The progress bar that doesn't convey any sense of progress (was Re: ...)

[Janzert]

Martin Pool wrote:
> I think the next best step would be a decaying average (what is the
> correct name?) as John suggested.
> 

Since I was interested enough to look it up and for anyone else that
happens to have an interest; the formula John proposed (slightly
modified/corrected?)

new_avg = weight * new_sample + (1-weight) * old_avg

is called an "exponential moving average"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_average#Exponential_moving_average

Janzert