Topic: Forum Split maybe needed! (Read 5430 times)

Jaguu · « **on:** June 20, 2003, 03:08:00 am »

JRiver,

as the new MC9.1 Beta produces a lot of discussion and threads about the new interface, it might be wise to split again the board into 2 separate boards, one for people that download and buy and want to discuss MC9 issues and for those advanced users involved in 9.1 Beta testing.

Otherwise potential MC9 users might ask themselves: What's going on here!

As things grow, sometimes things that do work well on a small scale, might not work as good on a larger scale and might need change or adaption. Just a suggestion!

Mastiff · « **Reply #1 on:** June 20, 2003, 04:41:37 am »

I agree. This is not a beta board anymore, so beta talk should be moved to a beta board. But then who cares what I think anyway?

LisaRCT · « **Reply #2 on:** June 20, 2003, 05:47:20 am »

Browsing the MC9 board I think this is obviously a good idea.
While especially important to new/trial users, it is getting a bit messy even for those who have been here to (sorta) know what is goin on.

nila · « **Reply #3 on:** June 20, 2003, 09:07:29 am »

Yeah,
v9 is done and dusted and hopefully fully stable.

all these bug posts must be scarey and should be moved to an appropriate 'beta' board again.

MachineHead · « **Reply #4 on:** June 21, 2003, 03:10:17 am »

Agree about Beta Board.

How about new forum software as well? This is the slowest loading one I've seen. Also can't configure how many posts are shown at once. 50 per page seems a little high. Would rather have the ability to upload avatars to the server. Speeds up the loading of pages significantly.

(I know this is unlikely though.)

V-Man · « **Reply #5 on:** June 21, 2003, 04:23:01 am »

Also, as MC development seems to go the way of majority rule, it would be useful to use a forum with the ability to set up polls. This would help everyone to feel their opinions on the future direction of MC are being counted. The current panes vs. tree debate being a case in point.

Another reason why this forum software sux is you have to ask to be notified of new posts manually per thread, and if you do you then get dozens of emails for each thread. The AVForums for example can be configured to auto-subscribe you to every thread you reply to, and send you up to one email per subscribed thread between logins. That's just completely sensible.

DocLotus · « **Reply #6 on:** June 21, 2003, 03:15:00 pm »

Looks like to me that MC9.1 is a precurser to version 10.0 ?

I say this as 9.1 is soooo different from 9.0 that it should be handled as a different product.

So, I agree a different board is needed for this new baby.

xen-uno · « **Reply #7 on:** June 22, 2003, 01:04:39 am »

Regarding forum software...

I think YABB is using some IE specific code. When using Moz FireBird, page generation is slower and scolling is jerky (especially when an avatar is partially shown). Over at HA (which uses InVision), FB is a tad faster than IE but both perform well. Actual posts load up noticeably faster there than here.

R_x

nila · « **Reply #8 on:** June 22, 2003, 11:24:38 am »

It's definitely not v10.

v10 would mean upgrade fee and I know no one is ready for that so soon after v9 was released.

With the current price of MC I'm going to be really thinking about it long and hard before moving up to whatever upgrade next requires me to pay.

I use MC but I dont think I use it $45 worth - thats a lot of cash, or at least for me, maybe not for some of you guys that I know are loaded and have whole rooms dedicated to your multimedia pc's and setup's.

DocLotus · « **Reply #9 on:** June 22, 2003, 12:37:33 pm »

I paid for MC9.

Is not the next upgrade still free as was in the past ?

xen-uno · « **Reply #10 on:** June 22, 2003, 08:25:30 pm »

In regards to my last post about jerky behavior when using Moz FB and Interact....

Problem solved. Latest NVidia drivers and DirectX 9.0a has made FireBird fly. I'm sure it's mostly the NVidia drivers...but who knows?

Anyone that hasn't tried FB needs to. The extensions (there are 20 to 30 last time I checked) are cool. Popup window blocking is the first thing you'll notice. It will also display 24 bit png's correctly (and quickly) when transparency is turned on. FB is killer.

