Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[rocketsauce]

from this thread:

http://www.musicex.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=MediaCenter;action=display;num=1054926807

Matt wrote:

must use skins...

Media Center is no longer frame based -- meaning we do all the drawing of the title bar and borders.  This makes it impossible to let Windows do the drawing of the main frame.

There are other skinning-only features that exist and that we'd like to do in the future.  Drawing everything gives us a lot of freedom.

Keep in mind that just because we draw something instead of Windows drawing it doesn't mean it'll be slower.  With a well designed architecture, it can even be faster.

So if there are bugs or slowdowns with skinning please let us know and we'll fix them.

Thanks.

(p.s. if you'd like to discuss this more, please start a new thread)

Matt, of course, we'd like to know about the features that can only be implemented by using skinning.

My two main reasons for not using/liking skins are:

1) On my current system the interface is less responsive when skinned. Specifically, scrolling through the library in the track view is much slower and dialog boxes take longer to appear (ie., clicking the Options button on the Toolbar).

2) Even if I had a newer system, I still like to control (through Display Properties/Appearance) how my Windows environment looks on my computer. I don't use Desktop Themes or wallpaper and skinning is always the first thing I turn off when installing new software. I prefer the generic, gray Windows interface and don't appreciate it when programs ignore my settings and force their own look/colors on me.

That's my 2¢, feel free to throw yours in.

Thanks,

Rob


Media Center Registered 9.0.180 -- C:\Program Files\J River\Media Center\

Microsoft Windows 98 SE
Intel Pentium III 731 MHz MMX / Memory: Total - 261 MB, Free - 138 MB
Resource Info: System - 63 %, GDI - 74 %, User - 63 %

Internet Explorer: 6.0.2800.1106 / ComCtl32.dll: 5.81 / Shlwapi.dll: 6.00.2800.1106 / Shell32.dll: 4.72.3812.600 / wnaspi32.dll: 4.60 (1021) , ASPI for Win32 (95/NT) DLL, Copyright © 1989-1999 Adaptec, Inc. / Aspi32.sys: N/A

Ripping /   Drive E:   Copy mode:ModeBurstBigBuffer   CD Type:Auto   Read speed:Max
 Drive F:   Copy mode:ModeBurstBigBuffer   CD Type:Auto   Read speed:Max
 Digital playback: Yes /  Use YADB: Yes /  Get cover art: No /  Calc replay gain: No /  Copy volume: 32767
 Eject after ripping: Yes /  Play sound after ripping: No  

Burning /  Drive E: PLEXTOR  CD-R   PX-W1210A   Addr: 0:0:0  Speed:8  MaxSpeed:12  Use MJ Engine:Yes
 Test mode: No /  Eject after writing: Yes /  Direct decoding: Yes /  Write CD-Text: Yes
 Use playback settings: No /  Normalization: None

[KingSparta]

I think there is no point talking about it.

Just My 2 Cents

[NoCodeUK]

In terms of speed the interface should theoretically draw faster as it is not drawing a skin on top of windows but is drawing itself it that makes sense.  This means it should at least be as quick as the unskinned windows interface and possibly faster.

As for wanting software all to look the same I am afraid I am the opposite.  I really like the new look and I like my progs to look individual.  I hate the grey windiows look  You could always design a grey windows look skin once it is out of beta anyway;D

Adam

[RhinoBanga]

For those of us with WindowsXP we already have skins and we have already chosen how we want our applications to look and feel.

Remember just because J River can skin their app begs the question should they.   A skin, just like a colour scheme in Windows, is a personal choice ... one man's drink is another man's poison.

Having no option to switch off skins would put me off using MC.

[Mastiff]

I really don't care. I agree with King. The desicion is made, and I'm sure there's a good reason for it. As for old computer/new computer, the prices mobos and CPUs are these days (my carputer uses old parts except for the mobo and CPU (Duron 1,2) and runs XP without any problems what so ever, and I paid a little more than 100 bucks for the mobo/CPU combo) that point really isn't valid. If you can afford to keep harddisks for your media, you can afford a 1 gigaherz system. And that's all you need.  

