INTERACT FORUM

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Re:Managing Documents -- Why?  (Read 3295 times)

plopje

  • Regular Member
  • Junior Woodchuck
  • **
  • Posts: 62
  • nothing more to say...
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« on: June 07, 2004, 05:03:12 pm »

I am not trying to be too critical, but it seems to me you guys will have a hard time beating an app like Paperport Office from Scansoft. It supports all office, pdf-files and images, has extensive index/search features and has image editing. It's affordable and is available everywhere (download or boxed).

Why not focus on what you do best: Music management. ;)
Logged

Robert Taylor

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 646
  • Living in a Smokeless Zone...
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #1 on: June 07, 2004, 08:40:58 pm »

Here here...
Logged
Cheers
Rob

JustinChase

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3276
  • Getting older every day
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #2 on: June 07, 2004, 09:23:19 pm »

Don't forget about images and videos...

Media Center, remember ;)

I could live without the Document stuff too.

Having Media Center be more of a total media organizer/player/enhancer should always remain the focus of the software.  Otherwise you become okay at a lot of stuff, not great at anything.

I should think taking care of some of the many remaining items from the many different wish lists would easily take care of a major build.

Importing and playing Ripped DVD's, is but one great option.  They are not all pirated, many people just prefer to have the easy access that some of the other front ends provide.  Media Center could bring in another large market share of hardcore videophiles if it could be used more like zoom player, or better.  Choice of video codecs, audio codecs, etc.  I still cannot understand why MC doesnt' allow for importing of ripped (backed up) DVDs?  i can only assume that is a decision of some fish somewhere, but i think it's a bad decision.  More users, more revenue, more ability to improve software, yeah.

Sorry, I sort of spaced out there, what was I saying?  Oh yeah, MC rocks, lets keep it focused in the right direction.

Back to sleep...
Logged
pretend this is something funny

LonWar

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2874
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #3 on: June 07, 2004, 09:23:28 pm »

I am not that sure there weren't those that said the same thing when JRiver started out or when they decided to roll out MC instead of a higher MJ version...

All I have to say is, I wish them well and good luck!
Logged
-

Chris Shaw

  • Regular Member
  • Galactic Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 365
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #4 on: June 07, 2004, 09:26:44 pm »

I'd possibly agree with you on pdf files and other documents, but images and video are integral to the HTPC environment. This is where MC already scores big and a little more work on these areas would make it really top notch
Logged

hit_ny

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3310
  • nothing more to say...
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #5 on: June 07, 2004, 11:59:00 pm »

I'd be happi(er) if they implement *FULL* CUE support, still have lots of albums that are ripped as VBR and CUE. Can't rate or access the individual tracks from within MC.

Send TO-> winamp works, but why use winamp at all.

Fubar can access individual tracks with its CUE plugin. But it uses APL files for this.

Yes, APL with mp3 files !!!

I don't know whether Matt is uncomfortable about using APL for media other than APE.  The (A) in APL referring to APE. But I'd say imitation just shows how good an idea APL is for this sort of thing.

MC handles APL already and stores analysis data in it, it seems like a easier thing/maybe faster to implement than trying to do without APL.

Of course if they can do it without APL, Kudos to JRiver. No (APL) clutter in the album folder but then the analysis data is stored in the library only.

Library backups will be essential. I once lost mine and a quick import from files restored the ratings/analysis info. If they want to allow tagging other kinds of media in the future,  this might become the norm.


 
Logged

IanG

  • Regular Member
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 528
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #6 on: June 08, 2004, 02:47:16 am »

Well, why not?  MC's already capable of doing good things in the office, so it's got some of the core capability now and J River are talking about producing File Cruiser as a separate product.  If MC and FC are going to be parallel developments there should be plenty of opportunity to apply the lessons learned in both products - isn't that a good thing?  

