Print

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

[infara]

Two reasons why I don't use Media Center (and use Windows Media Player 9 instead).  Media Center would be by far the best media player were it not for these two issues (in my opinion).  Both have to do with cataloging:
Let me first say I have a combination of CD's that I rip to add to my collection as well as a multitude of single track media files - some mainstream and some not.  I am currently using the newest beta of Media Center 10 (10.0.26)

1.  YADB is inconsistent, sparse, confusing, and too easy to modify:
 - Often the listed genres are not consistent among artists (and sometimes even inconsistent between different discs of a multi-disc set, such as the Phantom of the Opera Original Cast Recording.
 - Many discs that Windows Media Player 9 recognizes (often using All Music Guide itself) are not recognized by Media Center
 - Often multiple entries come up for any particular CD, and even looking at the details window displayed does not help because the information displayed is exactly the same.  Often this is not such a big issue, but it could be very confusing or annoying for some.
 - In my opinion, it is too easy for someone to modify the database by submitting a new entry for a CD or modifying an old one.

2. Windows Media Player has a few nice features that MC does not have:
 - Songs which feature multiple artists are cataloged as such, with all corresponding artists having that track listed under their name ... this is not integrated in MC's database.
 - Windows Media Player has a much more interactive lookup for individual tracks to associate them with a released album.  MC's is non-interactive and thus very difficult to influence or choose between multiple possibilities.

I know many of these reasons are inherent to the album database method used, but I've stated them anyway just to represent my feelings.  Any comments?

-- Anand

[dragyn]

Well there's only one reason why I do use Media Center... They listen! That's all there's to it.

I can't even begin to count how many times they've added stuff (from me) to MC. I'm sure if you got a problem, they'll try there best on fixing it. Maybe others here can put there 2cents in on a better way of cataloging, databasing and stuff.

If you're basing your views on v10, it's far from done. It's only gonna get better. I trust them and I'm looking forward to the new things to come.

[mooseman]

YADB is inconsistent, sparse, confusing, and too easy to modify:
- Often the listed genres are not consistent among artists (and sometimes even inconsistent between different discs of a multi-disc set, such as the Phantom of the Opera Original Cast Recording.
- Many discs that Windows Media Player 9 recognizes (often using All Music Guide itself) are not recognized by Media Center
- Often multiple entries come up for any particular CD, and even looking at the details window displayed does not help because the information displayed is exactly the same.  Often this is not such a big issue, but it could be very confusing or annoying for some.
- In my opinion, it is too easy for someone to modify the database by submitting a new entry for a CD or modifying an old one.

Uuuhmm...Every online database has this issue, unless you are going directly against the record companies information.  CDDB does this as well.

[infara]

Yup... I know it's a common problem among databases... I'm just saying that I feel WMP's is a bit better and trying to state why I think so...  Of course, WMP itself has many problems, namely that it isn't very configurable and is insists on sticking to a particular cataloging ID choice even if it is wrong.

-- Anand

[Doof]

It's true that WMP9 has some nice features. Hell, all of the media players out there have some nice features that the others don't. But WMP9 is lacking in some really major areas, IMO.

Here's why I don't use WMP9:

View Schemes are a joke. You get Artist/Album and that's it. Want to view your library by Genre\Year\Artist? Forget it.

It's slow.

It supports only a very limited number of file formats.

While I don't believe that MS is the evil empire that others do, I don't fully trust WMP9 to not screw me over in some way. Last time I checked, MC wouldn't allow a hacker to take over my PC, for instance.
 
Last I heard (although I think this may have changed recently), WMP is pretty much WMA only as far as encoding goes. You have to buy some encoders and others are flat out unavailable.

Personally, to not have to deal with all of that, it's worth it to me to have to deal with the occasional online database discrepancy.
 
Plus, I can duplicate the multiple artist thing in MC just by adding one database field and changing my view schemes a little bit.

They're hardly what I would call deal breakers. I can't actually think of anything that WMP9 can do that MC can't, although I will admit WMP9 is a much cleaner product. I can think of several things that MC can do that WMP9 can't.

