Archery Software Review

Alan McDonley - alanmcdonley at gmail dot com

April 14, 2009

 

(Note: I am putting this online as-is, unfinished.)

 

1        Evaluation Overview

Archery software applications have functions useful to every kind of archer.  Two functions stand out in utility above all others: arrow selection guidance and sight mark estimation.   This review discusses the programs Archer’s Advantage (AA), OnTarget2 Software for Archers (OT2/SFA), The Archery Program (TAP), and to a lessor extent X-Sight, applied for a sliding single pin sight on a compound bow estimating sight marks from 20 feet to 90 meters, and comments on other some of the other program functions.

 

All the programs perform the sight mark estimation function well, with good accuracy.  Using a “straight out of the box” approach, AA and TAP estimated sight marks with nearly equal accuracy.  OnTarget2 Software for Archers produced acceptable, but less accurate estimated marks than AA and TAP.  X-Sight is not in the class of the other three programs, featuring only sight mark estimation from two or more reference marks, but performs admirably between reference sight marks. 

 

In the unexpected surprise, TAP produced a very accurate extrapolated mark for 90 meters (center of X) in spite of a limitation entering the precise turns of the sight lead screw.  The AA extrapolated 90-meter mark is about 1 inch high, while OT2/SFA mark puts the arrow group about 6 inches high at 90 meters.  The X-Sight extrapolated sight mark puts the arrow about 4 inches high at 90 meters.

 

From a user interface standpoint, TAP is the most visually appealing and the simplest to navigate.   Since AA copies marks to the clipboard, it integrates the best into my sight mark update workflow.  OTA/SFA is the only program with windage visualization.

 

 

2        Credits:

Archer’s Advantage is available at www.archersadvantage.com

OnTarget2 Software for Archers is available at www.pinwheelsoftware.com

The Archery Program is available at www.thearcheryprogram.com

X-Sight is available at http://www.huntsvillearcheryclub.com/xsight.htm

 

3        Disclaimers:  

Inputs to each of these programs have been triple checked to ensure identical inputs to each program.  Default bow performance settings that come from each program’s database were used, with no attempt to adjust any bow performance features.  A “straight out of the box” approach was used for each program. 

Since I shoot only spots, no 3D, and use an inexpensive single pin sight with metric threads, I am not “the typical” user.  I am relating my experience with these programs.  YOUR experience and results WILL be different. 

The BIG DISCLAIMER:  The actual marks used for comparison with all the programs are the result of sighting-in based on a set of AA generated marks.  From a scientific view this probably has induced a sight mark bias favoring AA.  For example, if an AA generated mark of X.345, it was written as X.3 on the initial sight mark list.  If sighting in, the X.3 mark generated a 4” diameter group ½” high, the X.3 mark might have blessed as good enough, where X.2 might have been the exactly correct mark and X.1 might have been ½” low.  If another program had estimated X.2, it would appear slightly “less accurate” than AA even though it was actually dead-on.  Likewise if another program estimated X.1, both AA (at X.3) and the other program (at X.1) would actually be equally distant from the correct mark (X.2), but AA would end up being favored due to the X.3 mark having been deemed “good enough”.

 

4        My History:

I started with OnTarget2 Software for Archers in 2003 when I purchased a 1970 Hoyt Pro Medalist recurve on e-Bay and needed to select arrows for the new bow.  OnTarget offered a downloadable demo at that time with exactly the functions I was looking for. 

At the time, Easton offered a downloadable arrow selection tool, which had broad spine categories and did not factor in point weight, FOC, vane weight, or nock type.   OT2/SFA was my best friend.

In 2007 my wife purchased a new bow.  We found that my wife shot better with arrows spined much stiffer than OT2/SFA recommended, so my prior absolute faith in OT2/SFA for arrow selection and evaluation softened a little.

In 2008 I decided to switch from “Olympic” recurve style to compound freestyle.  About the same time I purchased a widescreen LCD monitor for my computer and discovered some frustrating, but non-critical issues with the OT2/SFA user interface. 

