing is, I'm not sure if the tree-view is necessary - how many users visit the network config dialogs more than once in a blue moon to adjust something? I only ever delve in there if I'm testing a router for someone and have to change my subnet.
Also, I think the protocol-specific dialogs are actually in separate modules, and appear as dialogs. I could be wrong. But this would mean it'd not be possible to do as you describe :(
But as a compromise - if necessary - maybe it'd be an idea to copy the Firefox style of "preferences" dialog, with icons where the tree-view is, but have each icon represent a different connection...
Jasper van de Gronde wrote:
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
...
Can you come up with a design?
I don't know about others, but one thing that has always bothered me enormously is that it's hard to get an overview. Perhaps it would be possible to list all connections at once in a tree view for example, instead of forcing the user to open and close dialogs all the time. It might even work to put some of the options in this tree view. Or perhaps it would be better (as in more attainable) to just open property sheets next to tree view instead of forcing the user to navigate through multiple windows (first selecting the connection in "Network Connections" and requesting its properties, then selecting the desired item, click on properties, and then possibly even a click on advanced).
To illustrate my thoughts I've created a mock-up that shows a lay-out that would at least be an improvement over the XP layout for me: http://home.hccnet.nl/th.v.d.gronde/networkconnection.png For the mock-up source (Glade+Python, if anyone is interested in expanding on this idea): http://home.hccnet.nl/th.v.d.gronde/networkconnection.zip
You'll have to imagine the details like icons and so on, but it shows the general idea of putting all the connections in one tree view, which makes it easy to quickly navigate to the desired property page, to switch between property pages (of different connections) to compare settings and last but not least it avoids screen clutter! (try navigating to the list of IP addresses under Windows, you'll have four windows open!!!)
There would definitely be some details to fill-in. Like what to do when navigating to a different property page when the current one has been modified but not yet applied? But these issues should be possible to resolve, either by looking at what other people do or (when lacking satisfactory examples) by devising new solutions.
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
Only thing is, I'm not sure if the tree-view is necessary - how many users visit the network config dialogs more than once in a blue moon to adjust something? I only ever delve in there if I'm testing a router for someone and have to change my subnet.
I agree, but would it hurt them? I feel Windows is just a bit too much like a maze in this case.
Also, I think the protocol-specific dialogs are actually in separate modules, and appear as dialogs. I could be wrong. But this would mean it'd not be possible to do as you describe :(
In some cases standard dialogs appear to be used along with information in the registry that defines what parameters there are, their types and values (in particular the RealTek driver I use seems to do this). This scheme seems to not very complex than the previous one and should lend itself very well to displaying in custom dialogs. I don't know how common this is though and whether it's only for nic's or also protocols for example.
For displaying custom property sheets there appears to be an INetCfg interface on (recent versions of?) Windows, but I can't say I fully understand the details of what this and would not allow you to do (what exactly qualifies as a "network component" for example). And I have no idea at all whether something like this is supported by ReactOS.
But as a compromise - if necessary - maybe it'd be an idea to copy the Firefox style of "preferences" dialog, with icons where the tree-view is, but have each icon represent a different connection...
If only one level is feasible this might indeed not be such a bad idea (although it might get a little clumsy if it contained more than a few entries).
I would love to see a new UI for ReactOS. I hate the Win95 / NT look.
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 16:29:04 +0200, Jasper van de Gronde th.v.d.gronde@hccnet.nl wrote:
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
Only thing is, I'm not sure if the tree-view is necessary - how many users visit the network config dialogs more than once in a blue moon to adjust something? I only ever delve in there if I'm testing a router for someone and have to change my subnet.
I agree, but would it hurt them? I feel Windows is just a bit too much like a maze in this case.
Also, I think the protocol-specific dialogs are actually in separate modules, and appear as dialogs. I could be wrong. But this would mean it'd not be possible to do as you describe :(
In some cases standard dialogs appear to be used along with information in the registry that defines what parameters there are, their types and values (in particular the RealTek driver I use seems to do this). This scheme seems to not very complex than the previous one and should lend itself very well to displaying in custom dialogs. I don't know how common this is though and whether it's only for nic's or also protocols for example.
For displaying custom property sheets there appears to be an INetCfg interface on (recent versions of?) Windows, but I can't say I fully understand the details of what this and would not allow you to do (what exactly qualifies as a "network component" for example). And I have no idea at all whether something like this is supported by ReactOS.
But as a compromise - if necessary - maybe it'd be an idea to copy the Firefox style of "preferences" dialog, with icons where the tree-view is, but have each icon represent a different connection...
