Print

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

[scottlindner]

I'm a MC newbie (still on trial before buying) and I have a few questions about the Media Server option.

I'd like to maintain all of our music in a single location.  Just today I started dabbling with using MC as a client on one machine and MC as a server on another machine.  I tried changed some of the metadata for a file on the client, but those changes do not show up on the server.  Is it possible to enable all clients (or just some?) to have full change control of the library hosted by the MC Media Server?

I had more questions but I forgot what they are now.  Guess I'll have to post back.

I love this application!  I wish I knew about it a long time ago.

Cheers,
Scott

[JimH]

I tried changed some of the metadata for a file on the client, but those changes do not show up on the server.  Is it possible to enable all clients (or just some?) to have full change control of the library hosted by the MC Media Server?

It isn't possible.  The client is read-only.

[scottlindner]

Is this planned in the future?

To me it naturally makes sense.  It would make the application distributable and will separate client functionality from server functionality.  I guess this is why I find so many questions about replication, backup, file shares, VNC, etc.  To get the same capability as if it were a distributed app.

Thanks for the prompt reply.  I'll stop holding out hope that it's something hiding in a forum thread that I couldn't find.

Cheers,
Scott

[JimH]

Is this planned in the future?

Maybe

[scottlindner]

That's cool.  I'm not looking for promises.  It was more a test of myself to see if I understand how most people use MC and think of how it should/could be used.  Since this typically aligns with future enhancements.

The way I'm thinking is my wife and I could be sitting at our desktops doing something, listens to our jams, and fixing tag mistakes, adding ratings, creating playlists, adding new jams, etc.  All stored on our HTPC media server.  Then when we have people over or don't have a regular computer on we just fire hit a playlist on the HTPC that's always connected to our main home theater system and all that goodness that we've been doing while doing work on our desktops is already there.  That's how I would use it.  Maybe I'm a minority of users in this regard?

[jgreen]

Scott--
Sweat not.  I guarantee you the MC Mad Scientists are puzzling over this very issue, as we speak.  The nubbin is that if you want automatic syncing then you give up a fair amount of interactivity, as in refresh speed.  I'm not aware of any db tool that flops around as quickly as MC, and responsiveness is the most important factor for most users, I believe.  I can't wait to see what v12 brings.

By the way, welcome to MC.  IMO, it''s the most capable media organizer/player on the planet.  FWIW, these guys play it very close to the vest when it comes to announcing new features.  They'd rather make you wait and guess, it  seems.  But the end result is mind-blowing stuff, IMO.  Several users have noted your point about cllient/server updates, so I'm confident it's on their to-do list.

In the mean time, I'm listening to great music on a great program, and I recommend it to any and all. 

[scottlindner]

I can't imagine refresh being an issue if the client and server separation are done properly.  This isn't a new concept at all and our music collections are patheticly tiny in comparison to numerous client/server w/ a large shared database in the backend for a very long time.  The hard part is proper separation of client and server responsibilities.  Which is where most people make their errors in architecture.  I think the important point to take home is not to synch at all, but only give the appearance of unity to the user.  As I think more about this, a big part of the solution will probably be in custom user profiles... but that's a tangent from the real point.  Lots of people have mentioned it and we're both sure they are listennning.  I'm cool with that and certainly am not complaining in anyway.  I mostly wanted to make sure I wasn't having RTFM issues.  Which is a common problem I experience.   

IMO, it''s the most capable media organizer/player on the planet.

I agree.  After using MC for just a short bit I quickly realized it's the Cat's Meow.  My trial had a few more days left, but yesterday I decided to just buy it.  It's not like I'm going to hit expiration and not want to use MC anymore.  The one thing I do appreciate is the price to capability ratio.  There are so many people that make a cool gadget that people love, but is so immensly simple and want well over the $40 that MC charges.  I think it's a bargain to be completely honest.

I think it's wise to be tight lipped about upcoming features.  M$'s approach is very unwise.  Look at the embarassment Vista is and we still don't have it yet.