I purchased Archer’s Advantage for a “second opinion” while waiting for my new bow, and I began evaluating several arrow types in OnTarget, Archer’s Advantage, and each manufacturer’s arrow selection table on-line and in the Lancaster Archery print catalog. 

I had been shooting a 34 lb recurve and was buying a 40 to 50 lb compound.  My plan was to start with the bow around 42 lbs and then crank it up after I got used to the new form and toys.   Arrow selection under these two conditions became an obsession with no single answer.  I was dreaming of an arrow that would grow with me by cutting a little off and decreasing the point weight with an optimum target shooter FOC.

When my bow arrived, the dealer set me up with six Easton Redline arrows for 42 lbs, and I ordered three Gold Tip Ultra Light Pro 500s with a million point weights.  I used both OnTarget and Archer’s advantage for my initial sight marks and thus began my first evaluation of SFA/OT2 versus AA.

Simultaneously, I was trying to tune my wife’s arrows.  She was relatively new to the sport and hoped for a technology solution to her groups.  I set up arrows with both Flex Fletch and Quick Spin vanes, with optimal point weights, as well as set up a new rest for her.  I spent hours and hours tuning and using OT2 and AA to evaluate and build new sight marks with each change.

The wife grew tired of my seemingly endless “perfect tune” suggestions which did not shoot better than her “too stiff” original arrow, vane, point setup and finally she declared “no more changes – put it all back to the way it was”.

In June of 08, three months into shooting my new bow, I was itching to get the perfect arrow and put the weight up on my bow.  About this time, I noticed that the OT2 windage estimates had grown to three times the prior values.  While I was pretty sure my close range scores would be fine, shooting the long distances – the 80 yard walk up in Field rounds, the 60 yards in the 900, and the 90 and 70 meters of the FITA, would expose my scores to the influences of the frequently heavy Florida wind.  Evaluating many arrows for windage at 60 yards using OT2, I decided to leave forty years of shooting Easton arrows for some Carbon Express Nano-XR arrows. 

Forum wisdom about these arrows was suggesting to shoot them “one or two spines light, because the dynamic spine is stiffer than the static spine”, while OT2/SFA, AA and Carbon Express (via email) all suggested a 530 spine.  Larry, of Pinwheel said that he was working with CX on Nano spine selection, but he was not able to release his results to me at that time. 

Since these arrows were going to cost around $30 an arrow and I wanted a “matched dozen”, I decided to take the risk of living with a perhaps stiffer-than-needed arrow by going with the 530 spine as recommended by both OT2/SFA and AA.

After setting up the arrows and sighting in, I compared both OT2/SFA and AA sight mark estimation functions and published my results in the Archery Talk forum. 

Due to the slightly easier workflow, and slightly better estimated sight marks of AA, I began using AA exclusively for sight marks.

In March 09, one year into shooting my new bow, I noticed PSI and TAP assisting, and vigorously courting, an Italian recurve shooter that was awaiting a new bow.  I thought I had navigated the TAP website everywhere, but somehow missed the downloadable demo tab.  Tony from TAP PM’d me with an offer for a TAP demo and I began comparing the latest version of AA, OT2/SFA and TAP for my usage. 

As I was completing this review, I saw a post about X-Sight on Archery Talk forum and quickly added it to the end of my efforts.

 


5        Goals:

 

Evaluate available archery software programs based on my needs using a novice workflow with each program.

 

My usage of archery software:

 

Once or twice a year for myself and for my wife:

 

a)    Calculation of a full set of estimated marks in preparation for a “full sight-in” session.

b)    Windage visualization

c)    Speed, Spine, FOC what-if for vane/point/wrap/nock changes

d)    Print scaled targets to practice at 15yds in backyard

Once every five to ten years:

 

e)    Calculate “very first time” marks with new arrows or new arrows and bow

f)     Arrow recommendation based on estimated speed and diameter (vs. availability and cost)

g)    Estimate how far behind target to look if “some archer” misses the butt

h)    Estimate performance of possible new bow, new arrow at my DL

 


6        Sight Mark Results

This is a graph of the estimated sight marks of all four programs, and the actual sight marks, compared between the 20 and 80-yard reference marks:


This graph shows the overall accuracy from 20 feet to 90 meters:
    (programs extrapolate below 20 yards and above 80 yards)


7        Discussions

 

7.1      Sight Marks and Setting Peep:

Developing sight marks for a brand new bow differs from the creation of sight marks after a setup change.  For a new bow I will usually tune, set the peep in my back yard and collect an accurate 15-yard mark. 

