Print

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

[RemyJ]

Just adding my two cents...

First, "Clippy" should die a thousand deaths.  Having said that, Microsoft's Office suite IS a good role model (from a UI perspective anyway).  The average soldier has no clue of the power and flexability available to them.  The generals know all to well.

Wizards:  OK if they,re not intrusive.  You should always be able to call the wizard easily IF YOU WANT TO, but you should never be forced to use it or forced to dismiss it every time.  Everything doesn't need a wizard however.  

User Levels:  Been down this road a few times over the past 20 years.  Never seen them work.  Single biggest source of support calls.  "...But I don't HAVE that option on my menu!!"

I'm in favor of of mega-flexability in the configuration (including configuration of the UI (toolbars and menus))with a good set of defaults that will slightly challenge a first-time user.  

Here's another thought, If you think you'll lose revenue by making it more complex, make it up by publishing "Media Jukebox for Dummies".

[gkerber]

This opens up an interesting can of worms.

Novices (not novices for long) don't use MJ, really, the idea of having a computer based music system is not done lightly.

(Somebody didn't like UNIX, I wish Windows was more UNIX like!)

Different user levels might be good, not showing all of the features until the user is ready for it.

Things like being able to choose which sound card MJ uses is critical for me, and it's really an expert feature.

[sekim]

lee269,

I know. Just making it clear on my end about what I think of them gizmos tapping at the screen like I'm some kind of stooge.

And I don't think a thousand deaths is enough for that little $#!|PLS|.

[lee269]

I think even MS realised how annoying the paperclip was. But RemyJs point about the useability of Office is well made - MS spend $m on useability testing AFAIK - if MJ can incorporate some of their techniques I think they wont go too far wrong.

[sekim]

Another thought here that may put me on the fringe of lunacy. This very forum.

As much as I hate to admit it, this could be the time for yabb or something close to it. I visit Matt's site once in a while and have found that it wasn't as bad as I previously thought. The way it is layed out isn't as confusing as I had imagined. If a b12 fortified (read-complex), MJ 9 and beyond is going to need more support this may be a way to handle some of the increased load it/they will generate. I think the way FAQs - trouble shooting - tips and what have you could be put right out front where anyone can find them, would ease a ton of the burden from J River.

But then we lose the familiarity, and in general good natured aspect of the current Interact. Which is why I like hanging out here so much. Boy, I can't believe I'm thinking this..

[KingSparta]

>> I think even MS realised how annoying the paperclip was.
I like the cat, it's so cute.

I guess we can see that no matter what MJ is we all have diffrent views of how someting should be an no one will be happy.

If a program that can be completly customized by the user and options added as the user grows with the program then that program will (IMHO) will win the market.


'Year of the Cat' Charted At 08 In 1976

Listening to: 'Year of the Cat' from 'Sounds Of The Seventies - 1977' by 'Al Stewart' on Media Jukebox

You Can See All Of My 6200|PLS| MP3s On The Top 40 List from 1940 - 2002 By Using Media Server, Built Into Media Jukebox.

My Media Server IP Address: 24.88.229.242.:80
Note: Use The Latest Media Jukebox 8.0.348, Media Server Version 1.0.135 Older Versions

[RemyJ]

Well said, except about the cat.

[sekim]

Mark,

1) I'm not sure that may be the right answer. MJ can't do it all now, but that doesn't mean we are unhappy with it. We can all see that it is an evolving product. Look at some of the other rubbish on the market and see where MJ stands then.

2) >>> options added as the user grows with the program <<<

Or maybe just shown how to awaken them. I garner as much about MJ as I can everyday from others experiences. I'm sure I am not alone here. They are there, I just need a nudge once in a while to get to them.

[joe mama]

Novices (not novices for long) don't use MJ, really, the idea of having a computer based music system is not done lightly.

That's probably true.  I would imagine most people start out just using WMP, then they hear about Winamp or Musicmatch, and then maybe end up at MJ when they realize the possibilties of a computer based music system.  Although, I know a lot of advanced users who just stick with Winamp.

[KingSparta]

>> Or maybe just shown how to awaken them.
I do like the new MS OS Windows XP where it lists programs i use most on the list.

Maybe as a user uses options the most common options a user uses can be on a list and icon list along with basic options used for first timers.