If only one level is feasible this might indeed not be such a bad idea (although it might get a little clumsy if it contained more than a few entries). _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
David Johnson wrote:
I would love to see a new UI for ReactOS. I hate the Win95 / NT look.
I'm afraid we're only discussing the network configuration interface. ReactOS's default interface will be "comfortable" for people transitioning for Windows. If you don't like the Win95/NT look, there are plans to support uxtheme someday as well as the alternate shells out there.
Thanks I did read that... After my post. Keep up the great work!
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 09:14:29 -0600, Royce Mitchell III royce3@ev1.net wrote:
David Johnson wrote:
I would love to see a new UI for ReactOS. I hate the Win95 / NT look.
I'm afraid we're only discussing the network configuration interface. ReactOS's default interface will be "comfortable" for people transitioning for Windows. If you don't like the Win95/NT look, there are plans to support uxtheme someday as well as the alternate shells out there.
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
I think that the control panel for network configuration should list currently activated (enabled) devices as well as inactive (disabled) devices listed the way windows xp and 2000 does it in the network connections folder. With a reworking of explorer maybe ip address, hostname and uptime would be displayed. I think if we did an implementation of mshta.exe reactos could do this quite well. Also advanced networking features would be enabled. Maybe some nifty javascript could be implemented to support collapsible menus and subtopics like winxp does it.
The mshta.exe handles much of the code that the Add/Remove Control Panel applet installs, uninstalls, and list programs installed. I would guess these are read from the registry.
Some features may include:
-Active/Inactive -Windows Device Name, Linux device name (eth0, lo, en0) -Ip Address (v4, and v6) -Netmask -Domain -Hostname -Aliases used by the particular device (www.somehost.net) -Network Uptime -Quality -KBs in and out -Packets in and out -Firewall status -Ipsec -Rules (disallow all traffic from anything other than local network) feature.
Through mshta.exe with the help of perl, tcl, or perhaps even c++ code could get these statistics and activate changes applied by the user.
I think that the control panel for network configuration should list currently activated (enabled) devices as well as inactive (disabled) devices listed the way windows xp and 2000 does it in the network connections folder. With a reworking of explorer maybe ip address, hostname and uptime would be displayed. I think if we did an implementation of mshta.exe reactos could do this quite well. Also advanced networking features would be enabled. Maybe some nifty javascript could be implemented to support collapsible menus and subtopics like winxp does it.
The mshta.exe handles much of the code that the Add/Remove Control Panel applet installs, uninstalls, and list programs installed. I would guess these are read from the registry.
Some features may include:
-Active/Inactive -Windows Device Name, Linux device name (eth0, lo, en0) -Ip Address (v4, and v6) -Netmask -Domain -Hostname -Aliases used by the particular device (www.somehost.net) -Network Uptime -Quality -KBs in and out -Packets in and out -Firewall status -Ipsec -Rules (disallow all traffic from anything other than local network) feature.
Through mshta.exe with the help of perl, tcl, or perhaps even c++ code could get these statistics and activate changes applied by the user.
I think that the control panel for network configuration should list currently activated (enabled) devices as well as inactive (disabled) devices listed the way windows xp and 2000 does it in the network connections folder. With a reworking of explorer maybe ip address, hostname and uptime would be displayed. I think if we did an implementation of mshta.exe reactos could do this quite well. Also advanced networking features would be enabled. Maybe some nifty javascript could be implemented to support collapsible menus and subtopics like winxp does it.
The mshta.exe handles much of the code that the Add/Remove Control Panel applet installs, uninstalls, and list programs installed. I would guess these are read from the registry.
Some features may include:
-Active/Inactive -Windows Device Name, Linux device name (eth0, lo, en0) -Ip Address (v4, and v6) -Netmask -Domain -Hostname -Aliases used by the particular device (www.somehost.net) -Network Uptime -Quality -KBs in and out -Packets in and out -Firewall status -Ipsec -Rules (disallow all traffic from anything other than local network) feature.
Through mshta.exe with the help of perl, tcl, or perhaps even c++ code could get these statistics and activate changes applied by the user.
From what I've heard and seen (while playing with Resource Hacker), netshell.dll implements the main networking config dialogs. Somewhere the TCP/IP protocol driver provides the TCP/IP configuration dialog - I don't know where, however.
It'd be great to somehow merge TCP/IP etc. configuration into a single Firefox-preferences-style window. Maybe a "configure" button could be to the side of each protocol? I don't know...