[bedessy]

word-up people at jriver's forum do listen and they do try there best. Evertime you turn around there try'en to improve on something. verison after version's are coming out they'll try. what version are we on now . Working on v10 . I 've been in it to win it since V7 and still have'nt find a better Media player for my computer. May haven't post to much but hey,They most be doing somthing right to keep me with them for what 3 version 's .

[xen-uno]

Regarding on-line DB's...

EAC/FreeDB has never failed to find a match yet (and can find many, but which one to use is up to the user). On top of that, it presents the data in an easily editable format, which is necessary because often, the entries are full of typos and mis-capitalization. It is also very easy to select an alternative file naming format (ie...for soundtracks). It won't do single track lookups, AFAIK...but I never do that anyhow.

10^-27

[TimB]

I guess I like MC 'cos (a) its got SO many cool and powerful features, (b) I keep on discovering (ie reading on INTERACT) about features I didn't even know it had and (c) the developers and management listen to feedback.

Others mileage may vary.

-=Tim=-

[martinhw]

If WMP is so much better than Media Center according to you infara, why do you not post things on the WMP Forum giving credit where you think due, instead of trying to groan about what you don't like.

If it were me, I'd spend time telling the developers of the software I like what I'd like to see in future releases, not on a forum of the software I don't like.

Opinions are like @ssholes - Everyone has one.
 - Some just stink more than others ! -

[toniann]

Windows Media Player has a version that runs on most handheld Pocket PCs under PPC Windows 2002/2003.

This combination allows me to stream songs (WiFi), when I am at home, from my home machine to the handheld, which can connect to powered speakers in any room I am in.  To me the ability to conveniently access any song, without having to first download it to the handheld, is a considerable advantage to Microsoft products.

When will there be a version of MC that runs on Pocket PCs?

[Doof]

I thought I read somewhere that WMP9 was the last stand alone version of WMP. From now on, to upgrade WMP, you'll have to do upgrade Windows.

I know that's the case with IE, but I could have sworn the same was true with WMP. Anybody care to confirm or correct me on this?

If it's true, that's a huge reason to steer clear of it right there.

[infara]

If WMP is so much better than Media Center according to you infara, why do you not post things on the WMP Forum giving credit where you think due, instead of trying to groan about what you don't like.

If it were me, I'd spend time telling the developers of the software I like what I'd like to see in future releases, not on a forum of the software I don't like.

Well... I do like Media Center... so that's exactly what I'm doing - saying what I'd like to see in future releases.  Seeing as the MC developers seem to be very open to suggestions, I figured this was appropriate.  I don't want to have to use WMP - it just best fits my needs at this point.

[LisaRCT]

If WMP is so much better than Media Center according to you infara, why do you not post things on the WMP Forum giving credit where you think due, instead of trying to groan about what you don't like.

If it were me, I'd spend time telling the developers of the software I like what I'd like to see in future releases, not on a forum of the software I don't like.

Well... I do like Media Center... so that's exactly what I'm doing - saying what I'd like to see in future releases.  Seeing as the MC developers seem to be very open to suggestions, I figured this was appropriate.  I don't want to have to use WMP - it just best fits my needs at this point.

Perhaps a more positive approach would have met with less debate and more support/agreement . . . .  
instead of "Why I don't use Media Center" a more positive title of "What would help me use MC exclusively" may have been better (the old saying about catching more flies with honey . . . ).
But you are correct, they do listen here.

[sraymond]

Perhaps a more positive approach would have met with less debate and more support/agreement . . . .  
instead of "Why I don't use Media Center" a more positive title of "What would help me use MC exclusively" may have been better (the old saying about catching more flies with honey . . . ).
But you are correct, they do listen here.

Come on, guys...  instead of us critisizing this guy for a negative approach, JRiver should be saying "thank you" for taking the time to post his reflections.

I believe JRiver considers *all* opinions with an eye towards improving MC - even those that might not be the most "politically correct".  Surely they wouldn't avoid improving just to spite him.