[gkerber]

I hate the cat and the dog and the "most used" menu, and the dancing butterfly in Messenger has been banned from my system, and the paper clip guy should have been shot dead.
I have XP, set for Windows Classic
I have never used Visualations (might have like them in highschool when I was high...., so many years ago....)
I really like a no-nonsense OS and program.

That all said,the great thing about the lastest OS and programs is thier customization.  I don't like the cute fluffy stuff, others do.  And we all get what we want.  Cool.

[phelt]

IMO a lot of the suggestions in this thread, though obviously pondered for a while, might tend to make MJ _more_ complicated than it is now, both in terms of use and development. I would put the "multiple user modes", "learning menus", and "pay per feature set" ideas into that category. Again, no disrespect intended because everyone is trying to help make MJ even better,

This discussion is reminiscent of the "various artists" thread. In this case, as in that one, I'm pretty happy with the way that MJ works now. Everything on the surface of MJ is pretty straightforward. If I need to tweak something I can drill down into Settings, etc. I have no need for the Media Server and I have no idea how it works - this is a good thing. If I want to play with it I can dig and get to it, but I am not forced to configure something that I don't use.

There is also the responsibility of the user to take into account. Once something reaches a certain level of complexity, there is no way around education. Here and in other software forums I've seen a lot of "Why doesn't it do things my way?" posts by new users. The answer usually is "It can, here's how, BTW this is in the help file".

[zevele1]

This is a problem links to support forums.
It is so easy to ask.
If a  support by email,i'am sure that the mail will be set to an automatic answer:your question is adressed in help file.

The other problem with the forum is that if you ask about something you use only from time to time,the next time you use it ,you do not remember the 2 months old answer.

I started to compile some answers[to me or to others],like it i [hope]would not ask the same thing 3 times a year

[Charlemagne 8]

All that I would say has been said. I like King Sparta's Idea for purchasing the parts you want (Advanced User) beyond the Free-Basic (Beginner) and $24.95-The way it is now (Expert).
Having said the first sentence, OF COURSE I have something else to say.
There are "free" users, and I feel that this would constitute the majority ... check downloads:purchases to get a better idea.
There are Expert/hopefuls that will spend A LITTLE money on a piece of software. $24.95 seems to be a magic number to me. If it had been $29.95, I wouldn't have taken the plunge.
Beyond that, $5.00 ($4.95?) a pop for each additional feature appeals to me. If I'll do it, lots of other people will, too.
The question was "Should it be more complicated?". It could be but doesn't have to be. Go with the flow. Helpful, huh?
CVIII

[roving cowboy]

wow this is a large thread now.

what i mainly  dis agree with is taking the basic stuff and the eq off the free version.   i have 5 computers and am getting another one  so i dont want to have to pay for the program for all my computers.  

i should have the ablity to move it to my other computers sure that makes it likely to be copied and passed around to others.

but you can add something to the code that looks for some id of some kind that the person that orginal bought it has to put in their computers.

say like some code they have to fill out on your computer servers purcess page.  so only they could use the paid for version.

that way if they pass it to some one else and put their code in a computer that is not theirs it will work but all the info would not be there for any updates cause the other person would not know the needed info to get it.

but the orginal buyer could still go to your web site and put the needed info in to update any or all of their computers.

thus putting a block on the non paying user from getting the lic. updates.  

but allowing the orginal buyer to put the same lic. on all their computers cause they know the info needed to get the lic. updates

that would also allow you to trace back to the orginal buyer if someone reverse enginerd the pirated copy they had. because they would not beable to get the code out of that copy.

sounds like a winner to me?

[KingSparta]

>> what i mainly dis agree with is taking the basic stuff and the
>> eq off the free version.
But it already is a Plus Feature

From Features Page: Integrated DSP/EQ (PLUS Feature)

[sekim]

>>> wow this is a large thread now. <<<

roving cowboy - This may only be the tip of the iceberg.

As far as the rest, J River has to be careful about privacy issues here. This a whole other can of worms....and a sore point that may best be left out of this for now. Past threads allude to this if you care to search the forum and find out for yourself.