Jasper van de Gronde wrote:
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
Only thing is, I'm not sure if the tree-view is necessary - how many users visit the network config dialogs more than once in a blue moon to adjust something? I only ever delve in there if I'm testing a router for someone and have to change my subnet.
I agree, but would it hurt them? I feel Windows is just a bit too much like a maze in this case.
Also, I think the protocol-specific dialogs are actually in separate modules, and appear as dialogs. I could be wrong. But this would mean it'd not be possible to do as you describe :(
In some cases standard dialogs appear to be used along with information in the registry that defines what parameters there are, their types and values (in particular the RealTek driver I use seems to do this). This scheme seems to not very complex than the previous one and should lend itself very well to displaying in custom dialogs. I don't know how common this is though and whether it's only for nic's or also protocols for example.
For displaying custom property sheets there appears to be an INetCfg interface on (recent versions of?) Windows, but I can't say I fully understand the details of what this and would not allow you to do (what exactly qualifies as a "network component" for example). And I have no idea at all whether something like this is supported by ReactOS.
But as a compromise - if necessary - maybe it'd be an idea to copy the Firefox style of "preferences" dialog, with icons where the tree-view is, but have each icon represent a different connection...
If only one level is feasible this might indeed not be such a bad idea (although it might get a little clumsy if it contained more than a few entries). _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
I may be wrong, but isn't it possible to embed any window into anoter window. Maybe one must change some winstyles bevore. But the tcp/IP's dialog (from where it comes) window should be embeddable anywhere. ??
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
From what I've heard and seen (while playing with Resource Hacker), netshell.dll implements the main networking config dialogs. Somewhere the TCP/IP protocol driver provides the TCP/IP configuration dialog - I don't know where, however.
It'd be great to somehow merge TCP/IP etc. configuration into a single Firefox-preferences-style window. Maybe a "configure" button could be to the side of each protocol? I don't know...
Jasper van de Gronde wrote:
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
Only thing is, I'm not sure if the tree-view is necessary - how many users visit the network config dialogs more than once in a blue moon to adjust something? I only ever delve in there if I'm testing a router for someone and have to change my subnet.
I agree, but would it hurt them? I feel Windows is just a bit too much like a maze in this case.
Also, I think the protocol-specific dialogs are actually in separate modules, and appear as dialogs. I could be wrong. But this would mean it'd not be possible to do as you describe :(
In some cases standard dialogs appear to be used along with information in the registry that defines what parameters there are, their types and values (in particular the RealTek driver I use seems to do this). This scheme seems to not very complex than the previous one and should lend itself very well to displaying in custom dialogs. I don't know how common this is though and whether it's only for nic's or also protocols for example.
For displaying custom property sheets there appears to be an INetCfg interface on (recent versions of?) Windows, but I can't say I fully understand the details of what this and would not allow you to do (what exactly qualifies as a "network component" for example). And I have no idea at all whether something like this is supported by ReactOS.
But as a compromise - if necessary - maybe it'd be an idea to copy the Firefox style of "preferences" dialog, with icons where the tree-view is, but have each icon represent a different connection...
If only one level is feasible this might indeed not be such a bad idea (although it might get a little clumsy if it contained more than a few entries). _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
I like Jaspers mock-up, but I still insist that we need to have a simple, even a throw away design NOW that addresses ReacctOS's current networking capabilities. We can make a pretty new network config interface after that is done.
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:01:46 +0200, Jasper van de Gronde th.v.d.gronde@hccnet.nl wrote:
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
...
Can you come up with a design?
I don't know about others, but one thing that has always bothered me enormously is that it's hard to get an overview. Perhaps it would be possible to list all connections at once in a tree view for example, instead of forcing the user to open and close dialogs all the time. It might even work to put some of the options in this tree view. Or perhaps it would be better (as in more attainable) to just open property sheets next to tree view instead of forcing the user to navigate through multiple windows (first selecting the connection in "Network Connections" and requesting its properties, then selecting the desired item, click on properties, and then possibly even a click on advanced).
To illustrate my thoughts I've created a mock-up that shows a lay-out that would at least be an improvement over the XP layout for me: http://home.hccnet.nl/th.v.d.gronde/networkconnection.png For the mock-up source (Glade+Python, if anyone is interested in expanding on this idea): http://home.hccnet.nl/th.v.d.gronde/networkconnection.zip
You'll have to imagine the details like icons and so on, but it shows the general idea of putting all the connections in one tree view, which makes it easy to quickly navigate to the desired property page, to switch between property pages (of different connections) to compare settings and last but not least it avoids screen clutter! (try navigating to the list of IP addresses under Windows, you'll have four windows open!!!)