R_x

edit: It still hangs up a bit on avatars (so far when scrolling upward, not downward). I think there might be a FB setting for this.

edit²: I figured out the problem. It hangs up on avatars that FB or YABB is resizing down to 100 x 100 pixels. When it hits jaguu's or sraymond's it hangs for a second at the top & bottom window edges. Avatars that are truly 100x100 scroll past quickly.

V-Man · « **Reply #11 on:** June 23, 2003, 12:09:33 am »

Quote

I use MC but I dont think I use it $45 worth - thats a lot of cash, or at least for me, maybe not for some of you guys that I know are loaded and have whole rooms dedicated to your multimedia pc's and setup's.

I fully agree. I like MC's powerful media management features, and it's ability to work with audio, video and images. The other features like cross-fading, view-schemes etc are really useful. CD burning is not that important to me as I leave everything on my hard drive and only ever want to listen when I'm at my PC. All the other "hi-tech" features like serving media over a network is and never will be of any use to me.

I got the Version 8/9 license and so feel I got a good deal as $25 for MC9 is worth it. Well, it would be if J River quit doing adventurous revamps and concentrated on making it bug-free and leaner. IMO, x.1 versions should be about making the x.0 release work better, following up on early feedback. It shouldn't be a brand new version altogether. I really enjoyed the interactive development process prior to release of 9.0, but am now losing faith in the product and its future and cannot see myself paying out in future. Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I feel it's all going crazy right now and I'm very frustrated at the number of important issues like stability and speed that are being pushed to one side in order to give the developers more fun features to play with.

DocLotus · « **Reply #12 on:** June 23, 2003, 07:18:30 am »

>>> Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I feel it's all going crazy right now and I'm very frustrated at the number of important issues like stability and speed that are being pushed to one side in order to give the developers more fun features to play with. <<<

I also agree.

I just wish JRiver would fix the obvious known bugs before going on to an entirely new interface (with more bugs).

Gesh... I sometimes think they are getting as bad as the big M (Microsoft) at releasing new buggy versions.

Case in point... the basic TV controls that are supposed to pop up with the Ctrl+Shift+Tab keys have NEVER worked correctly since day one. They totally loose focus when the TV is full screen. They will work one time then loose focus. Matt told me that was going to be fixed in the next couple of versions... that was about 30 versions back & they still do not work. In fact, they seem to be a little more messed up on the current 9.1 versions. I have complained about this on several occasions to no end... it has NEVER been fixed. That makes me rather mad.

It reminds me of the old days of the American car industry, rather then fixing old known problems, they would simply come out with a NEW model... with NEW problems of there own. Somehow, that was supposed to fix everything... but it never did.

I for one am so sick of this rat race. Microsoft is the worst offender at this. Somehow they always get us to buy the NEW version in hopes of it working correctly (which it never does as it always has a whole new set of it's own problems).

Doesn't anyone get it? Hey guys, we don't want new features... we want a program that works reliably. After you accomplish that then lets talk about new features.

sraymond · « **Reply #13 on:** June 23, 2003, 07:30:40 am »

Quote

Hey guys, we don't want new features... we want a program that works reliably. After you accomplish that then lets talk about new features.

Doc,

I'm not sure who the "we" are, but it doesn't include me. The pane vs. tree browsing has saved me $50 and I'm quite happy with the newest version (save for a few missing "features" that I need).

Though I don't disagree about the bug extermination bit... I do remember how long it took when first coming into the 9.0.x to get them all. You make it sound like MC is an unstable product... which it's not.

"All Media - One Interface" still isn't a true statement with MC. When it is, I'll agree that almost all bugs should be resolved before new features are added.

Scott-

sraymond · « **Reply #14 on:** June 23, 2003, 07:35:54 am »

Quote

edit2: I figured out the problem. It hangs up on avatars that FB or YABB is resizing down to 100 x 100 pixels. When it hits jaguu's or sraymond's it hangs for a second at the top & bottom window edges. Avatars that are truly 100x100 scroll past quickly.

I changed my avatar to 100x100 - I hope it helps.

Scott-

NoCodeUK · « **Reply #15 on:** June 23, 2003, 08:19:44 am »

I'm definitely all for the new features. I have no real bug isues with MC at the moment. for me it pretty much does everything it should apart from my issue with sound recorder which I am sure will be fixed soon.