OK...  so here's my contribution to this thread:  Wouldn't Utopia be a place where we could download the metadata using any of the databases and then import that metadata into MC?  I've had occasion to give a lot of thought to importing metadata (I wanted to tag thousands of images automatically) and I concluded that MPLs let me import any metadata I want.  There's a downside:  you can only import an MPL item if the file is *not* currently in the library.  So as a kludge, I first export the MPL, then delete the files from the library, then merge the MPL with the third-party metadata, then import the merged MPL.  Of course, I backup the library first, 'cause I've been known to make a mess sometimes.

If we could easily "update" the library with an MPL, this would be a great way of importing third-party metadata.

Thoughts?

Scott-

[Bartabedian]

Well, here in the states anyway, this is what we call Capitolism at its best.
Certainly for some users, WMP has the functions that suit them, while others prefer something else.

Within MC, some users find tagging, DVD or TV features useful, even powerful tools, yet others use it strictly as an audio player, playlister and catalog system.

But in the end, the true test (ament) to MC is, they do listen, they care what their user base has to say and are usually willing to implement changes if the demand is justifiable. Microsoft doesn't really care if you use WMP since it's freely available to almost anyone and comes standard in a windows install. Their goal is to make Windows a necessity in your life, not just WMP.

In the end, if you find WMP useful for your needs, then so be it. Enjoy it.

As for the YADB issue, it just a'int gonna change in MC, man is that a dead issue around here. And the cataloging you mention is all customizable in MC beyond anything WMP can offer, but maybe you don't want to spend the time, I can understand that, so again, enjoy WMP.

A'int freedom of choice a grand option?

WP

[infara]

If WMP is so much better than Media Center according to you infara, why do you not post things on the WMP Forum giving credit where you think due, instead of trying to groan about what you don't like.

If it were me, I'd spend time telling the developers of the software I like what I'd like to see in future releases, not on a forum of the software I don't like.

Well... I do like Media Center... so that's exactly what I'm doing - saying what I'd like to see in future releases.  Seeing as the MC developers seem to be very open to suggestions, I figured this was appropriate.  I don't want to have to use WMP - it just best fits my needs at this point.

Perhaps a more positive approach would have met with less debate and more support/agreement . . . .  
instead of "Why I don't use Media Center" a more positive title of "What would help me use MC exclusively" may have been better (the old saying about catching more flies with honey . . . ).
But you are correct, they do listen here.

Well - actually, I had opposite thinking... I was trying to get people interested in reading what I had to say by using a more of controversial title.  Sorry if it offended anyone.

Anyway, similar to what Scott said above, I would recommend a way to access a multitude of databases and allow the user to choose the best information.

[zevele10]

I do not have XP .so i just saw the full Windows Player few times.
Yes it is good. Yes it is MUCH better than many other programs at $25.

I can understand that many people just stick with it when they got a computer.

You cannot compare with MC. They are 2 kinds of products.
So ,do not makes sens to say one better than the other.
I saw some small things in WMP i would like to get in Mc, but i do not remember wich ones.

And, yes, i would like a default ,or non-expert ,or idiot default setting making MC as friendly as WMP.

Beside it:
I was for allmost two months without internet.
EVERYTIME i put the mouse on an Window format  in Explorer 'someone' was trying to call home.....

And this WITHOUT WMP9 installed..not 7 or 8 ever by the way.
Just the one on the W 2000 disc. Must be 6.

And ,yes, YADB can be really a PITA [ not a  baked one]. Because of the lack of results , because  some problems with track number instead of track name.

I use FreeDB to get cd infos.

But ,unlike you XenUno
I uploaded A LOT of cd infos not in the data in FreeDB
I allmost never get entries  full of typos and mis-capitalization.
Genre are strange many times ,but i just do not care about genre .Blank in my library.
But i do not use EAC , so we may not use the same data.
In fact i rip with MC, but get cd infos from FreeDB and CDBB.

Now ,to tell the true , CDBB is the best concerning results.

Because ANY band would upload infos from his cd to  CDBB
Many to FreeDB
NONE to YADB.

By band i mean band , manager,roadie, girl friend ect .