[lee269]

OK, so I havent built up the courage to try 9.1 yet, so I dont know what Im talking about...

Gotta say Im with rocketsauce on this. I havent noticed any problems trying out skins in MC v9. I dunno about speed etc, but I can change Win skins in XP and I chose 'classic', ie standard rectangular 20th century windows. Its not about speed, its my preference. I want my applications to conform to this, and if they cant - well, for MC I guess Ill have to learn to live with it. However, if MC is all one big skin - cant we have at least a Windows Classic skin?

Aside - I think Kings right, but Ive got to try this: When I install software that has 'non-standard' interface stuff, well for me it looks 'amateur'. Yes, I know MC isnt, but I believe it should behave like a 'standard' app, even if the MS standard can be improved. Or at least show up the way you have Windows configured. Im interested particularly in interface issues as Ive been trying to show people MC for a while, and I believe complete newbies want consistency, even if the MC skin is 'more intuitive'

[JimH]

I think there is no point talking about it.

Just My 2 Cents

Do you offer a student discount?

[KingSparta]

Do you offer a student discount?

Put it on your Visa.

No discount for you your too dam old!

Nice Rain Jacket, Should Keep You Semi-Dry

[dragyn]

I've spent about 15mins trying to think of something to say on this issue and now I have nothing.

<nothing>. the end.
thanks for your time.

[nila]

I agree with King, it seems like a done deal.
Cant see any chance of a no skin option.

[MachineHead]

Media Center is no longer frame based -- meaning we do all the drawing of the title bar and borders.

And I'm assuming that scripting of some sort is what allows you to do this. Making it necessary to use skins?

This thing doesn't care whether an apps is skinned or not, it's just plain fast. So I've been using PixOS without much thought about matching the rest of my windows schemes. I could go either way here with the skinning deal.

Something that would be of more interest is making an MJ9 out of MC. With the DirectX hosting included.  

[MachineHead]

I could go either way here with the skinning deal.

On second thought...

Is there even the remotest chance that we could alter the look of this type of MC through a skin design of our own choosing? I mean like creating tabbed views and other nifty little changes that is custom tailored to our taste?

Then I would be all for the skinning.

[lee269]

OK - Saturday night - few drinks - loud music - bibble bibble bibble

The big guns are resigned, and sure, Im gonna take my toys away and download something else ... We're not going to turn this around, so Ill learn to love it. Besides Im sure the benefits of 9.1 will be well worth it.

Listening to: 'Turn It Around' from 'Warehouse: Songs and Stories' by 'Hüsker Dü' on Media Center 9.0

[zevele10]

On the other side of the hill,people like me.
I HATE the Windows look and any program with a blue interface .
So i will give a try to MC 9,1 when maxi skins ready to work with it
And the one i want to be MC 9,1 compatible is woodeck

[rocketsauce]

I think there is no point talking about it.

Well, it was Matt's suggestion to start a new thread for discussing the topic...so I did...but unfortunatley, you're probably right.

You could always design a grey windows look skin once it is out of beta anyway

I have a grey look Windows skin. I made it using Control Panel/Display Proeprties/Appearance. The best part is that it works (or should work) with any program I install on my computer. It took about 30 seconds to make and that's pretty much all the time I'm willing to spend being a skin designer.

I paid a little more than 100 bucks for the mobo/CPU combo) that point really isn't valid.

It is valid if you don't have $100 to spend on a mobo/cpu combo upgrade.

If you can afford to keep harddisks for your media, you can afford a 1 gigaherz system. And that's all you need.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. It costs me nothing to keep my harddisks, other than the $75.00 I spent on an 80GB drive a year ago.

Rob

[MachineHead]

There is one other side to this Rob. Do we really need to update to MC9.1? Outside of having DirectX hosting, there isn't much that is different. Just the layout.... so far. It didn't seem any faster, and my view schemes took a hit with 9.1.

[rocketsauce]

Do we really need to update to MC9.1?

You're right. 9.0.180 works great for me. There are still a few little bugs here and there that I hope would get fixed before it's left behind for 9.1. And I certainly share your interest in a music only MJ9 (based on 9.0 code, of course).

