Topic: How complex should MJ be? (Read 8281 times)

JimH · « **on:** August 31, 2002, 03:51:26 pm »

We're being asked to add features frequently. Some are just plain great ideas and we do them. Some are not. But there is another category that causes us pain. Yes, pain.

These are ones in which a simple switch in options could make the person happy. Here's an example from a thread today:

----------
[KingSparta is replying]

>>> I would like to be able to turn ON a feature to
>>> REMOVE SONGS FROM PLAYLIST WHEN PLAYED .

that might not be a bad option, this way if for some reason you need to stop the playlist you dont play the songs over again when you start playing.

---------------

This one would be easy for us to add, and at least one user would be happy, but (and this is our problem), it adds complexity for all.

The expert users are no problem. They will be able to navigate without too much frustration.

The intermediates and below are the problem. They will find the choices bewildering.

So...what should we do? Is it already complicated enough? Or should we please more users?

KingSparta · « **Reply #1 on:** August 31, 2002, 04:04:43 pm »

Novice Mode

[Play] [Stop]

[X] Normal user Mode

[Play] [Stop] [Pause]

[X] Extreme User Mode (*All with an Attitude)

[Reverse*] [Play*] [Stop*] [Pause*] [Fast Forward*]

JimH · « **Reply #2 on:** August 31, 2002, 04:06:44 pm »

Perfect, but it still makes MJ more complex. Worth it?

sekim · « **Reply #3 on:** August 31, 2002, 04:14:02 pm »

Go for broke. Most questions are answered here without to much PAIN.

I'd like to see everything and then some. I guess in my case, the more I use MJ, the more comfortable I am with its advanced features. Like everything else, you have to learn how to use it. I'm still trying to figure out the can opener though...Good thing beer comes in a bottle, I just smack the S.O.B. on the counter and viola, open.

Listening to: 'Pain' from 'Shpritsz' by 'Herman Brood & His Wild Romance' on Media Jukebox

Listening to: 'Cure for Pain' from 'Cure for Pain' by 'Morphine' on Media Jukebox

Listening to: 'Pain' from 'Primitive' by 'Soulfly' on Media Jukebox

KingSparta · « **Reply #4 on:** August 31, 2002, 04:16:57 pm »

For me:

As long as your not talking about a Unix version, Yes

(I never liked Unix)

anyone else have some thoughts?

DocLotus · « **Reply #5 on:** August 31, 2002, 04:20:07 pm »

Hi guys;

I like KingSparta's idea. This brings back memories of several programs that I have used through the years that had 2 or 3 modes for different users,

1: Novice (or beginner) mode.
2: Experienced user.
3: Advanced (or expert) user.

The program only had one overall set of commands (the master set, so to speak). Each level simply made more of the switches available. Most users ended up using the 'Experienced user' mode. Guys like us would turn on the 'Advanced' mode.

KingSparta · « **Reply #6 on:** August 31, 2002, 04:21:50 pm »

>> Guys like us would turn on the 'Advanced' mode.
with a rocket straped to it.

dloneranger · « **Reply #7 on:** August 31, 2002, 04:25:53 pm »

yup same here, you can't have too many options for my liking
the beginner/normal/advanced option sounds good to me

sigh, if only windows had the same option
sigh, yes i really DO want to move that read-only file
yep, and that one ad nauseum

DocLotus · « **Reply #8 on:** August 31, 2002, 04:33:27 pm »

Another thought… having 2 or 3 levels of command complexity seems to have several advantages to the user (and to JRiver).

A: The new user does not get turned off by an overly complex set of switches as they start out in ‘Beginner’ mode.

B: As they gain experience they discover the ‘Experienced’ mode which gives them more choices.

C: When they think the program has run out of steam, they discover the ‘Advanced’ mode.

D: As the user moves through the various modes, they are gaining valuable experience & each new mode is a kind of ‘reward’ which is a great morale booster as the user has a since of ‘I did that’.

E: All of the above makes for a very faithful MJ user who will pass the ‘gospel’ around about the benefits of MJ.

phelt · « **Reply #9 on:** August 31, 2002, 04:44:19 pm »

I like the multi-level idea. This is currently represented in several features of MJ. In Options>Encoding you can get all the way down to command-line parameters. Same with Playlist building and View Schemes.