Adam

xen-uno · « **Reply #16 on:** June 23, 2003, 08:49:48 am »

Thanks Scott...it helped alot (though you didn't have to do that

).

I also refrain from being too negative, critical, and even cynical on MC. As mentioned, it takes time to iron the bugs. I generally like the direction JR is going with MC and support their efforts fully. In fact, if there was something I could do to help development ... ... ... hmmm, maybe there is...

I was thinking along the lines of my own streaming radio station, where I would overdub (like Karaoke) the vocals with my own. JR could tune in and hear me sing the hits, like "In A Godda Da Vida", "Dinah Mo Humm", and my favorite..."I Will Always Love You". Other users here would be welcome to sing their favorite songs, too (rebroadcast from my station). I'm sure it would truly relax the JR crew, leading to better concentration and more efficient coding.

10^-27

nila · « **Reply #17 on:** June 23, 2003, 09:32:59 am »

I definitely like all the new features but I'd also definitely like to see a lot of the smaller requests fixed.

Why is it every time someone asks what ripper to use EAC comes up - not because of it's better ripping quality but because it can support .cue files and it can que the encoding to be done after the ripping, and it can create a .m3u for the album - MC needs these features.

For encoding I use Razorlame every time because it gives me a visual way of tweaking the settings to what I want - MC should be a full encoding suite and could be easily if a bit of time was spent on tweaking this section to give each format a GUI to tweak it's options and to also let us save configurations - we could save options for:
Our Portable
Website Streaming
blah....
etc..

There are a lot of little areas that really could do with polishing and as much as I like the big changes, the little areas effect me just as much and I want to see them addressed.

Sorry to whine but there are a lot of features that I've seen requested on the forum since v8 beta which still aren't done

They're the little things that would make people's lives that much simpler not revolutionise the way they do things.

kiwi · « **Reply #18 on:** June 23, 2003, 11:14:32 am »

I do have a question. Is MC as good as EAC for ripping CDs? I have been using EAC, but if MC does as good a job, I'd be happy to use it. Is there a reason to get the cue files? Do they let you recreate the original CD w/ the same spacing and gaps between songs?

KingSparta · « **Reply #19 on:** June 23, 2003, 11:24:18 am »

>> I do have a question. Is MC as good as
>> EAC for ripping CDs?
i guess that depends what your looking for.

I have tried them all, and continue to to try all the media players, if there was something better i would be using it.

MC9 uses Lame encoder the best MP3 encoder that does have selectable rates to include encoding speed.

I have been playing with this jukebox since like version 5 and bought it at version 6.

MC9 i think as it is right now the best Jukebox you will find.

Besides do the others have a Bios Finder?, Lyrics Finder? Cover Art Finder? Chart Finder? Music Chart Finder?

'Let The Music Play' Charted At 08 In 1983

Listening to: 'Let The Music Play' from 'The Best Of Shannon' by 'Shannon' on Media Center 9.1

kiwi · « **Reply #20 on:** June 23, 2003, 03:16:42 pm »

Yeah. I really like MC for playback of files and organizing my library. However, my question is specifically whether or not the Audio Extraction of MC is as good as that of EAC. I imagine that you have to set the extraction method to digital secure.

I'm looking to extract the content to APE files. I want to have perfect extraction (or as close to, given physical damage to the disk that might cause problems.)

Should I stick with EAC or does MC's Digital Audio Extraction work equally well? When tagging APE files, does MC use APE tags? Are they v1 or v2?

Thanks,
kiwi

KingSparta · « **Reply #21 on:** June 23, 2003, 03:19:35 pm »

EAC and MC9 both use the lame encoder

Matt said MJ\MC is bit perfict

Quote

I imagine that you have to set the extraction method to digital secure.

well i don't feel this is needed, maybe on older systems that the CPU speed is not all that high and the CD Burner takes like 1 hour to burn a CD.

I have a 3.06 Ghz computer with a 48x burner so thats not a problem for me, even when i had my 700mhz computer digital secure was never needed.

kiwi · « **Reply #22 on:** June 23, 2003, 08:06:49 pm »

If I were ripping to MP3s, I wouldn't really care too much.

