Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Incorrect shower time on overview #8

Closed
Swpolo opened this issue Jul 11, 2020 · 6 comments
Closed

Incorrect shower time on overview #8

Swpolo opened this issue Jul 11, 2020 · 6 comments

Comments

@Swpolo
Copy link

Swpolo commented Jul 11, 2020

The time provided on the overview for the star shower of the current day doesn't match the time provided in the day forecast.

I believe the overcast page still use the old system from 1.2
What leads me to think that is that at midnight, which has a fine weather, the time is correct. But at 1, with a cloudy sky, the time is incorrect

Example in following image for seed: 1443633326
Screenshot_20200711-010820
Screenshot_20200711-010814

@Treeki
Copy link
Owner

Treeki commented Jul 11, 2020

This is not a bug at all. The overview tries to give a representative sample of all the stars that appear by grouping stars that appear closely and giving an average of the time.

As the in-app FAQ says:

During a light shower, you have a small random chance of seeing five shooting stars every minute between 19:00 and 04:00. MeteoNook analyses the schedule to try and figure out when multiple groups of stars appear close to each other. The times in bold are when you can expect to see quite a few stars. On the other hand, the times that are faded out are when stars are few and far between.

This lets you see at a glance roughly when to play if you want to get more. Of course, you can always click 'see more' for exact times.

@Treeki Treeki closed this as completed Jul 11, 2020
@Swpolo
Copy link
Author

Swpolo commented Jul 11, 2020

ah indeed, I was too focused on the prediction between midnight and 1 AM that I didn't challenged my assumption on the 2 AM prediction which was having a fine weather but still was rounding the stars time occurrence.

I'll be more careful next time, thanks for your answer

@RickSeiden
Copy link

Given the fact that we are supposed to track our shooting stars down to the second when entering them, averaging the times sends a very mixed signal. It would be much better to see "7:07-7:15" in the summary than "7:10".

@zeroum
Copy link

zeroum commented Aug 6, 2020

This is not a bug at all. The overview tries to give a representative sample of all the stars that appear by grouping stars that appear closely and giving an average of the time.

I'm sorry but this behavior is very misleading, even if it's written in the FAQ.

The app idea is about finding exact seeds, knowing the exact weather, and all its exact patterns. Averaging the times goes against its own exactness ethos.

I also support the range idea, something like 19:07—19:15 would be a better option if the times are too close together, and there are more than 3. Maybe even out a (N) to show how many of them, like 19:07—19:15(4).

@gjnance
Copy link

gjnance commented Aug 6, 2020

Second @zeroum 's comment. It is misleading to show a precise time when that precise time is not indicative of a precise event. I think something like "Expect star events between 7 and 7:30" for n>=1 or some such.

@liangaili
Copy link

This is not a bug at all. The overview tries to give a representative sample of all the stars that appear by grouping stars that appear closely and giving an average of the time.

I'm sorry but this behavior is very misleading, even if it's written in the FAQ.

The app idea is about finding exact seeds, knowing the exact weather, and all its exact patterns. Averaging the times goes against its own exactness ethos.

I also support the range idea, something like 19:07—19:15 would be a better option if the times are too close together, and there are more than 3. Maybe even out a (N) to show how many of them, like 19:07—19:15(4).

I respect the designer's idea, and I agree with zeroum's opinion that this design might be misleading for some users.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants