I haven’t been using Glasswire in all this time since I discovered it in March 2017 due to this major limitation, but today thought I’d have another look to see if fixed vertical scaling is finally in there yet?
I’m rather stunned that it isn’t and I can’t believe you don’t find it important - how on earth can a graph scale that jumps all over the place show anything meaningful?
Like I said before, it’s like having a car speedometer that constantly shows max but changes the units - I cannot see how anybody finds this useful and it provides no context in its use and as far as I can see unnecessarily causes the eye to have to keep examining the graph, scale and readings when things (pointlessly) jump around.
The requests to have this ability date back over three years.
What is the reasoning for not allowing a fixed vertical scale?
It does seem odd that fixing the scale of the graph is not an option, at least.
A fixed scale would be very useful to me, as I’m using an ADSL connection which has fixed upper limits for upload and download speeds, and being able to see how my data transfer is in relation to those limits is the most interesting thing I’d like to see.
Currently, the way GlassWire represents things makes absolutely no sense at all to me, nothing is in context and thus pointless. GW’s graphs are principally visual tools, but any use of that visual ability is rendered useless because one is further required to analyse its graphs before its readouts begin to make sense.
It’s like having two minimum-maximum dials, one showing a low reading and the other on maximum, but both dials representing the same low value.
Or like having a time clock that shows the hands anywhere it likes for any known time of the day. An analogue clock works because one can just glance at the hands and know the time - there is no comparison or calculation work involved. The same does not apply for GW.
I completely uninstalled GW the other day because I find it pointless and never look at or open it yet it was always running as a service recording its data. I was hoping they’d add the long requested feature but it looks unlikely and ignored without valid reason or further response.
With Networx I can see out of the corner of my eye, without thinking, exactly what’s going on with the network traffic. Whatever other benefits and tricks GW can do I will never know (and to date haven’t really needed) because I really do not want to see the minutiae of traffic showing as huge jumping spikes all over the place on my screens, all of which would in effect be worrying false-positives.
I don’t recall seeing an email about surveys and I do review all emails, all I get is like a weekly summary of things which I vaguely glance at. As for regularly visiting the forum, well there are too many things like that in life to keep up with so rarely happens.
My problem though with what you say is that you don’t recognise the need for it yourselves and are just relying on surveys (or rather than this forum?!). Maybe surveys don’t always work? (it didn’t for me, I didn’t even know there was one). Or maybe people answering surveys didn’t think of it as an option and just accept that’s how GW is (and seemingly will never change judging by responses so far), or depending on the survey type and how it’s written maybe there wasn’t a suitable question, or maybe anyone wanting fixed scales gave up on GW ages ago (which in effect I did) and therefore wouldn’t be around to answer your survey?
I think my analogies with clocks, speedometers, and min-max gauges adequately illustrate the importance of a fixed-scale need, even on just a usability/visual quick-reference level.
Imagine how hard things would be if the hands of my on-screen clock or the red circle on my calendar never changed position, but the numbers did:
It would make life much harder, but I guess one could at least say that twice a day for the clock, or once a month for the calendar, one, other or both would at some point be visually correct and in context within defined norms - that’s what GW’s ever-changing graph does to me and I’m amazed more don’t find the same and that you haven’t just allowed a fixed scale as an interface option from day one.
I don’t get why it’s such a problem, even on short timeframes?
All I need is to see is a graph that doesn’t bounce all over the place changing the units but not the max-peaks level. Is it really that hard to do?
Like I said above a few times above over the last year or two, as things stand with GW, it’s like having a car speedometer showing roughly near maximum all the time but only changing the units, or having an analogue clock with the hands roughly in one position but changing the numbers accordingly - I just don’t understand the logic or why most people seem happy with the way it is?!!
I can understand GW’s current method helps show the small details of what’s happening, but as an overall performance indicator, available at a glance, GW fails miserably and I can’t put things into context at all.
Someone please tell me why my view/need of the world is not more widely understood?
Right now, with setting up my new computer, all I want to do is see how my downloads are performing while various large downloads and cloud services do their tasks and to get an overall view of how quickly things are going in relation to how fast things potentially can be on the network I’m currently on - with GW, it so hard to do or see consistently.