[mikeh]

Q. How complex should MJ be

A. It should be simple to use - which it is.

Mj is a very complex product - but you have to go looking for the complex bits. If you only want to do the basic stuff its really easy to use. Its got lots of gadgets that i still come across every day, but they dont get in the way of the average user. I think it really is a product that bends itself to the advanced user. Before i came across it i tried all the usual culprits. Real, MM MS etc.

Being honest if i wasn't an advanced user i would probably buy the others as they look far better than MJ, MJ looks old and boring compared to the competition. Real One for instance looks brilliant, plays all my CD's and does ripping and recording - and its free.

Ive used them all and MJ is the best product for me, but i can see why it probably doesnt sell as well as the others.

Never mind what the product does  - what does it look like. Thats whats gonna sell it.

Personally i'd be quite happy to pay more for an advanced level with the extra functions etc. $100 for the full product would not be unreasonable considering how much ive spent on other parts of my hi-fi.

JimH - I think youve got a real problem with MJ. Its too good for the mass of standard users, and the advanced users are not enough to pay for the development. Basically i think you should diversify and supplent this product with some new products  - rather than trying to make MJ do everything.

mikeh.

[Sam.]

Easy To Use is not the opposite of Powerful.  You can do both.

I agree with nearly everything Nila said.
Better organization of options.  Yes.
Wizards.  Yes.

Nila: Having thousands of options isn't a problem, setting them all up so as not to confuse the user is the problem.

Completely agree.

Alonso: So it's not the pages of options that turn folks off, but menu options and forms that don't immediately click.

Competely agree.


Please keep adding features.  But please also focus on the user interface.  Make everything intuitively easy.  Pay someone lots of money to design a great UI.  (Most people cannot make great UIs.)



At the risk of sounding like a moron, let me share with you my experience with some of the "advanced features."


DSP Studio
This tool is very well explained.  Easy to understand.  But hard to find; perhaps move this to the Tools menu.


Media Editor
My first attempt many months ago to truncate and save an mp3 file failed because I had not downloaded the right encoder to create the new mp3 file.  The error message wasn't helpful.  I gave up in frustration.


MusicEx Manager
I don't know what the hell this is.  (The recent death of my hard drive left me without the licensed version of MJ.  Haven't gotten around to restoring the license.  Perhaps it'll be clearer when I restore, but I'm guessing it won't.)


Media Server
If I weren't a message board lurker, I wouldn't even know what this was. I have 2 PCs and I'd love to try this, but it wasn't self-explanatory when I clicked on it.  So I gave up and dismissed it as too difficult.  I'm sure there's a great help page on it, but I'm not going to hunt for it.  And neither will most users.  


Download Manager
I've figured it out now, but at first, my reaction was, Where do I begin?  What do I use it for?  Add URL?  Huh?


Skin Manager
Easy to use.


Options
Not bad, but there is room for improvement.  And having lots of options does not necessarily make it difficult to use or understand.  It's a matter of grouping and labeling.  The more options the better.


Plug-In Manager
Excellent.  Plug-ins are over the heads of many users, but you have clear explanations for each type of plug-in.  Well done.


The Target Bar
Thank you Lee269.  Now I know what that silly target is for.


Search
The basic search is intuitive.  Ctrl-F.  The on-the-fly aspect is wonderful.  I haven't gotten around to learning the advanced search features, but I'm guessing you use them for Smart Lists.


Smart Lists
I'm sure I'll love it when I get around to figuring out how it works.


Properties
MJ's best features.  Extremely powerful.  I'm guessing that most users don't know it's there.


View Schemes
Another hidden feature.  I've created the views I want, but again, I think most users don't know it's there.



Other comments

Re Pricing, please keep it simple.

You don't need beginner and advanced modes.  Make the advanced features easier to use.


If you choose to stay in the mass market, I hope you're identifying new features from WMP, MMJ, and Real, as much as from culling this message board.  And if you're okay with open communication, you may benefit from asking users here what they like about each of your competitors.  This takes lots of courage.  

[Nila]

Ok,
here's where I think you should have two wizards that would position them straight away easily for new users and make it totally intuitive (I also think there should be an option to hide this).

On the Playlist item as the 1st child under it's tab you should have: Create new Playlist and inside that you should explain what a smart list is and ask them if they want a standard playlist or a smart list.

