video port warning exceeded when just opening one sdi port

I opened the software and saw two input options to select and have as my input video source. I then selected and dragged that one SDI input to the video input section of the software. Immediately I got a video input exceeded notification. This was only with one input source. I also got a warning the frame rate was different from the input source compared to the rendering frame rate. But when I corrected the rendering frame rate to match the input frame rate the warning did not go away. Sorry but these warnings are useless if they don't give more details as to how to remedy the problem. Moreover if I make a change that the warning appears to be referring to then the warning should no longer display to show it has been corrected. 

I am trying the free version and have experience with a variety of video software applications and if the developers can't get the basics right from the start then is shows they don't comprehend the end users needs. Just having a warning about an error and leaving the end user to figure out how to resolve the error is useless. 

   Lighting Video

コメント

JohanF
  -  
The free version doesn’t support any SDI ports, so it’s not a big surprise that adding an SDI input exceeds the number of supported inputs (which is 0 in the free version). You can’t really blame the software for not reading the basic information about it, right? 
Lighting Video
  -  

Thus my point JohanF as very simply the warning could have stated that point. GUI is important that makes clear statements. The fact is I saw my SDI as an input option and then dragged it into place, so the logical conclusion is it sees and recognises the SDI input. In trial versions those limit options are usually greyed out noting only available on full version etc. That gives clear information. The fact that the trial version has a watermark it is obvious that is part of the free version to restrict output for commercial use. If they want people to fully try out their software then allow the full options and keep the watermark as that is perfectly understandable. Having seen the poor key quality in their examples I wanted to test it with an SDI feed. Of course they have the right to restrict features. My point is in the evaluation of communications in the software putting a warning with no explanation is the problem. A watermark is often used to allow full feature testing while limiting useful content output. Having a watermark and limiting access to features means higher level evaluation can't be done. If they want me to test it then allow a testing of all and retain the watermark.