Rob

[DocLotus]

A skinned interface can be as fast & sometimes faster then Win XP native skin.

Look at StarDock's WindowBlinds 4.  It is actually a little faster then the Win XP default skin as WindowBlinds 4 uses something that StarDock calls "Predictive skinning".

What they do is only re-write the skin about every 3rd or 4th time as you move an object.  They found that on todays fast machines the human eye can not tell the difference between a skin re-write every time or every 3rd or 4th time.

Note however that this only works currently on Win XP at present as skinning is native to XP but not other versions of Windows.  Win 98, SE, & 2000 are an entirely different subject.

So... there is really no reason to even think about turning skinning off as that thinking is obsolete on a Win XP machine.

[MachineHead]

There are still a few little bugs here and there that I hope would get fixed before it's left behind for 9.1

Bit of deja vu here?  

[Mastiff]

Sorry, Rocketsauce, I of course meant "buy harddisks". I tend to think that everybody are like me, I need at least one new large HD every six months (well, two, really since I do full backups of everything on a second harddisk) because my collection expands and expands. And if you can't afford 100 bucks for a new mobo/CPU I'll have to say that you should stop upgrading your programs and stick to the older versions programs that will run on slower systems. It's sort of like expecting that a T-Ford still should keep up with the regular family cars at any givec time as long as the roads gets better and better... Most programs just aren't made for less than 1 gig systems any more. Period.

lee269, did you know that 'Hüsker Dü' (the real way to spell it should be Husker du') means "do you remember?" in norwegian? And that it was a TV-program with 20's and 30's music for old people from around 1970 and until mid 1990? Little know fact, that one...  

[rocketsauce]

...you should stop upgrading your programs and stick to the older versions programs that will run on slower systems.

So... there is really no reason to even think about turning skinning off as that thinking is obsolete on a Win XP machine.

It's not only about system resources. Of course, eventually I will have a system that will run MC in skinned mode just fine. The fact is that even if my current system ran MC skinned with no problem, I would still choose to not use skins. If could go out today and buy a new 3Ghz system, I would still choose to run MC unskinned.

There should be an unskinned option for those that don't want every application to look like some designers idea of a cool, alien interface (or whatever) or use their choice of colors . It's fine if you like every program to look like a different, space-age gizmo, but I don't. I like nice, gray, easy to read square windows with the menus and toolbars at the top and the status bar at the bottom and I want all of the programs installed on my computer to adhere to my preferences.

So, in WinXP if you switch to the classic look, is it just running a skin or is it running unskinned?

Rob

[KingSparta]

what about a skin to look like it is not skined?

[AndyCircuit]

not skined = dos box full screen   ?

[rocketsauce]

what about a skin to look like it is not skined?

Is that really possible? If it's a skin it would still be using it's own colors and menus sizes, etc, and ignoring my system settings.

Rob

[KingSparta]

>> Is that really possible?
Ask Pinnocho

See any stars?

[DocLotus]

>>> what about a skin to look like it is not skined?

Is that really possible? <<<

Yes, it is.

On the StarDock WindowBlinds WinCustomize site http://www.wincustomize.com/skins.asp?wp=1&sort=updatedate&searchtext=&order=&library=1 there are several Win XP enhancement skins that look just like the original Win XP skins except they have a few small enhancements.  The are not made to look like a new skin but simply to supply some things that are missing in the native Win XP skin

[NoCodeUK]

Windows XP classic look is actually a skin made to look like the old 95 Windows interface.  XP is inherently skin based and cannot actually be unskinned.  The classic look is just that  - a look.  So there fore if it can be done for Windows I see no reason why it cannot be done for MC too once it is out of beta and ther is a new skinning SDK

Adam

[LisaRCT]

Looks aren't everythiing


..................... having a good heart and a smart brain behind the looks can often be more important.

[lee269]

Mastiff - I always wondered if Husker Du meant anything. Thanks.

Rocket, Rhino (and maybe some others) - Seems like its us against the world. I still think theres a principle here, but I guess we are swimming against the tide.