People who want a ton of advanced features are the kind of people who will drill down to get to them. In a perfect world there might be more feature transparency. But in the real world, regular users get overwhelmed quickly and presets should be designed for them. Hackers will find the tools to achieve their results. Then, after answering a newbie question or 3, they will post requests for yet more obscure functions

KingSparta · « **Reply #10 on:** August 31, 2002, 04:53:23 pm »

A Comment from A J River Advertisement

"Not Your Little Sisters Jukebox"

Dave T · « **Reply #11 on:** August 31, 2002, 05:28:59 pm »

Definately add all the features you can. As long as there's a default, "simple" mode, novice users need not even deal with them. Having an option to hide the "advanced" features is a great idea, but even without that, I don't see too much of a problem having zillions of options hidden away in "options" dialog boxes, as long as the basic UI remains simple, with all major features easily discoverable.

- Dave

JimH · « **Reply #12 on:** August 31, 2002, 05:33:06 pm »

Ok, now for the sobering part. You're ready, right?

The more complex and poweful we make it, the smaller our market niche will be. Programmers, technology freaks, union carpenters, etc.

This means we will have to move into a different (higher) price bracket. $40-$60, for example.

Still a good idea?

kthlnstz · « **Reply #13 on:** August 31, 2002, 05:33:23 pm »

This is a comment from a beginner or novice as you guys call us. I get overwhelmed trying to figure out the best settings for navigating through MJ. As much as I use help or this forum(which is quite often), this beginner just doesn't understand what is being discussed as far as: do this or try that. I've had MJ for quite some time and feel like I'm out of my league. So maybe I'm admitting my stupidity, but the different advanced levels sound great to me. You are correct as far as a person advancing through the various levels being an accomplishment for each level of expertise.
Putting aside my not knowing what I'm doing, I do really like MJ and have passes the word on to various people. Thanks for all you're doing and listening to suggestions.

phelt · « **Reply #14 on:** August 31, 2002, 06:05:54 pm »

JimH - my impression is that's your current market niche, mostly. Folks smart enough to be dissatisfied with the limitations of other media players.

In my case, the spirit of my response was: make it simple and shiny for the folks who just want to use it, with the presets and defaults created for them. Minimal control surfaces and options visible in most common processes. Beyond (underneath?) that, let your freak flag fly with deep menus, customization, and options for those motivated enough to learn, test, and Interact. I'm talking about getting away from a binary ease/functionality choice.

As to the price, it works both ways. Raising the price significantly will keep away many newbies. I think the geeks here understand what a bargain MJ is currently. I know I do. But it would become harder to recommend to people.

Chico · « **Reply #15 on:** August 31, 2002, 06:12:19 pm »

I can see both sides of the coin here. I like a lot of bells and whistles, and the more powerfull the better. Not sure about shelling out $40 to $60 for it all when I now have a great one for $30.
I also understand about the novice being overwhelmed. Rather than having a very complexed, $40-$60 program, what about the idea of two seperate programs?
A MediaJukebox-Lite, would offer a novice a taste of what a full blown MJ could do, and still have a lot of the features that make MJ what it is today... A very powerfull media management tool. They can play, rip, and organize their music, but wouldn't get into the more complexed features.
You could charge say, $10-$15 for the Lite version, then, if someone wanted to get bold and move up with the big boys, they could pay another $15-$20 and get the monster app! Those that want to jump right in there with the big fishies, would just pay $30 or so for Media Jukebox-Full.

sekim · « **Reply #16 on:** August 31, 2002, 06:15:44 pm »

Maybe price level performance options? You know those who want the good stuff will shell out the money. Structure it as such and you will still have plenty of markets. A discount if you go for the full boat of options?

joe|PLS|mama · « **Reply #17 on:** August 31, 2002, 06:19:47 pm »

I like KingSparta's idea. This brings back memories of several programs that I have used through the years that had 2 or 3 modes for different users,

1: Novice (or beginner) mode.
2: Experienced user.
3: Advanced (or expert) user.

The program only had one overall set of commands (the master set, so to speak). Each level simply made more of the switches available. Most users ended up using the 'Experienced user' mode. Guys like us would turn on the 'Advanced' mode.