Whilst the first claim of GW is “Visual Network Monitoring” in its website “Features Section”, it’s so hard to actually achieve in a consistent way - it’s ironic and defies logic!
I just tried to “Like” the post, but it looks like I did that before…
For everyone that sees these messages looking for this “basic functionality feature”, please go to the link and “Like/Love” it also.
I like your message from ages ago that said:
“I guess we’ve got a catch 22 then, Ken. If I had found GW more useful and was using it, I may have frequented the forum more often and seen that [the survey/etc].” - My view exactly!!!, And I tried to say similar in one of my posts - i.e. how can one respond to a questionnaire locked away in a basement that one doesn’t frequent, behind a door that says “Not Working”.
It’s a strange world that makes it so hard to find/discover things and have to “like” something rather than it be common-sense/logic and “cool” added for creativity/functionality. One would hope that creators/developers would not principally rely on pure “social” suggestions/feedback ratings but would also have some gumption to create and steer without relying on the mass popular vote (isn’t that where politics keeps going wrong these days!)
I love the concept and looks of GlassWire… it’s inspirational, visual and attractive! But I won’t install it (or buy it) because, err, it’s not visual in a really really basic and fundamental way… - go figure ! … (somebody, please explain why I don’t get the GW methodology)
I’m really not sure why the developer(s) ignore or can’t grasp/add the (basic/fundamental) “feature” that I (and others) crave so much? It’s like GW were given some code from the future and don’t know what to do with it.
In so far as pandering to user’s needs and extrapolating future needs/development, if GW ignore advanced/basic requests/features/suggestions, then all I can say is: Garbage In/Garbage Out.
Sorry to sound so strongly, I’m not normally like that, but given a brilliant product, it’s so sad to see it fail.
I check the feature requests myself, and I did not notice that this feature was requested a lot as @Remah showed. So, perhaps I should have paid better attention.
We also have an Android app and I do all support and check all feedback for that app and I have never seen anyone request this feature there, and the functionality of that app is similar to Windows.
For me personally, if I want to see a less changes in the graph I will make the time period of the graph longer… then it changes much less. If we had a static slider it sounds really nice, but with real world usage it may cause the usage to get so large the graph is just completely filled up, or the network activity will be so small you can’t even see it. So you’re probably going to spend all your time adjusting the graph constantly… but I guess there are other apps that work this way so perhaps I’m wrong.
Anyway, I don’t recall anyone asking for this feature for awhile so that’s why we’re not jumping to add it but it’s like anything else on GlassWire, and if a lot of people request something we’ll consider it.
I’ve requested it several times over the past two plus years and have largely felt ignored. I’d given up until receiving notification when Remah tagged me in his post. The first time I am aware of this being requested was four years ago: Suggestion - fixed scale for graphs. And you said:
The thread we are now posting in alone has requests going back years. It even refers to and posts a screen shot of Networx (https://www.softperfect.com/products/networx/) from a year ago that works this way despite your claim that you had not been aware of any. (Networx is also what I now use for the graphical display.) So, perhaps more attention is warranted. It seems you rely more on bias of what you think things should be?
And, you encouraged use of the feature feedback thread for this. Take a look at the top liked posts (not that people have used this system reliably). Mine, referenced here, was among the highest number of “likes” among all the posts according the the system you initiated and encouraged and simultaneously seemed to disregard. Ironically, you were one of the people that “liked” my post in that thread!!
It seems such a simple request, just make the vertical scale fixable at user chosen certain levels of unit and maximum peaks.
If there can be a simple toggle/click to zoom in on the details (as we see in GW now), then all the better.
For me, most of the time, I just like to see current performance right now to confirm everything is working as expected, not every minutia of what is happening bit by bit. Sometimes though, I do like to examine each thing going on in the way GW currently shows, but that’s rare and scary when one realises how much network activity is actually going on, but mostly can be ignored.
An easy to see current and consistent overview would be brilliant to see in GW that otherwise looks fantastic.