Studio Toolbox Size + Performance

Feature Requests Studio Features
#1

It takes up half the screen by default, and can’t be made any smaller.

Also, ever since this update, Classic Studio has not been able to use Toolbox; the primary way to transfer models/ builds from Studio 2013 into classic.

I know you guys don’t care, but please… This is literally the only option for the developers who have incredibly bad performance issues with Studio 2013.

I’m seriously not being nitpicky about Studio 2013, it is unusable. I will record video of it (recording my screen from a separate device, god forbid I try recording AS studio is open) if I have to. It is really really really really bad, outside of the Lua Editor.

Also, I just tried to transfer any kind of model from Studio 2013 into classic (saving as an rbxm and importing it), and it doesn’t seem to work, when with the toolbox it worked fine if there weren’t any PointLights/ newer objects mixed in.

I would really love to leave Classic Studio behind; I cannot. I love building, and it is the only way I can build. I’ve tried multiple times to move onto Studio 2013, it just kept getting laggier and laggier. It is unusable. Even in its limbless state, Classic Studio is way more versatile in functionality, performance, and user interface. I know you guys really don’t care, but it is REALLY important to me.

Either get this toolbox thing fixed (people want it reduced/ reverted anyway) or at least attempt to address the large performance issues with Studio 2013. Please. D:

1 Like
#2

Tried telling the devs about the size and stuff when it came out but they didn’t understand.

Gave a lot of examples but they didn’t see how the size was an issue

#3

[quote]
Also, I just tried to transfer any kind of model from Studio 2013 into classic (saving as an rbxm and importing it), and it doesn’t seem to work, when with the toolbox it worked fine if there weren’t any PointLights/ newer objects mixed in. [/quote]
Since September 3rd, models are stored in the binary file format when uploaded. Old Studio probably isn’t compatible.

#4

The search bar used to slide under the category drop down when too small. I now see that it’s not allowed to collapse. That kind of bothers me.

Also I’d like to note that Studio really comes to a crawl if you go through several pages of models in the toolbox.

#5

Do this many people still use XP

I have a lower-end Win 7 and studio never lags

#6

[quote] Do this many people still use XP

I have a lower-end Win 7 and studio never lags [/quote]

My laptop is a lower end Windows 7 (pre-installed; it’s not Windows XP in any way shape or form)

Playing online is fine

Classic Studio is a breeze ( consistently greater than 27 fps)

Studio 2013 is like, straight from hell

My laptop is not (entirely) outdated piece of garbage. It still functions.

#7

Post your specs plz: CPU frequency & #cores, RAM, and video card

I think I asked this on another thread of yours, but you never posted them.

#8

[quote] Post your specs plz: CPU frequency & #cores, RAM, and video card

I think I asked this on another thread of yours, but you never posted them. [/quote]

Is this it? (Sorry, it’s been like years since the last time I posted specs/ been able to find it)

#9

That’s perfect.

Yeah, your computer is 2.0 lower than mine on the scale – I’m guessing it’s due to your processor. My processor is only at 2.7 GHz, so 2.3 isn’t that much below it. For people with a processor like that, ROBLOX should definitely improve Studio 2013.

#10

[quote] That’s perfect.

Yeah, your computer is 2.0 lower than mine on the scale – I’m guessing it’s due to your processor. My processor is only at 2.7 GHz, so 2.3 isn’t that much below it. For people with a processor like that, ROBLOX should definitely improve Studio 2013. [/quote]

yay, I’m not insane!

Also, I’ve been meaning to link you to the specs each time you asked for them. I had this image somewhere on my imgur profile, but every time I went looking for it I got distracted and went linking other funny shit from the past to my friends and talking about that, completely forgetting that I needed to look for the specs image.

I also remember linking the wrong information to someone else when it came to specs, so I wanted to find that second image to reassure I was giving the right info to ya

#11

What videocard does this thing have.

Running it on this and it works fine:

#12

Hmm, we have a similar machine here in the lab, and it runs fine. Could you send us more information on your machine.

  1. Press Windows + R on the keyboard
  2. Type dxdiag and press enter
  3. Click the ‘Save All Information…’ button and save somewhere

Upload that to drop box and post the link with confidential tags. That should at least give us a little more info.

#13

[strike]I missed the lecture on confidential tags, so I have no idea how to do them.

If it says “hidden from guests” is it working?[/strike]

Got it working, and as tradition goes, here’s a gif

#14

No, it’s not working

[ confidential ]stuff[ /confidential ]