(Bow Hunter Freestyle shooters often don’t understand this peep-set-distance thing because for them, the sight housing, peep, and head position are constant.  Compound Freestyle keeps only the peep constant while the pin and head positions vary with distance.  I use 50 yards as my peep-set-distance because it is half way between the 60 and 40-yard marks of the 900 round, and half way between the 20-yard indoor and the 80-yard Field long shot.  )

Because my peep will not be set accurately until I can shoot 50 yards, I know that the first set of marks are throw away, but they will keep my arrows on the 20 and 50 yard target face.  This is the goal of the first mark estimate. 

7.2      Arrow Speed

Before I can shoot any arrows, I will have used an archery software program to estimate an arrow speed, first for arrow selection, then again after I have built the arrows.  When I have my two first real sight marks (and set peep and measured the peep height accurately), I use the program again to estimate arrow speed.

I also have a Radarchron stabilizer-hole chronograph to measure approximate arrow speed with stated +/- 2% accuracy.  I shoot seven arrows, throw out the high and low readings and average the five remaining collected speeds.  My chronographed arrow speed comes out to somewhere between 245 to 246 fps.  Plus or minus 2% is +/- 5fps, so I would believe most any archery program’s arrow speed estimate between 240 and 251.

I compared the arrow speed estimates for data only, two reference marks 20 and 60 yards, and two reference marks 20 and 80 yards for AA, OT2/SFA, and TAP.   (X-sight does not estimate arrow speed.)

The data case estimates are based on the bow model/year/cams, the actual bow weight setting, draw length, brace height, axle to axle distance, with 10 grains for peep and 10 grains for D-loop (only OT2/SFA uses peep and D-loop weights).

 

Chrono

AA

OT2/SFA

TAP

All Average

Prog Ave

Data

245

243

242

246

244

244

20 80

245

242

250

246

246

246

20 60

245

241

246

247

245

245

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Average

245

242

246

247

245

245

Min

242

241

242

246

243

243

Max

250

243

250

247

247

247

Range

4.0

1

4

1

2

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Error" from Chronograph*

 

 

 

Average

-1%

0%

1%

 

 

 

Min

-1%

-1%

0%

 

 

 

Max

-1%

2%

1%

 

 

 

Range

0%

2%

0%

 

 

 

TAP was the most consistent, between the three test cases, at +/- 0.6 fps, followed by AA with +/- 0.8 fps, then OT2/SFA with +/- 4 fps.  (Note –  4 fps is still less than 2% and should be considered very good.)

TAP was the closest to the chronograph and to the all-values-average using the 20/80 marks.

OT2/SFA was the closest to the chronograph and to the all-values-average using the 20/60 marks.

All the programs generated believable speeds for all three conditions, (database only, two marks 20-80, and two marks 20-60), with the average of the three programs for 20/80 marks at 246 fps.  All the programs estimated speeds within +/- 2% of the averages.  Since the actual arrow speed is unknown it is not possible to say which program is more accurate.

7.3    Mark Extrapolation for 90 meters:

Although TAP did not allow setting the turns per inch to the actual value, it produced the most accurate extrapolated mark for 90 meters (center of X). 

The AA extrapolated 90-meter mark was off by 0.1 (one-click), which would result in groups being about 1” high.

OT2/SFA extrapolated the 90-meter sight mark 0.8 (eight-clicks) off which puts groups 5” to 8” high when sighting in. 

(Two clicks off made an 8-point difference in my first 90-meter end recently.)