The only concolusions that I can draw at this point are that MC will extract w/o a problem as long as the disc doesn't have any errors, and that if you have scratches and such, you should use EAC because it is better at recovering that data. But this is only through various threads that I've read, with no concrete data.

Also, EAC will create CUE files for recreating your CD and can be setup to deal with "Read Offset", but that is only a few ms here and there.

I figured that I'd move this discussion over to the appropriate thread.
http://www.musicex.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=MediaCenter;action=display;num=1056140676;start=0#18

-kiwi

BigAl · « **Reply #23 on:** June 25, 2003, 05:18:12 am »

It seems a lot of us are paid up but using other (better) components for specific functions. EAC is one. TV front-end is another. While hairstyle is a great idea, it was always one of those "later dude" components. MC is a great management engine but all my wife sees is the hairstyle interface which really lets the whole product down.
I've seen a few people using myhtpc for this (Nila, Adam) - any comments?

nila · « **Reply #24 on:** June 25, 2003, 05:46:47 am »

hey - dont quote me like that, it'll make me look like I'm a trouble maker

lol

Give MC a chance - they said they're going to revamp hairstyle after they've finished with the GUI overhall that's happening now

and MC is primarily just a jukebox, the rest are added features which they're doing agreat job with but no software can be it ALL.

Having said that, there are some areas that could do with improvements and a little nagging/reminding of the specific things u'd like to see changed/added usually results in them happening if u persist enough and people agree.

Just give the specific things u'd like to see done - repost them in each build or start a thread for the specific thing and it'll happen in time

Individual threads work good as you hear other people's opinions and sometimes realise u were wrong to begin with - I have been occassionally

- The panes are one example - once I ditched all my original view schemes and started fresh they work great.

sraymond · « **Reply #25 on:** June 25, 2003, 07:54:18 am »

Quote

and MC is primarily just a jukebox, the rest are added features which they're doing agreat job with but no software can be it ALL.

You're showing your age! MC is *not* just a jukebox to many of us - though those that jumped on in MJ8/7/6/? might think so.

"All Media - One Interface"!

Scott-

nila · « **Reply #26 on:** June 25, 2003, 08:02:09 am »

"All Media - One Interface"!

Doesn't say anything about it not being a jukebox

It just means it's not just an audio jukebox which it's not.

It's main function though is to organise our files.
The hairstyle interface is just a newly added feature to give us a new interface to do this with.

sraymond · « **Reply #27 on:** June 25, 2003, 11:36:18 am »

Quote

Doesn't say anything about it not being a jukebox

It just means it's not just an audio jukebox which it's not.

You know I'm not one to be pedantic (yeah, right!), but I've never found a jukebox that plays video or photos. In fact, Webster defines jukebox as:

Quote

Date: 1939
: a coin-operated phonograph or compact-disc player that automatically plays recordings selected from its list

Scott-

P.S. I resisted the urge to do a bad Jack Nicholson impression... Jukebox? Audio jukebox? Is there any other kind?

Marko · « **Reply #28 on:** June 25, 2003, 12:40:30 pm »

so............

what about this forum split?

Can you do like "sub-forums"? A thread in here, the media center 9 forum entitled 9.1 beta, that contains all the threads relating to 9.1.

nila · « **Reply #29 on:** June 25, 2003, 11:38:57 pm »

Not that I hate to loose an arguement or am a knit picker or anything

BUT
where is the slot to insert the coins in MC?

Quote

Date: 1939
: a coin-operated phonograph or compact-disc player that automatically plays recordings selected from its list

I think that dictionary needs updating

It also says: Recordings - a video is a recording, so is a film technically. And if you really want to get technical - a picture is a recording of the light waves at a particular place at a moment in time so it's a recording too.

Sorry just bored and love a pointless arguement for a bit of amusement

sraymond · « **Reply #30 on:** June 26, 2003, 01:42:32 pm »

Nila,

There's a difference between prescriptive and descriptive definitions. It's unfortunate we get into the mode of thinking that because something is commonly used that it's "proper". I could get on my soapbox about Eubonics, but I'll resist!

