Print

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

[Marty3d]

Tried MJ9 today and I must really push for redesigning the interface!
The current interface worked for MJ8, but I believe it's WAY to cluttered now.

I know that you put alot of effort in skins for this one, but I'm sure you can keep the core engine anyway.

The tree list: There is way to much information in this tree now! It would be far more better if you divided the tree into "views" instead. Playlists for itself, ML for itself, And Playing now for it self etc.

I'm not trying to be mean, but the interface that you introduced to MJ8 actually looks 'old'.

I've just beginning to work with VS.NET. There you have an interface that's containing EVERYTHING. But for some reason, MS manage to have everything you need at hand without the user being too confused.

You should probably let an interface designer look at MJ9...I know I got lots of ideas to redesign it when I saw it.

And please, take this as GOOD critic, I really love MJ and probably will for a loooong time! But something has to be done about the looks...

[Matt]

Specific, implementable critiques help us a lot.  General comments like "redo everything" only make us feel bad.

If you make a list of specific ideas, we'd love to hear them.

Thanks Marty.

[Marty3d]

Of course, Matt! It wasn't intended to mock you in anyway, more to start a discussion about the various pros and cons of the current interface and get some input from you and the users. (plus doing some cooking...and I suck badly at that, so the post was a bit too quick)

I'll pop in later tonight to give you some more "real" input

Sorry if it sounded harsh! It wasn't my intention!

[JimH]

I had the same reaction as Matt.

There is no simple answer to what you suggest.  Here's why.

(Ever hear the joke about the camel is really a horse designed by a team of architects?)

Everyone has a different sense of what looks "good".

Power and simplicity are trade-offs.  Small improvements are possible but if you want power, you will end up with at least moderate complexity.

Your comment about "looks old" is a little annoying.  We probably follow the rules for Windows interfaces more closely than others.  I guess that's not in style anymore.

But feel free to make specific suggestions.  We know there is always room for improvement.

[Marty3d]

I noticed that I hit a weak spot here, and I'm truly sorry if you saw my post as just dissing. It's absolutely not! I love MJ and only want it to be as perfect as you want.

About the "old" issue. I didn't criticize you following the windows standard. Probably it's the look and feel of icons, symbols, choose of fonts and such that does it. I'm certainly no expert on the subject, but take a look at WinXP and some of the newer programs that developes. Everything seems...flashier or something. One thing that have gotten critics before is the tiny jukebox for instance... But hey! The development isn't done yet, is it?

Some suggestions, as promised:

Tree view general
----------
At first, you have a great overview over all parts of MJ. But expanding only Artist/Album makes the tree list hard to navigate (if you have 200+ artists, there's ALOT of scrolling), expand a few times more and you'll have to resize the pane to see the text.

Suggestion:
Break up (I would try to remove the tree list alltogether) the tree view into different layers. Tabs perhaps? Playing Now, Playlists, Devices. Here you could have one layer only for searching as well.

Tree view (the different sections)
--------------------------------
Suggestion:
Imagine the standard Explorer in Windows. When you click on Media Library, you could get the different View Schemes as "folders" in the main window (where the list of songs show if you with the current design). From there, the user could double-click on the desired "folder" to see that particular View, or expand the tree in the left pane if she wishes to.
It might not change functionality radically, but newbies will have an easier time to understand the structure (coming from a family of computer illiterals and being a former "basic computer knowledge" teacher, I know they rather like going through folders that way , you know, DblClick My Computer - dblclick C: - etc, instead of using trees...they simply don't understand it!). The added view for songs/images is a great step on the way, but I believe that one can develop it further.

I can't remember the details on the rest today, as I've been pointing out in an earlier post, I've only got MJ9 installed at work. But I will gladly try to leave more suggestions later on when I see the interface again tomorrow.

Cheers and thank you for being patient with some of us!