7.4      Mark Extrapolation for “the peeps”:

Parallax makes a bigger impact on sighting than arrow trajectory when very close to a target, and no one should use estimated marks in a tournament, for any distance, but especially for the peeps.  Long ranges are where you can pick up “lucky” points against competitors; short ranges are where you can lose “stupid” points.

For this evaluation I sighted in all four of the peep shots, but I am pretty sure there is a single sight mark, which would keep me in the 5-ring, perhaps even the X-ring.  I need to study this idea further.

 

7.5      Trajectory Function (inches per click):

Extrapolated distances are most likely to require extensive sighting in, so knowing how many clicks are needed to move a group to the center is helpful.  Using the 20 and 80 yard reference marks, the 90 meter distance and “peeps” are extrapolated estimates and may be the farthest from the X.  Sometimes using the 10yard (30 feet) mark for 35 to 20 feet will work.  90 meters is the more difficult mark to sight in.

All three programs gave an approximate value of 1 inch per click at 90 meters, with AA and TAP closely agreeing.  (AA: 1.1”/click, TAP: 1.0”/click, OT2/SFA: 0.73”/click)

The trajectory function of OT2/SFA allows very precise point of impact estimates (+/-0.01) on either the trajectory or simulation tab.  The precision may give false confidence in marks which may impact up to 5.75 inches off the center at 90 meters.  The trajectory tab offers both numerical and graphical display with coordinated hot spots on the display for each data point and each yardage mark on the x-axis.  To extract the value of one click on the sight at 90 meters, go to the Make Marks tab.  Compute the number of clicks between the 98 and 99-yard sight mark (56.30-55.9=0.40= 4 clicks), then switch to the Ballistics tab.  Enter 100 in the maximum and 98 in the impact edit box.  Either scroll to 99 yards or mouse over the 99-yard tick on the graph to read the drop in 1 yard (2.90”).  Divide the distance by the number of clicks (2.9 inches divided by 4 clicks = 0.73 inches per click or roughly 1” per click).

AA only offers a graphical display of trajectory, with an option to turn on point labels.  Enter 98 for the range, then double click on the graph, click on the “Series” tab, then check labels and OK.  This view showed the label after 0.0 as –3.4 inches.  The AA sight mark for 98 is 54.0, for 99 is 54.3, so three clicks per yard equals –3.4 inches computes to 1.1 inches per click.

TAP offers only numerical table of trajectory values.  To extract the value of one click on the sight at 90 meters, compute the number of clicks between the 98 and 99 yard sight mark (54.3-54.0=0.3= 3 clicks), then switch to the Data tab and find “drop in in/yard” column for 98 yard row (3.01”).  Divide the distance by clicks (3 inches divided by 3 clicks = 1 inch per click at 90 meters).

7.6      Bow is on the way, what arrow should I buy?

“My new bow is on the way.  What arrows should I buy?”  is a question seen on the archery forums everyday.  I admit that I have purchased arrows before my bow arrived once.  It turned out ok, but I did my homework first with OT2/SFA and I designed for tuning.  AA, TAP, or OT2/SFA each have databases of bows built-in which may provide early and approximate numbers for a bow that is not in-hand, but if the archers draw-length is not known exactly then buying three inexpensive, stiff arrows is suggested to have something to shoot the day the bow arrives.  You’re not going to shoot a tournament, but you want to be able to shoot the thing – we’ve all been there.

Some of the programs have specs for the most popular bow, cam, limb combinations, but not every limb/cam/weight range.  Purchasing one of the archery software programs is a good way to feed the obsession that starts when a bow is one-the-way.  The question that should be posted, (and on the respective program’s support forum, not to the general public forum please), is not “what arrow should I buy”, but rather does program xyz have the 200X, Manufacturer, Model, Cam, Weight, Limb in the shipping database, and is the data in database correct?  

Once you have that answer, buy the program online, download and install it, put in your guessed-data, and select some inexpensive slightly-stiff at two-inches-longer-than-the-draw-length-you-think-you-are arrows.  You are going to use those arrows to learn more about your specific needs.

7.7      Spine selection

 

TAP has a really cool function on the spine tab.  Selecting “Graph” shows a grid with a dot for the “current arrow” and the arrow selected in the arrow evaluation table.  What is really neat about this view is that the x-axis of the grid is a guess at how many pounds you should crank the bow up or down to bring the particular arrow to “perfect spine”.  For my arrow it suggests that the ideal weight is three pounds more than my current setting.  I prefer a slightly stiff arrow so knowing it is three pounds stiff is great.

 

 

 


8        Issues

This section describes any issues that arose when using each program:

8.1      Archer Advantage (AA)

 

Version Reviewed: 5.5.7 (3/29/09)

 

Issues:

1)    Nock weight only allows selection of 2gr, measured was 2.6gr for Easton Pin Nocks

2)    Wrap length only allows select 3” mine are 2.25, only allows select 3gr weight, mine are 1.7gr

3)    Bow database for Hoyt Pro Elite does not have “Cam ½+” – choosing Cam1/2 offers only 2004 and 2006, choosing ATA Cam ½ offers 2007.  Chose that.

4)    User record concept is a bit counter-intuitive.   There is not a “Save”, use “Add record” on the Manage Records tab, enter name and press “Exit” instead of “Save” or “Done”.

5)    For my Cartel X-pert sight (10 “clicks”, 5 turns per centimeter), I chose “inch” type.  There is no entry of clicks and turns possible, so program will not generate real marks, only inch measurements from a reference (20y) sight “mark” of (0.000) inches.

6)    For “Sight in” the program accepts two ranges and two “marks”.  For the inch sight I used 20 yards for Range1, with “Mark 1” of 0.000.  I entered 80 yards for the Range2 and the distance in inches from the 20 yard mark, which is 1.472 inches.  This tab will calculate an arrow speed.

7)    On the Shaft Selector tab is an arrow table with speed and spine evaluation, but the scroll bar for the table is not visible on my Wide Screen 1440x900 resolution with 110% normal dpi display setting.

8)    There is no “Save” concept.  All changes entered are remembered and unrevertable.  To play what-if, you have to choose a base setup, add a record (makes a new record using all current record values) with a new name, and then make changes (to the new record).   To revert, change to the prior record in the “Select Setup” pull-down.  It is counter-intuitive but it works as long as you remember to play in a duplicate setup.  If you forget and make changes there is no way to recover the prior values.

9)    Maximize will briefly maximize the window, and then it shrinks back to original size.  If you try to resize the window, it goes berserk while you drag the corner, then returns to the original size when you release the mouse button.

10)  Arrow sound at startup is cool but cannot be disabled – if I forget to turn off speakers before starting the program in the morning when I usually do computer archery, my wife wakes up abruptly and knows I am playing instead of working…

11) Using trajectory tab, the x axis does not have enough labeled gridlines and the units change to odd numbers so have to count 25, 27, 29 and 30 is between two grid lines.  Usable but not convenient.

12) AA has two database entries for Hoyt Pro Elite.  One is “ProElite” which allows me to pick 2008 but has “All” for the limbs and cam pull downs.  Selecting this entry gives the wrong numbers (305 IBO).  The entry “Pro Elite” (with a space between the words) only goes up to 2007 and does not list “Cam & ½ Plus” which they introduced in 2008, but it does list something that gives the correct specs – “ATA Cam 1/2” for my 2008 Hoyt Pro Elite XT3000 Cam & ½ Plus bow.

13) Widescreen problem photo:

 


 

9        On Target2 - Software For Archers (OT2)

 

Version Reviewed:  2.4.10

 

Issues:

1)    Default Configuration At Startup mode keeps coming back mysteriously.
”Un-checked” when user record was saved, and when program closed last, but program sometimes starts with default configuration and the mode is again checked.

2)    Widescreen mode 1440x900 with 110% normal size (106dpi) setting in advanced display properties settings causes havoc with user interface.  Tabs are too large for windows hiding sub-tabs in equipment tab, edit boxes below calibration window boundary totally prevent use of velocity per grain, per pound, per inch, and gravity, edit boxes at bottom of Make Marks are off window preventing changing chart, scroll bar on spine match table is better than half gone out of window making use of the scroll bar difficult.