Having seen more info about v9.1, I admit Im struggling here. 'Recent Playing Nows'? 'Search Wizard?' Must... resist... downloading... beta... software... But I dont think Ill be able to hold out for too long. You JRiver guys know how to keep us on tenterhooks.

[LisaRCT]

Having seen more info about v9.1, I admit Im struggling here. 'Recent Playing Nows'? 'Search Wizard?' Must... resist... downloading... beta... software...

We are BORG  . . . . You WILL be assimilated!!

[zevele10]

I allways saw that Husker Du was sweedish words ,not norvegians.

Zen Arcade is in my '10 best rock albums of all time'  chart

[phelt]

Bad. There are plenty of multi-paned apps that do not force users to sacrifice display/presentation customization. To me it's not an issue of whether the grey-box look for most versions of Windows is ugly, but the fact is that forced skinning reduces options and appears to have a significant and detrimental performance impact on older machines. There is a point at which people must accept that their HW is not robust enough to perform certain functions, but for that point to be reached because of non-standard interface display reasons seems... bad.

There are not that many MC skins available and even fewer that I would consider using (personal taste, not a comment on the efforts of the various designers). And it appears that I am locked out of using WindowsBlinds/ObjectDesktop to make MC appear the way that I would like.

I have a fair bit of graphics and interface design experience, but many other users do not, so making their own skin is not a realistic option. As for me, I would rather invest the time making skins that I can use with more than one app.

[rocketsauce]

There is a point at which people must accept that their HW is not robust enough to perform certain functions, but for that point to be reached because of non-standard interface display reasons seems...bad.

Good point

Rob

[Doof]

Personally, I love the fact that MC is heading in this direction. I wish every program supported skins.

Just ask any gamer how they feel about having to upgrade a PC because of graphical presentation.

And let's not forget that if you really really hate skins, you can keep using 9.0. There's no law that says you HAVE to upgrade. Every new version introduces changes. It's up to you, as a consumer, to decide for yourself if the changes warrant an upgrade or avoidance.

[phelt]

Personally, I love the fact that MC is heading in this direction. I wish every program supported skins.

Most of the apps that I use skin reasonably well with WindowBlinds, Blackbox, and a number of other applications. I don't use XP, but I thought that MS licensed skinning code from Stardock for this exact reason.

Just ask any gamer how they feel about having to upgrade a PC because of graphical presentation.

This is different because game graphics and animation characteristics are the bulk of the content of most modern games, not just the presentation layer.

And let's not forget that if you really really hate skins, you can keep using 9.0. There's no law that says you HAVE to upgrade. Every new version introduces changes. It's up to you, as a consumer, to decide for yourself if the changes warrant an upgrade or avoidance.

Sigh. I don't know where this comes from. Unless I misunderstood, the point does not seem to be "skinz are teh suck!". Personally, I like skins and I have no problem running them. But being locked into an arbitrary "standard of one" when there are other options seems inefficient. Besides, we all know that J River folks have been great about responding to user requests, complaints, suggestions, etc. So regardless of the outcome, I think it's productive for them to see where users stand. Frankly I'm surprised by comments on this board suggesting that people just lump it or leave it.

[JimH]

Frankly I'm surprised by comments on this board suggesting that people just lump it or leave it.

I don't remember seeing anyone say that.  Nobody from JRiver has said that.  We'd like you to be happy, but we can't do everything.  Yet.

[Doof]

I guess all I'm trying to say is that if it's a choice between innovation with regards to the UI, and sticking to the same old standard Windows look, I'll go with the skins any day.

I'm not sure what you mean by "locked into one". If you're talking about one skin, then just wait a bit. There's only one skin currently because this is the only one that's been designed to run on 9.1. There will be more. If you're talking about being locked into skins with no possibility to disable them, then again, I have to point out that without doing so, the innovations in MC's UI evidently will not take place.

[RhinoBanga]

Something to note.

The implementation of anything ownerdrawn leaves us at the mercy of the developers and will not take advantage of anything that is inherent in the OS.