[JimH]

Tree view general
----------
At first, you have a great overview over all parts of MJ. But expanding only Artist/Album makes the tree list hard to navigate (if you have 200+ artists, there's ALOT of scrolling), expand a few times more and you'll have to resize the pane to see the text.

Try a right click on the view scheme, edit, and add the two-letter option.

Suggestion:
Break up (I would try to remove the tree list alltogether) the tree view into different layers. Tabs perhaps?

Tabs are a problem for new users.  They often don't see them.

Playing Now, Playlists, Devices. Here you could have one layer only for searching as well.

Tree view (the different sections)
--------------------------------
Suggestion:
Imagine the standard Explorer in Windows. When you click on Media Library, you could get the different View Schemes as "folders" in the main window (where the list of songs show if you with the current design).

It's called the Content Window.  The folder view is a reasonable idea.  It may have some merit.

[nila]

Please dont remove the listing that currently shows, maybe add the folders as well at the top, but I definitely like the listing still. I use the tree view to refine what I'm looking at.

Also, computer for newbies doesn't quite count in this case as that is usually for people with no idea how to use a computer.
Anyone using MJ must know enough about computers to be able to find it online, download it, install it, and actually have some computer music to play.
That all suggests some level of computer knowledge.

At first, you have a great overview over all parts of MJ. But expanding only Artist/Album makes the tree list hard to navigate (if you have 200+ artists, there's ALOT of scrolling), expand a few times more and you'll have to resize the pane to see the text.

This is why I suggested having the 'search' toolbar always visible so that this list can be searched quickly and easily by entering a basic search criteria.
This would allow one letter to be typed which could half or even quarter the number of items shown.

Pretty easy for beginners but still gives a LOT of power if combined with the tree view itself changing dynamically to show results of searches.

This would have to be an optional feature though as some people might not want the dynamic changing, I'd suggest having an option box right on the search box itself so it can be turned on and off VERY easily.

[JaredH]

I believe that this issue goes back to an option that a lot of people have been asking for since the advancements from MJ7 to MJ8. The ability to hide the different main branches of the Tree. With MJ9 having more than MJ8 (which has more options on the tree than I personally need) i do agree that some sort of tree management would be a good idea, in my opinion preferably the hide/disable option for all of the tree branches. That way (especially since MJ9 will have the My Computer view) you dont have people using your program to play songs and accidentally get into my computer and screw something up or lose files. I actually just logged on to post a message asking if you guys were considering implementing a hide option for the Tree options for MJ9 when i saw this thread.

[Polonio]

Sorry, I agree with Marty3d, MJ interface looks "old" to
me, but I also like very very much how MJ works. I like
its organizing features, the power for tagging,
converting, ripping, and so on, I like the fast it works.
But I do not like the interface.

I am not a GUI designer, nor an expert, so I am not
sure why it does not likes me pretty much. But here are
some suggestions:

1) Tabs in the left (just like WMP8, sorry), or in the top. I
would put tabs for these "views":

-Playing now
-Media library (or, maybe, three independent tabs:
audio, video, images)
-My computer (Why do not include "CD, DVD, &
Handhelds" into My computer view?)
-TV Turner
-Web Media
-Playlist (not sure about it, may be it should go inside
Media Library)


Each "View sheme" into the Media Library could be a
tab or, even better, "Media Library" tab should expand
displaying each "View scheme".


2) Two buttons for "Send to Playing Now" and "Send to
Playlist". These buttons should be menus
buttons like the "Font Color" button in MS Word (then,
user could "Send to" last option just clicking, or expand
the menu to "Send to" somewhere else).

3) About the "File properties" window (and others).  I
would use a combo list for selecting the view (not the
actual arrows). Take a look to Album View 2 plug-in.

4) Someone suggested it. And it seems a great idea to
me. I mean the posibility to toggle between a "Content
View" and a "Folder View". I think the actual "Toggle list
style" button could be replaced for two group buttons:

- One group for toggle between "Folder view"
and "Content View".