3)    In CSV export of sight marks – choose “Sight Mark References” – was not sure difference between this and “Sight Mark Data”

4)    CSV export of data does not offer to choose saved file location – have to navigate into Program Files tree to retrieve exported data.

5)    Arrow speed on Spine Match tab (252.6) is neither the Equipment tab calculated (241.6) nor Equipment tab manual speed causes mistrust of spine calculation when calibration tab suggests a higher arrow speed than Spine Match tab uses for evaluating

6)    Use decimal point in marks configuration and sighting in distance are not saved from one invocation to next, nor with user record.

7)    Could not enter 90 meters or 98.4 yards into the Ballistic Data Impact edit box.  Had to up the Maximum display range to 100 before program would allow entering 98 into the impact box.

8)    Calibration from sight-pin-marks speed estimates varies depending on the prior arrow velocity value on the equipment tab.   The speed varied a little (+/- 0.5fps to +/- 1fps) every time I ran the program.  Additionally, OT2/SFA has two ballistics computation methods, Siacci and Liston.  The Siacci method resulted in less sight mark error so I decided to do everything with Siacci method.  This is also the “straight out of the box” method.  OT2/SFA allows up to 5 sight marks with and without cross distance averaging, and the resultant speed estimate will appear to vary greatly but in actuality only +/- 2%. 

9)    Calibration by sight marks only allows integral distance so 70m, which is 76.553 yards mark was entered as 77-yard mark when using 20 yards and 70-meter marks as references.  The program does allow a metric mode but using 77 yards was close enough for this archer.

10)  WideScreen problem photos:

 

 

 


10    The Archery Program (TAP)

 

Impressions:

Install went very easy.  Choose a user name, I chose my email address.  No problems.

Registering: no problem.

Visually the color scheme and button layout is very appealing.  Intuitively organized except for the use of the verb “Calculate” on the tab where the sight mark calculation method is chosen and reference marks are entered for the method, which uses two sight marks.

Updating databases was easy with no restart required.  (4 DB updates avail, downloaded and installed in less than 20 seconds.  Program was up to date.)

Sight configuration:  Incompatible with my sight, which uses a metric thread of approximately 12.69 turns per inch (0.0788 inch per turn).  Custom setting does not allow decimal point, so cannot enter 10 clicks 12.69035 turns per inch.  Entered 10 clicks 13 Turns, 31.00 peep to pin, and 4.27 peep to arrow.

Arrow setup: Selected Carbon Express 2008 catalog, Nano-XR 530, 27.5" RAW shaft, 100g tip (CX#2 break-off at 100g), no insert, 3.1g fletch (FFP175), added weight for wrap 1.7g to nock end, 2.6g nock (Easton pin nock, measured), 8.0 Nock pin (CX#1 blue).  Computes arrow weight as 327.86 - actual measured is 331.6 +/- 1.2.  FOC is computed at 11.96% , measured is 12.8%

Spine - current arrow is in yellow (best) slightly closer to red on the stiff side.  Program suggests ideal spine is 0.5446  (“everything from data”), or 0.5440 (from sight marks) and shows Nano-PRO 550 as yellow, does not show a yellow recommendation in Nano-XR until a different arrow is selected in table. ("Overall Match" of the Nano-XR 530 is light blue when arrow is selected, with 580 showing red.) 

I finally figured out that the full path of the loaded profile is displayed in a status line at the bottom of the TAP window, (I did not see it for the first 20 times I used the program).

 

 Issues:

1)    Incompatible with my sight, which uses a metric thread of approximately 12.69 turns per inch (0.0788 inch per turn).  Custom setting does not allow decimal point, so cannot enter 10 clicks 12.69035 turns per inch.  Custom setting does not allow metric turns per inch so cannot enter 5 turns per centimeter.  (In spite of this limitation, the generated marks were phenomenally close!)