There would definitely be some details to fill-in. Like what to do when navigating to a different property page when the current one has been modified but not yet applied? But these issues should be possible to resolve, either by looking at what other people do or (when lacking satisfactory examples) by devising new solutions.
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
I was going to create such a thing, but the general concensus in IRC at least appeared to be that we shouldn't have a "quick hack" and should focus on the final product already.
WaxDragon wrote:
I like Jaspers mock-up, but I still insist that we need to have a simple, even a throw away design NOW that addresses ReacctOS's current networking capabilities. We can make a pretty new network config interface after that is done.
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 12:01:46 +0200, Jasper van de Gronde th.v.d.gronde@hccnet.nl wrote:
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
...
Can you come up with a design?
I don't know about others, but one thing that has always bothered me enormously is that it's hard to get an overview. Perhaps it would be possible to list all connections at once in a tree view for example, instead of forcing the user to open and close dialogs all the time. It might even work to put some of the options in this tree view. Or perhaps it would be better (as in more attainable) to just open property sheets next to tree view instead of forcing the user to navigate through multiple windows (first selecting the connection in "Network Connections" and requesting its properties, then selecting the desired item, click on properties, and then possibly even a click on advanced).
To illustrate my thoughts I've created a mock-up that shows a lay-out that would at least be an improvement over the XP layout for me: http://home.hccnet.nl/th.v.d.gronde/networkconnection.png For the mock-up source (Glade+Python, if anyone is interested in expanding on this idea): http://home.hccnet.nl/th.v.d.gronde/networkconnection.zip
You'll have to imagine the details like icons and so on, but it shows the general idea of putting all the connections in one tree view, which makes it easy to quickly navigate to the desired property page, to switch between property pages (of different connections) to compare settings and last but not least it avoids screen clutter! (try navigating to the list of IP addresses under Windows, you'll have four windows open!!!)
There would definitely be some details to fill-in. Like what to do when navigating to a different property page when the current one has been modified but not yet applied? But these issues should be possible to resolve, either by looking at what other people do or (when lacking satisfactory examples) by devising new solutions.
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 15:21:30 +0100 "Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood" lists@silverblade.co.uk wrote:
I was going to create such a thing, but the general concensus in IRC at least appeared to be that we shouldn't have a "quick hack" and should focus on the final product already.
These are the general principles I've been guided by so far in the net implementation:
1) Do stuff that works. 2) Try to figure out the actual interfaces. 3) Allow hacks when they're easy to back out.
Jasper van de Gronde wrote:
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood wrote:
...
Can you come up with a design?
I don't know about others, but one thing that has always bothered me enormously is that it's hard to get an overview. Perhaps it would be possible to list all connections at once in a tree view for example, instead of forcing the user to open and close dialogs all the time. It might even work to put some of the options in this tree view. Or perhaps it would be better (as in more attainable) to just open property sheets next to tree view instead of forcing the user to navigate through multiple windows (first selecting the connection in "Network Connections" and requesting its properties, then selecting the desired item, click on properties, and then possibly even a click on advanced).
To illustrate my thoughts I've created a mock-up that shows a lay-out that would at least be an improvement over the XP layout for me: http://home.hccnet.nl/th.v.d.gronde/networkconnection.png For the mock-up source (Glade+Python, if anyone is interested in expanding on this idea): http://home.hccnet.nl/th.v.d.gronde/networkconnection.zip
You'll have to imagine the details like icons and so on, but it shows the general idea of putting all the connections in one tree view, which makes it easy to quickly navigate to the desired property page, to switch between property pages (of different connections) to compare settings and last but not least it avoids screen clutter! (try navigating to the list of IP addresses under Windows, you'll have four windows open!!!)
There would definitely be some details to fill-in. Like what to do when navigating to a different property page when the current one has been modified but not yet applied? But these issues should be possible to resolve, either by looking at what other people do or (when lacking satisfactory examples) by devising new solutions.
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.com http://reactos.com:8080/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
As a network admin, I love that design. In general, I also love it. Having a tree view instead of tabs would be wonderful for most parts of the reactos UI.
-
Andrew "Silver Blade" Greenwood -
art yerkes -
David Johnson -
Jasper van de Gronde -
Rick Langschultz -
Robert Köpferl -
Royce Mitchell III -
Swiss Cheeseman -
WaxDragon