-And another group for toggle between "Big
icons", "Small icons" and "Details".

Well, that are my two cents. I am sure you will do your
best.  

POLONIO

[Polonio]

Tabs are a problem for new users.  They often don't see them.

I do not agree with you, Jim. Tabs can be as visible as you like.

I understand you like to follow windows standarts. So do I. If you do not want to implement a non-standart tabs like the ones of WM, you can try the Outlook style. This is already a standard (you use it in your "Options" dialog, for instance).

I think it should not be hard to implement. Users still would have the full tree (if they want), but also the ability to filter it in order to display just one "branch" (Now playing, Media Library, Artist/Album view sheme...).

How to filter it? Just clicking the icons of the left panel (I am thinking in the Outlook style...)

This way, users could jump easyly between branches without any scrolling.



POLONIO

[Polonio]

I just wroted:

You can try the Outlook style.  Users still would have the full tree (if they want), but also the ability to filter it in order to display just one "branch" (Now playing, Media Library, Artist/Album view sheme...).

I taked a look to how Outlook works, and it is not exactly as I said. Outlook bar just jumps between the branches of his tree. It does not filter any thing. That bar also offers option for adding new groups and new shortcuts.

I think implementing a similar bar would be a very big improvement to your product. But you can also consider the posibility to filter the tree in order to diaplay just a branch.  

[Galley]

Say what you will, but I feel that RealOne Player 2's interface is fantastic!
I would love to see dockable, tabbed windows like Visual Studio.Net has!  Here's a component called DotNetBar that I am will probably be using in my future applications.  It could be used to make a killer interface for MJ9!
http://www.devcomponents.com/dotnetbar/index.html

BTW, the only thing better than spending your own many, is spending someone else's!  

[Galley]

Seriously, I am a software designer, and feel I am pretty good at interface design.  I have always felt that MJ's interface is "lacking".  The new properties window in version 9 is very nice!  It's very similar to something that I am currently working on (non-music related).
One thing I like about RealOne Player is that "Now Playing" is always visible, and that there are buttons for many of the most used options.  The drop-down list for artist/album is great.  I absolutely hate file trees! I am designing a file manager, and it will not have a file tree.  One suggestion I would make is to have each different section of the current file tree on a tabbed window similar to the ones in Visual Studio.Net.  The window pops open when you hold the mouse over the tab, and disappears when the mouse leaves the window.  You can also "pin" the windows open, and use it as a standard tabbed interface.

[Marty3d]

Hi!
I promised some details of what I had in mind to improve the interface today. Sorry to say, the server I put the images on was unaccessible from outside our network at work
But since JimH wasn't keen on tabs, I thought of another solution instead. I'll post the images tomorrow, but until then:
Have you seen Dreamweaver MX? The new interface has another solution for hiding away stuff you don't use all the time. If you look at their standard layout, Macromedia uses this to the right of the window. My english is too limited to explain how it looks...but, I'll post an image tomorrow on how you could use the 'feature' in MJ.
Anyway, after thinking hard about the looks, I've come to the conclusion that it's mostly the tree thats really bothers me...but manana I'll show you!

[RhinoBanga]

Say what you will, but I feel that RealOne Player 2's interface is fantastic!
I would love to see dockable, tabbed windows like Visual Studio.Net has!  Here's a component called DotNetBar that I am will probably be using in my future applications.  It could be used to make a killer interface for MJ9!
http://www.devcomponents.com/dotnetbar/index.html

Why buy when you can have one for free:

http://www.beyondata.com/

[RhinoBanga]

There is no easy answer.

The treeview is the best compromise between screen real-estate and usability/flexability.

Maybe another idea would be to have bookmarks so you can quickly get to your favourite sections/albums/playlists/etc

[nila]

Problem with the tree view is that going from it to one of the other nodes when in say media library is a pain in the ass, you can have to do a lot of traversing.