Consider the file menu in MC for example (which isn't actually a menu but I'll skip over that for now).   Click on it.   Notice how MC has lost focus (as evident by the change in status of the caption bar).   Now slowly move the mouse over to Edit, then View, then Player, etc.   Watch the application gain/loose focus.   Not very pretty and not exactly the windows standard.

Next consider the menu itself.   In windows XP menu's are 3D as can be seen by the drop shadow.   In MC they are flat and lifeless.

These are just small examples of the difference between ownerdraw implementation and OS implementation.   It may not be a problem now but with future version of Windows utilizing the enhanced capabilities of graphics cards skinned apps will get left behind and may have compatibility issues.

[Vorgod]

Ohh no
must use skins...

well! I have disabled skins because my organization tree gets totaly messed up when i apply skins. It is simply not possible to use the organization tree with any of the default skins.

It has always been that way, but now seems to be the right time to report this minor error!

[phelt]

JimH: I did not intend that as a slam against J River - please don't take it that way. I was specifically referring to some comments in this thread. But enough about that...

Doof: My point was that there are already skinning options for nearly all applications in Windows, either through XP's scheme or with 3rd-party apps. But if MC does not have a "skinless" mode then it can't be skinned by those methods. This reduces the choices to however many skins are specifically and exclusively designed for MC. That number of choices will never be close to the number of skins available for the 3rd-party skinning apps. So binding MC exclusively to its own skins and disallowing 3rd party skinning methods would reduce the number of skins a user has to choose from. It's not a binary choice between Windows grey boxes or MC-exclusive skins if MC can allow other apps to define skinning.

RhinoBanga has expressed his valid concerns far more elegantly than I  

[Doof]

That is a good point. However, there all sorts of things that you, as a user, have no choice in with regards to the UI. There are things forced upon you whether it's the OS doing it, or JRiver. Menus are arranged just so, toolbar buttons look a certain way, the program behaves a certain way. These are all things that you have to accept about the program.

They can't write an app that adapts itself to every little whim of the user. You have to set the rules for your own app the way you want them to be, even the way most of your users want, and then stick by them. If something happens later on down the road (like a new OS renders your app inoperable) then change. It happens all the time. That's why there are always a deluge of patches whenever a new version of Windows arrives. Sometimes even apps that 100% Windows compliant get shut out for the next version.

Why should JRiver abandon all of their plans for a different\better UI just because some other company makes it possible to skin everything? The only other alternative is to try and create, update, and support two seperate interfaces. The unskinned interface that is bound by the constraints that Windows places on it, and the one that JRiver WANTS to make, that is able to do all of the things they want.

The more options you include, the more of a support nightmare you have on your hands.

"Right click on the button in the upper left hand corner."
"I don't have a button there."

etc.

And I'm reasonably sure that the bugs RhinoBanga mentioned can and will be addressed.

[JimH]

Ohh no
must use skins...

well! I have disabled skins because my organization tree gets totaly messed up when i apply skins. It is simply not possible to use the organization tree with any of the default skins.

It has always been that way, but now seems to be the right time to report this minor error!

Try updating your video driver.

[Matt]

"Good" or "bad" isn't really fair.  It's a tradeoff -- skinless mode is nice, but has become quite complicated.  The question is whether time is better spent making skinless mode work well or instead improving other things.

There is a reason Musicmatch, WMP, and Winamp don't have a "skinless" mode.

The implementation of anything ownerdrawn leaves us at the mercy of the developers and will not take advantage of anything that is inherent in the OS.

Software always leaves you at the mercy of the developers.  It's a power trip

When we replace some standard Windows piece (toolbar, menu, etc.) it isn't just because we're bored.  We do it because it's the only way to solve the problems we're facing.

As a result there may be some obscure bugs or inconsistencies with Windows pieces, but there are also cool new capabilities.

Helping us fix the bugs and inconsistencies would be the best.

well! I have disabled skins because my organization tree gets totaly messed up when i apply skins. It is simply not possible to use the organization tree with any of the default skins.

Any way we could get a screenshot? (matt @ jriver.com without the spaces)  Also, updating your video driver might help.

