> Currently panes autosize based on content. This is not user configurable.
Thanks. I'm happy to know for sure.
> Expressions may allow you to use fewer panes while accomplishing the
> same thing.
A very pertinent observation! I followed some threads about this and got some details from someone else. I tried making view chemes based on genre. That seems useful. So my basic browsing could be done with 3 columns: composer, album and Artist. I still have real uses for 4 panel columns. Two examples:
1. When I am tagging files, I use the panel columns to look for misspellings and unassigned field values. So I usually need to see Genre, Composer, Album and Artist in a panel column.
The list of values in a column is like an SQL Select ... Distinct. Quite powerful and something not provided in the file list portion of the MC 11 window.
2. I have quite a few recordings that look like duplicates on the basis of Genre, Composer, Album and Artist. These differ on the basis of a mon/stereo differrence, a re-mastering or just a coupling difference on the CD. For now, I'm just ripping everything. So I need an additional field to distinguish these apparent duplicates. That brings the column count back to four.
I've identified other uses but these two give the flavor of my uses.
I'm offering these examples to argue for making the panel columns thoroughly useful even with four columns. An algorithm that ensured that no column got squeezed to a useless width would be worthwhile. Letting me adjust panel column widths would work too. I'm not suggesting that this is a top of the list thing but I hope you note that for me at least, having 4 usable columns is quite valuable.
Being able to define panel columns (and use 3 or 4) was the feature that made MC 11 look significantly different and better than other music players i've examined. Full support for tags such as Composer, Conductor and Performer was the other big win for me.
Bill