Two answers:
1. Have all the main tree nodes in a drop down menu above, each one then just displays the content of that tree below it so it's easy to get out of the tree.

2. Have a button that can instantly close the tree fully and the open it to back to where it was, give people an easy way out the tree.

I personally think 1 is a much more professional way of doing it.

I also think playlists could be much smarter implemented by being tied in with the search window, that way the contents of the playlist could be edited easily from the content view and for smart lists it makes it easy to load them in as searches.

[Marty3d]

I have to protest against your suggestion about dropdowns Nila
Think about it, how often do you use dropdown lists in a windows program? On the web it's another matter, because there are no good simple alternatives. One reason is that they take too much precision to use.

Personally I think that tabs are a solution, then you can separate the different items Playing now (which by all means perhaps shouldn't be in the tree at all), Media Library, Playlists, devices, plugins, and now system files. Split them up into different sections and the tree will be MUCH more usable.

But hang on til tomorrow, then I'll post an image on another solution (as I said before, JimH didn't want the tabs).

Later!

[JimH]

REALITY CHECK
While it is interesting to watch, this discussion isn't very useful to us.  We are not going to throw out the interface and start over.  We like it.  It works.  

And you must like it reasonably well, or you wouldn't waste your time here.

So, specific suggestions are welcome.  General comments or complaints don't help.

[Polonio]

REALITY CHECK
While it is interesting to watch, this discussion isn't very useful to us.  We are not going to throw out the interface and start over.  We like it.  It works.  

And you must like it reasonably well, or you wouldn't waste your time here.

So, specific suggestions are welcome.  General comments or complaints don't help.

Please, take a look into Outlook interface. It is pretty similar to the actual MJ GUI. Both have a large tree, and both have a content panel.

The only difference is that Outlook has an optional navigating bar in in left side.  Considerating MJ tree is much larger, I think an easy way to jump between branches is highly needed.

Actually, MJ has standard buttons to fast access to "Playing Now", "Media Library", and so on. However, I never seen before buttons for exploring a tree. Buttons should be for "Add to play", "Replace", "Send to playlist", "Clear Playing  Now", "Rip", "Convert", "Tools",...

Further more, a customizable bar should integreate very well plug-ins. Imagine: You just click over "AV2" icon, and "Album View" (or any MJ9 pulgin) starts. Imagine: You just click an icon named "Genres", and MJ goes to a scheme "Genre/Album" or wharever. Imagine: Anyone could create shortcuts for branches he most uses. Imagine: No more tedious scrolling.

It is a very easy solution. You should not change the tree nor the content view. And, under my opinion, it is a powerful (and standard) solution.

What do you think about this "Outlook bar" solution?  

[JaredH]

i dont believe that changing the interface is a good idea, but i do totally support the ability to hid the different parts of the tree. For those of us who dont use different parts of it.

[bennyd]

I think the Outlook type of bar is an excellent idea !!!

[JimH]

Pollonio,
A problem with being reasonably well established and having a good following of customers is that any change that pleases one customer or one group of customers often "tees off" another customer or group.

I've looked at Outlook.  The bar you suggest is much like Palm Desktop or even the new WMP.

Why don't you see if you can organize unanimous approval for this style and then we'll do it.

[Polonio]

Why don't you see if you can organize unanimous approval for this style and then we'll do it.

Outlook bar can be hiden from "View" menu. If some one hides the bar, MJ should look just like now. Great for scrolling fans!  

I do not see the point of your observation, sorry.

[Polonio]

Jim, can you put this thread into the general forum?

I think it is a general issue that may interest many people. Just a guess.

[JimH]

Pollonio,
While I appreciate your interest and enthusiasm for the subject, I don't think it is helping our development.  I hope you will understand.

I'm going to close this thread.  If you have specific suggestions, please make them in a new thread with an appropriate subject so people can comment on them.

Jim