Thanks everyone.

[Mastiff]

I allways saw that Husker Du was sweedish words ,not norvegians.

You probably thought that because of the use of ü in the name. Actually the swedish version would be something like "kommar ni i håg" (well, something like that, I'm not very good in swedish grammar).  

[nila]

Not too bothered about the skins and I quite like the new look BUT I DONT like the fact there are no more right click options in the task bar and that double clicking on the item in the task bar does not minimise it like it should to follow normal windows behaviour.

I dont mind a program having its own look but I do mind it having its own set of rules that are totally different to normal program use.

[rocketsauce]

There is a reason Musicmatch, WMP, and Winamp don't have a "skinless" mode.

Which was also the reason I was so happy to stop using them when I found a program that didn't force me to use skins. In all the years that I used Winamp and the short time I used MM, I never found one skin that was truly usable (ie., easy on the eyes, not cluttered looking, not done by amateur graphic designers, etc). Even the default Winamp and MM skins are hideous.

Rob

[KingSparta]

they had plastic yellow and a cow skin.

I would like a Cow Skin for MC9 Mega-Me

[nila]

I do agree,
thats why I always hated MM. Tried it and would go off it almost instantly. Its 'pretty' skin just made it unclear and unuseable.

I also hate when programs dont stick to the windows norm.  When I press Alt+Space I expect to see the program window menu allowing me to minimise, maximise etc the program.
I want to be able to use keyboard shortcuts for everything easily, I want the fact that I'm extremely fast at navigating a computer to carry along to any computer program I'm using so I am just as fast using it.
I HATE programs where I cant navigate it fully with a keyboard and have to use a mouse as well.
I want to be able to press space with any dialog box to close it etc. All windows habbits should continue to all programs. I use the program to make my life easier not to learn a specialised set of controls for it.

Thats one pet peave I have with MC - it doesn't follow windows standard behaviours and it really slows down my useage of it
(one small example - I have XP set to ALWAYS show which letter is pressed on the toolbar with Alt to use it, on MC the underline doesn't appear until I press Alt - I got rid of this behaviour in XP because I hate it, I dont want MC to still keep it).

[Doof]

Well, don't lose sight of the fact that there's absolutely no reason that MC can't adhere to Windows standards AND be skinned.

Whether JRiver chooses to do so is another story altogether, and personally, I agree. It should adhere to those standards.

Maybe there's a way they can read the registry and apply some of the settings to the current skin? Like the underscore under the menu items, for instance.

[Vorgod]

Try updating your video driver.

A very good idea of course ...but it had no effect

I have a nice screendump I would like to show you ...if I just know how

Media Center Registered 9.0.176 -- C:\Programmer\J River\Media Jukebox\

Microsoft Windows 98 SE
AMD Athlon 598 MHz MMX / Memory: Total - 392 MB, Free - 239 MB
Resource Info: System - 52 %, GDI - 78 %, User - 52 %

Internet Explorer: 5.00.2614.3500 / ComCtl32.dll: 5.80 / Shlwapi.dll: 5.00.2614.3500 / Shell32.dll: 4.72.3812.600 / wnaspi32.dll: 4.60 (1021) , ASPI for Win32 (95/NT) DLL, Copyright © 1989-1999 Adaptec, Inc. / Aspi32.sys: N/A

Ripping /   Drive F:   Copy mode:ModeBurstBigBuffer   CD Type:Auto   Read speed:Max
 Drive G:   Copy mode:ModeBurstBigBuffer   CD Type:Auto   Read speed:Max
 Digital playback: Yes /  Use YADB: No /  Get cover art: No /  Calc replay gain: Yes /  Copy volume: 32767
 Eject after ripping: No /  Play sound after ripping: Yes  Soundfile:   chord.wav

Burning /  Drive G: IDE-CD   R/RW 4x4x24        Addr: 0:1:0  Speed:4  MaxSpeed:4  Use MJ Engine:Yes
 Test mode: No /  Eject after writing: Yes /  Direct decoding: Yes /  Write CD-Text: No
 Use playback settings: Yes /  Normalization: None