I'll second that,, I like the ol'  IVS chart/graphs too..

Quoting m666:

Quote:
Maybe I don't see it but what is it you don't like about them... I don't see a whole lot of difference...
elaborate?

Did you open both?

Notice on the one I like (2.5) that the years 1889 to 2007 go nearly full width on the screen, allowing air between them, and the dates below are easy to follow. They also have the count by year at the top of each column, again very easy to read.

On the other hand, on the one I do not like (3.0), the chart is not full width, but has a menu on the left (which was a pull-down menu on 2.5), and a key on the right, which only goes from 1889 through 1943, leaving 1944 through 2007 out. The dates below each bar are horizontal, rather than vertical, making it harder to figure out which column is for what year. At the top of each column is the year again: both useless and impossible to read. So I have to use the code on the right to determine the actual count of each year, but I'm missing 54 years.

2.5 is a useful chart. 3.0 is not.

The graphs in 3.0 no longer have any gridlines in the background to visually assist measuring the bar numbers. The charts may have gotten a lot flashier, but are less useful. Some of the displays we can specify are not very useful or muddled beyond comprehension when objects and labels overlap. The feature needs to be fully lab-tested a bit more when the next version rolls out, as I think some obvious glitches were missed. An examination of the 2.x charts/graphs will show that sometimes simpler is better. Rather than having a wide choice of display methods, I would prefer more choice in the area of data selection. But overall, I'm still impressed with it all.

Quoting Doombear:

Quote:
Hi. Charts & Graphs are still very unpleasant;

True.
As a side note, I'd like (as an option) to be able to group related Studios in one label and one bar.  For instance all "BBC" studios (BBC, BBC Home Video, BBC Video, BBC Worldwide).