Again, on the Media Library, one for View Scheme's.
The search criteria box at the bottom is EXTREMELY useful and is what I was after for ages to make a playlist show only full albums. Unfortunately it's not very self explanatory, and I probably could have found the answer in the help file but like most users who want to just use it to organise and play their music easily on their PC, I doubt we're going to go near the help file too much. What would be far more useful is a little ? at the end of it that explained what it was or a ? next to the X in the top corner so that everything had a tool tip.
Also, standard users like myself wont know the different keywords that can be entered here. A wizard asking if it wanted to be run after we created a playlist (with a check box to permenantly disable that feature) that helped us create a search criteria by like giving us a list of fields etc. would be HUGELY useful.

You've created a lot of features but I think you need to do what all of us programmers forget as to us all the features are self explanatory as we made them, you need to spend time on things like tooltips, explanations of features etc.
5 Minutes spent writing a good tooltip will make that feature be used by hundreds more users. They'll know what it's used for and with a few examples included too they'll be able to use it in minutes. And once they've used it once they'll have the motivation to move into the help file to find out the full power it offers.

The more features u have, the more users who are likely to find your product having the answer to the features they wanted.

Good explanations of the features and how to use them is all that's necessary. Tooltips are very useful and so are those ? in the corner of the forms next to the X's.

[JimH]

Sam,
> [on Media Server] I'm sure there's a great help page on it, but I'm not going to hunt for it. And neither will most users.

This is a problem for us.  Even if we right good documentation, people still don't read it.

It's easy to say "well just make the UI better".  There is obviously more we could do in this area, but a better UI still doesn't make it easy.  Easier yes, but it may still be formidable for a new user.

There are a lot of little things we can do.  No question.  The suggestion on adding DSP to the menu is an obvious one.  It's there in V9.

[Mirko]

About UI and not reading helppages.

My father is in the IT-business for about 30 years now. And he said (and still says) that software which he cannot use without reading the help is not worth to try. I think this attitude is somewhat unrealistic, but it may show how the "normal" user think. Btw he _is_ able to figure out software on his own, but the quoted sentence is his usual answer to UI-issues :-)

Microsoft does intensive UI-testing. Because they know the way people get into software, I think. I do enjoy reading long helptexts and handbooks. But most people propably don't.

I think the UI MJ uses is quite good. It does not show to much possibilities on the first view. But as someone else said, you would not discover the power of MJ if you don't look for it (e.g. view schemes: quite helpfull but difficult to "find out" if you don't look; the same goes for filtering (I _like_ that, but it's hard to find, it took me a couple of days only to see them and even more to find the filter criterias in the help file (you do hide them very good, but not too good *g*)).
So maybe "tip of the day" would really be an improvement. But don't fill them up by useless tips, because then users do deactive them quite fast (as I do if they bore me).

Maybe you could collect the interact-forum-postings and try to filter them down to a few common issues/questions. Then don't cover them in a FAQ, because this is reading also and I think we agree that most users don't do this, but try to convert them into usefull tips or maybe wizards. I can only speak for myself when I say this: I would help you doing this, if I can.

Maybe do some sort of "wizard runtime" and let us help you building the content (this I have done some time ago for my own software; using very simple text-files). If there are enough "hooks" the wizards might be attached to, this might be a solution. So you can distribute different sets of wizards ("Building CDRs", "Organizing efficient" and so on). I have some more ideas how to do this, if you would like to hear, say so ;-)

HTH,
Mirko

[MmmmJoel]

All advanced users don't want a more complex program. Many advanced user only use Media Jukebox for certain functions.

I would not shell out $50 for a more complex Media Jukebox. I do not use half the features that you have (I use Nero for burning (licensed with burner), use EAC for ripping (free), Zoom Player for video (free), etc). $25 is the right price for me. I think many users are in the same shoes.

I paid $25 for the excellent APE support, tagging, and organization features. I wouldn't be surprised if you lose more willing buyers than you gain because the increased cost would drive off more users than attracted by some obscure function. It's not hard to imagine, because like you said, how many people would actually use the "Delete file after playing" feature?

I do think that making Media Jukebox more modular may be a good idea. Not to the extent that MachineHead suggested, but separating audio use (including organization), video use (including tv), imagine use (with MJ9), and burning functionality might be good borders. Something to consider, at least.