2)    May be a defect on spine match tab that requires user to leave tab and return to update evaluation of arrows in the scrolling list.  Could not reproduce this problem again.  Once, when I went away from spine to marks and then came back to spine, the Nano-XR 530 changed to show Red in the Overall Match column with more arrows marked with deep blue than first visit to panel, (but Nano-XR 530 still shows yellow on the spine continuum line. Blue marked “overall match” arrows show up as orange on the spine line.)  Maybe it was confusion about the selected arrow’s “overall match” is light blue until a different line is selected, then true “overall match” color is visible.

3)    Spine match of current arrow firmly in the yellow on the “weak-stiff” line shows as red on the graph display (approx –3.3 lbs).   The color spans on the line seem to match the color spans on the graph exactly, while the arrow on the line and the dot on the graph differ in X position.

4)    On Spine table view, the “overall match” color of the selected arrow is light blue which hides the evaluation color.  The color above the blue triangle on the “weak-stiff” line should be used for the match value.

5)    Program starts clean every time; no option to open with a default or last used profile

6)    Program exits without prompting user to save when values have been changed.

7)    Clicking “Print Preview” when on Spine tab showing graph pops up a dialog box saying “Please navigate to the page you would like to preview then press print preview again”.  (Only Tape, Marks, and Data pages can be printed or previewed.)

8)    Clicking “File->Save As” does not appear to do anything.  Clicking “File->Save” opens a dialog to save the current program settings to a named profile.  If you open profile1 and then select a new name, profile2 and save, the program continues with the values of the profile2 but the status line will show profile1 as the “loaded” profile.  This behavior is unusual for a Windows file user interface.  After opening a file in Microsoft Word or Excel, Save will only save over the current file.  Save-as must be used to save as a new file, (the default file name of the save-as dialog begins as the currently “open” file), and after performing the save-as, the active file being edited is the new file.)

9)    Something keeps changing my nock weight to 8.9gr and the “adapter” to 7.7 after I set it to 2.6gr and 8.0 respectively.

10) Does not have my exact bow/limb/cam in the database (2008 Hoyt Pro Elite XT3000 Cam&1/2+ 295 IBO)

11) Database operations are not intuitive.   
First, the program should always protect itself by having a “Restore to default database” operation which is protected by a confirmation dialog: (“This will restore the xxxx database to the program’s original content, and lose all your edits and additions.  Do you really want to perform this restore to default operation?”). 

Next, the edit database mode should restrict operations possible to only editing the database; All tabs that would navigate away from the active tab should be disabled and grayed out when editing the database; Selecting the mode should only be possible from the Bow, label, or arrow tab. 

Last, the interaction between “Calculate Everything” on the “Calculate” tab and the display of the bow database, interferes with the user that selects “Edit Database”; When user declares they want to edit the bow database, save the current calculation mode, switch to “calc everything from data” mode so that the bow tab shows the database editing widget bar.  

If the user tries to do any “non-edit-database” operation such as navigate to another tab, pop up a dialog: (“Editing database.  Unselect “Edit Database” in the Database Utilities menu to leave this tab.) 

12)  The help file does not say if “check for updates” under database utilities deletes all user edits.

13)  

 

 

 

 


11    X-Sight

X-Sight was discovered only at the end of this effort.  It installed easily and performed well between the reference marks.  It uses a second-degree polynomial to estimate marks.  This limitation proved too great for the program when estimating the very short marks at the same time as the very long marks.  Although the short marks are quite easy to determine without a program.  The program does display the coefficients for the polynomial and these were used in Microsoft Excel to generate a full set of marks for review.

Issues:

1)    Limitation of click entry to two digits was strange for my sight, which has 10 “clicks”.  My 28.9 mark must be entered as 28.09.  (Must set 10 clicks in “settings”.)

2)    The programs lower limits do not show the 20 and 25-foot marks in the table.

3)    The table area was too small, and does not scroll, so it only shows 15 to 54 yards.




Zip file with all the calculations and data files

© 2009 Alan McDonley. All rights reserved.

Go to Alan's Home Page




Hosted free by FREE WEBSITES - Free Hosting with Online Website Builder!