Ian G.
Logged

IlPadrino

  • MC Beta Team
  • Galactic Citizen
  • *****
  • Posts: 496
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #7 on: June 08, 2004, 09:46:14 am »

I haven't put all my thoughts down on paper yet (well, not really on paper, but you get the idea), but my biggest concern will be this:

Document Management Systems need to be able to do real-time querying of the meta-data within the files themselves.  Will File Cruiser (TM?) be able to dynamically index the file metadata (and the file content itself!)?  If not, I wonder if it would meet the user needs.  Longhorn promises to revolutionize the Windows File System...  can JRiver beat them to the punch?
Logged

hit_ny

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 3310
  • nothing more to say...
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #8 on: June 08, 2004, 10:15:57 am »

Quote
Longhorn promises to revolutionize the Windows File System...  can JRiver beat them to the punch?

They have a head start.

Longhorn has been delayed and won't be coming out till 2006 or 2007.
Logged

GHammer

  • MC Beta Team
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 1930
  • Stereotypes are a real timesaver!
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #9 on: June 08, 2004, 10:45:27 am »

In my previous incarnation as an IT Manager, you'd never get an app that plays music in the door as a document manager.

Personally, if I were managing a large organization I'd go with SharePoint Portal Server 2003.

And for smaller shops or individuals, OneNote 2003 looks pretty nice.

But folks are folks and as long as MC doesn't suffer from neglect, I wish the crew good luck.
Logged

Bryan

  • Regular Member
  • World Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #10 on: June 08, 2004, 10:51:36 am »

I agree with the general intent of this thread..   I thought that MC would be the holy grail of media apps but I'm increasingly dissappointed in the results.   I think development should be focusing on making a solid 10 foot interface so that it could compete with Windows MCE.  Instead I see development time spent on deskbars, and document management, and a platform for subscription services.  Not that any of those things aren't useful ( I would definately use a movie rental service), but there's too much core work that needs attention in order to make this product all of which it is intented to be.    MC is the best media management product out there, hands down, no bout adout it..  ;)  It's sorely lacking as an app to easily access and enjoy that content though.   Hairstyle is horrible, period. Creating complex playlists requires a programming degree.  Some popular media formats are not supported.  I've spent at least 3 years working with this product, collecting content, cataloging it in MC, testing, installing, reinstalling, and configuring the product and I'm dissappointed in the interface provided to access it (Mini me and theater view).

I'm still not able to :

a)  have a solid and responsive 10 foot interface that friends can use without having a programming degree.  Wizards would help. A complete redesign would be better.
b) Reliable DVD playback with 5.1 audio. (The ability to choose mpeg decoders).
c) The ability to schedule recording a TV program and leave MC running
d) A media server with a shareable multi -user library.
e) Better relationships/partnerships with hardware vendors for things like  remote networked devices that can access the content in my library from other rooms, portable/mobile devices, entire systems with MC integrated into the interface/shell.  Better support for high-end audio cards (M-Audio).

I simply want a HTPC for my living room that can play DVD, play and record TV,  access and play my music, images, and video, and nothing else whatsoever.  And do it all from a remote control.  MC is just not there.  MCE is rapicly catching up to the ability to do this.

At this point I'd be happy if JRiver created an extension to Windows MCE so that I could use MC for music only.

Thanks for the great media management product but the UI for getting to that content and some of the missing functionality mentioned above should be your priority.

Bryan
Logged

Matt

  • Administrator
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 42373
  • Shoes gone again!
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #11 on: June 08, 2004, 11:44:50 am »

Quote
I simply want a HTPC for my living room that can play DVD, play and record TV,  access and play my music, images, and video, and nothing else whatsoever.  And do it all from a remote control.

A few years ago when we started MC, we heard the same thing -- except lists like yours were half the size.

People will want more and more from their software.  Our job is to try to stay ahead of that curve.

Helping one area of MC helps others.  We added compressed library fields yesterday because we needed it for document handling.  It turns out that'll make a huge size and speed difference for people with large music libraries as well.  There are a lot of other examples.

If there are specific things you want, start other threads.  Statements like "x is horrible" aren't helpful unless they're followed by specific ways to fix what you don't like.