I think that there should be a law about changing the meaning of words. If you're talking about something new, create a new word! I'm sure this theory is full of holes, but it sounded cool.

I wonder if JRiver changed the name from Media Jukebox to Media Center for a reason? While I'm sure it's not because they realized their application wasn't a jukebox (per Webster), I'd imagine that it's because it's much more than *just* a jukebox-esque program.

Your turn... :-)

Scott-

P.S. And I didn't even point out that you wrote "loose" when you meant "lose"! Ooops, I just did!

nila · « **Reply #31 on:** June 26, 2003, 11:56:18 pm »

Ah,
An educated man, I didn't realise they still existed in this day and age. I thought we had been reduced to the microwave, fast food, fast education, slow brain type.

Words are simply used to describe things so that when we say something people know what we are refering to. The dictionary was simply created as a way for people to look up the standard definition of what the words meant to the average person in the country the dictionary is created for. A means of educating someone as to the correct way to spell and pronounce a word as well as enabling them to see what the word meant.
The best word for the job is the word that describes and enables the other person to best understand what you mean and are talking about.
If I use a word which enables the other person in a conversation to understand what I mean as clearly as possible and this word does that to the majority of people in the country within which I am residing then the dictionary is out of date in not explaining the correct meaning of that word.
There is no official creator of a language, and it is definitely not ‘Webster’. The language is made by the people using it and the way they talk. The dictionary is simply meant to explain their meaning. Webster is therefore doing a poor job with their dictionary as it is outdated and no longer correctly explains the meanings of words as used by the majority of people within the country it is written for.

Webster should be sacked

sraymond · « **Reply #32 on:** June 27, 2003, 03:44:41 pm »

Guys like Strunk and White might not agree with:

Quote

Words are simply used to describe things so that when we say something people know what we are refering to.

Indeed, the foreword of their latest "The Elements of Style" reads "But we are all writers and readers as well as communicators, with the need at times to please and satisfy outselves (as White put it) with the clear and almost perfect thought." Writing is hard work - writing well (or is it "good"... I forget) is harder still!

You make me think of dialects - I'm familiar mostly with Italian. In Sicily, the younger generation tends to have has a disdain for Sicilian (the dialect) - preferring instead the "proper" Italian. Surely a dialect evolves within the confines of "understanding communication". I wonder if the disdain is because dialect is considered "uneducated"?

Wow... talk about getting off-topic!

So, if I asked 1000 Americans to draw a jukebox, how many would look like a computer? If asked those same people to describe a jukebox, how many would use the word "video"? Not many, if any.

Media Center is a great term. Of course, it's not in Webster - but give it time.

Scott-

nila · « **Reply #33 on:** June 28, 2003, 03:27:16 pm »

we're as off topic as the old discoverers were when they found greenland/iceland etc

- but hey - that worked out ok in the end

Media Center will indeed be in the dictionary soon with a picture of J River media center right next to it

But so will the term Media Jukebox with a picture of J River Media Jukebox.

If you were talking about computers to any slightly computer literate person and started talking about jukebox while still talking about the computer I'm sure they would know what you mean.

If you were talking to a non computer literate person then I'm sure they'd have no idea. But then again I know women who have put oil in the radiator cooler because they had no idea what a radiator was in a car.
U need to be talking to someone educated about the subject or it makes no difference

U do seem to have good arguements however with good points to back them up - I still disagree wtih you but I consider you a worthy oponent deservant of respect and so I shall not spit at u, but instead spit to the side of u

sraymond · « **Reply #34 on:** June 29, 2003, 10:39:54 am »

Now that's a truce I can respect! Spitting to the side of me is just fine - so long as the wind isn't blowing too hard.

I know what you mean about talking to someone unfamiliar with the topic.

Scott-

nila · « **Reply #35 on:** June 30, 2003, 12:04:04 am »

Aaahhh, peace on earth and goodwill to all

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: Forum Split maybe needed! (Read 5430 times)

LisaRCT

nila

MachineHead

V-Man

nila

V-Man

sraymond

sraymond

nila

nila

sraymond

nila

sraymond

Marko

nila

sraymond

nila

sraymond

nila

sraymond

nila