On the other hand, I do not think that Media Jukebox is an overwhelmingly complex program compared to other media players in terms of its interface. You have done a good job at keep the UI clean and managable and wouldn't worry so much about overwhelming a new user. I'd have an easier time teaching MJ than Winamp, for sure.

[Cmagic]

Long, but interesting thread.

my 2 euro-cents,

One way to please both simple and advance users could be to add an integrated scripting facility in MJ. Something lixe SaxBasic (a Visual Basic for Apps clone) would allow access to the full MJAutomation classes from within the MJ scripting engine.
That way MJ could be the same as it is now and the seasoned user could write a script to add such and such feature of its liking.

Of course you would have to set up a different licensing scheme :
like MJ classic at $25 for normal 'push button' users
and MJ with scripting at $50 for advanced users.

just an idea.

Have a nice day

Christian

[Nick_LeFave]

Most programs are actually complex if you go under the hood and start setting different options from default, but this doesn't prevent the average unknowing user from using Office (where you can customize the heck out of it), IE (most users don't realize anymore that they can set their own font options), & whatever else. That's why you need to have a default "classic" mode and also have an options menu that those more advanced users can customize.

I disagree with a package model. That is basically what winamp is. You get the basic shell program and then go hunt for plugins that work with it. It has been my experience, that you can almost get all the plugins you need (for free, except DFX) to approximate Media Jukebox (I said almost, you do sacrifice uniformity and good support, so wouldn't necessarily go that route anymore). Package model also confuses the basic user. They can't read details. They think that all the features listed in the copy apply to what they are buying (I have experience here, I worked for Parsons Software, The Learning Company, Broderbund, and Mattel Interactive which sold unlock keys for features that were listed as possible expansions in the feature copy. More people were completely p1sses off becaused that thought they bought everything. This created ill will and loss of money. Why? Because angry customer would call their credit card company and cancel payment/use their warranty ability). All the features in one product is why I bought MediaJukebox to begin with. I was a happy MusicMatch Jukebox user until I wanted OGG support.

Don't raise the price beyond $29.95. I feel that $30.00 is a reasonable market price. The only place where I can see a price above $30.00 is if you create the main jukebox and offer it with a suite of programs (ie. Make Download manager as powerful as Getright. Incorporate DX/VST support in the Wave Editor. Stand alone super duper tag editor and waffle iron.). I would pay more for a real suite of programs. That would get me to around $39.95 to $44.95.

Don't feel like you have to implement every user request. What is important is that the program has a consistent user interface and does what it promises. You as the programmers have a right to say this is the MediaJukebox concept behind this functionality. This does not mean you don't evolve the software, but it also isn't worth comprimising the gestalt/methodology of a program to make the switch change from blink/buzz/tinkle to tinkle/tinkle/blink/boom.

Right now, I feel quite confident that my mom can use MediaJukebox with no special tweaks. Maybe she wouldn't get all the power out of it, but she would still be able to play her mp3s. Remember the "classic"/"basic"/"average" user doesn't want the $6.00 burger for $3.95, they just want a burger that tastes good every time. They don't even want it their way, they just don't want to be hassled to get the burger. They think only "I want a burger", not I "want protein mass made from beef with vegetables products organized like this on maybe a bun made of raw grains with a twist of bourbon."

I think J River is on track with MediaJukebox. The program isn't complicated for the "classic" user and is extremely customizable for the "power" user. Currently the program is properly priced (maybe even over priced just due to the current licensing model) and any price increase would mean more people stick with WMP or Winamp 3.

So don't worry. Give yourself all a pat on the back.

[slikvik]

I've used MJ for over a year now, but I was 'almost' put off by the complexity that it has already. Luckerly I persevered to find an awsome product - but many would not.

I think the interface is at saturation point. I'm not saying don't add new features, but when you do, limit them to pull downs and advanced buttons - then people will leave them alone until they're ready.

I wanted friends to come round and kinda use it as a jukebox they could all use. This is just about possible in its current config.

Cheers guys

[Shotgun2]

I need an aspirin from just trying to follow this chain.

IMHP - Come out with your program. If I like it so much as to be a needed improvement over v8, I will pay a fair market price for it. If not???

Good luck - sg2