Thanks for the support everyone.
Logged
Matt Ashland, JRiver Media Center

LonWar

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 2874
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #12 on: June 08, 2004, 11:58:27 am »

We added compressed library fields yesterday because we needed it for document handling.  It turns out that'll make a huge size and speed difference for people with large music libraries as well.  There are a lot of other examples.

Cool, and when will this build be releases.... Sounds interesting...
Logged
-

Bryan

  • Regular Member
  • World Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #13 on: June 08, 2004, 12:10:27 pm »

Thanks for the response Matt.  What I'm asking for is basic functionality.  I am not against adding any feature but my list isn't that long and it is core to what this product is supposed to be about.    I would think that JRiver would want to get that done before adding whizbang features..

As for the "horrible" remark.  I've made suggestions aplenty about the interface and I never get a response or even an acknowledgement. That would be nice on occasion, especially for as long as I've been a customer and supported of this product.  I didn't mean to ruffle anyone's feathers here.  I appreciate what it does on the desktop.  As I pointed out, it's the best..  Just trying to point out that there's some people out here who want a better and easier interface for accessing content from a big screen and a remote.  And there's some core stuff that is repeatedly asked for and it's not getting done.  ie.. the list..  

Bryan
Logged

pank2002

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 623
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #14 on: June 08, 2004, 12:52:40 pm »

I think it's a beatiful idea to add project organization. I probably will never use it myself, but, at least for music, J River has done a good job on that account.

I don't know what you mean about an easier userface. Have you tried other player like winamp; small buttons which is impossible to read... generally to small, that is winamp's problem.  Or Foobar2k? you know how hard it is to tag in foobar ? I haven't tried MS media player, but v8 was pretty good, as I remeber. On the other hand you have MC; big buttons for simple commands; everything darn feature accesible from right click menu; panes; playing now. In other players you have to create playlistes if you play your tracks in a certain way, or even worse, as iTunes which only 'works properbly' for full-album playback.
 
I've come with some request myself. Some have been added (from the top of my head I can think of a couple of calc commands for the bar... btw, what happend to the bar, matt) some are on a to-do list (mjextman /iPodSync -  Kurt's idea originally; panes on the iPod)  and some have been totally ignored (automatic save log file when ripping)

Here's another one that will probably be ignored  :)
  - custom icons for view schemes. It would be great, as I fx have a standart album artist (auto)/album view scremes which only contains artist from a playlist with danish music. I would be great to be able to give this view schemes a danish flag as icon.

Cheers, and sorry for getting OT.
Logged
Music is life... the rest is details.
Here is a security related website: secubi.dk

Bryan

  • Regular Member
  • World Citizen
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #15 on: June 08, 2004, 02:00:39 pm »

I don't know what you mean about an easier userface. Have you tried other player like winamp; small buttons which is impossible to read... generally to small, that is winamp's problem.  Or Foobar2k? you know how hard it is to tag in foobar ?

The easier interface I am referring to is the 10 foot interface (Theater View) only.  The desktop interface in MC is perfect.   I've tried them all and I periodically go back and check them out for changes.  Winamp isn't suited for the HTPC and isn't well designed for library management.    Foobar,  well... the name speaks for itself..

Bryan
Logged

Matt

  • Administrator
  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 42373
  • Shoes gone again!
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #16 on: June 08, 2004, 02:10:36 pm »

Logged
Matt Ashland, JRiver Media Center

pank2002

  • Citizen of the Universe
  • *****
  • Posts: 623
Re:Managing Documents -- Why?
« Reply #17 on: June 08, 2004, 02:10:43 pm »

Oh, sorry Bryan. My fault :)

I must admit I haven't used hairstyle very much. When I used it, I remember it annoyed me to start playback of tracks (or at least I couldn't figure out) and the "cursor" was soo slow.

I guess Hairstyle could be improved. I don't use it much though-
Logged
Music is life... the rest is details.
Here is a security related website: secubi.dk
Pages: [1]   Go Up