I like this idea also. 1st Page 2000 is a free HTML editor that does this pretty well.

When I first started using MJ, I left everything set pretty much the way it was installed, and had no intentions of changing them. Now, as the weeks have gone by I've begun to realize the potential options MJ offers and have been coming up with more and more ideas on how to use and customize them.

Other options might be to offer a "Lite" version and and "Expert" version at different price points. Or offer custom installation which lets users install/unistall certain "Advanced" options as they want. Or maybe create a few streaming or downloadable tutorials that would help explain some of the more advanced features to new users. I found this type of thing extremely helpful when I first started using Cool Edit.

Rob

Mr.X · « **Reply #18 on:** August 31, 2002, 06:26:02 pm »

What about using wizards to help the newbies? You could build wizards from customer feedback when they ask "how do i..."

Then all the capabilities would be there for the advanced people to use, but the options would be pre-set from the wizards for the beginners.

DocLotus · « **Reply #19 on:** August 31, 2002, 06:37:38 pm »

JimH

>>Still a good idea?>>

Yes, still a good idea.

>>The more complex and powerful we make it, the smaller our market niche will be. Programmers, technology freaks, union carpenters, etc.<<

I think you miss the point Jim, make it complex… (underneath, with all the switches), but clean & simple out ‘of the box’. By providing an outwardly clean, easy to set up interface (Beginner), MJ will be more easily accepted by the new user. So I don’t see how this will limit sales, to the contrary, it should increase sales as new users will not be so intimidated.

In fact, MJ might have three main switches (&/or menu choices) for pre-set settings for ‘Beginner’, ‘Advanced’, & ‘Expert’ modes that will automatically pre-set all the switches for the three modes. Each mode will provide to the user more option choices until they get to ‘Expert’ which will make all switches available.

We ‘geeks’ will simply go directly to the ‘Expert’ mode.

As kthInstz commented, it needs to both powerful & simple at the same time so the new user is not overwhelmed.

Chico · « **Reply #20 on:** August 31, 2002, 06:41:11 pm »

I like the wizard idea, Mr X.

sekim · « **Reply #21 on:** August 31, 2002, 06:52:35 pm »

What about using wizards to help the newbies? You could build wizards from customer feedback when they ask "how do i..."
Then all the capabilities would be there for the advanced people to use, but the options would be pre-set from the wizards for the beginners.

This idea is sound. Maybe from the install wizard the choices could be given.

Beginner.

Novice.

Insane User-andyouknowwhoyouareyouneedtospendlesstimewiththisprogramandgetagrip settings.

JimH · « **Reply #22 on:** August 31, 2002, 06:55:20 pm »

Doc,
Powerful and simple are two ends of the spectrum. You can approximate powerful and still be simple or vice versa, but you can't do both.

> make it complex… (underneath, with all the switches), but clean & simple out ‘of the box’. By providing an outwardly clean, easy to set up interface (Beginner), MJ will be more easily accepted by the new user. So I don’t see how this will limit sales, to the contrary, it should increase sales as new users will not be so intimidated.

I know this sounds easy, but in support, we'll end up asking people what mode they're in, and then telling them they'll have to turn on another to make a change. We'll have to remember which options are available under which modes.

In the end, I think it's a choice we have to make and hope you like it.

JaredH · « **Reply #23 on:** August 31, 2002, 07:09:22 pm »

I agree with machinehead, wouldnt it be possible to make it a complex program and then build wizards into it? I mean you see a lot of programs these days that novice computer users use that have all the wizards built in and have the ability to turn off the wizards. Nero is one of them i can think of right off hand. That program has a wizard interface AND and pretty little beginner GUI for the novice users but you can switch to Nero mode and then use the advanced version. and give an option to turn all the wizards off and just emphasize the point that advanced mode is not for beginners and that you can cause damage to your files and settings in advanced mode. That should scare most novice users off. Of course youll get the occasional brave soul who will get in there and start clicking things and not know what they are doing, but if you think about it, those are going to be the ones that will learn the full potential of the program and become power users in the future rather than just scratching at the surface of the program and just being "content" and never realizing the true power of this program. Ok sorry, went on a rant, but you guys understand what im saying.

AlonsoN · « **Reply #24 on:** August 31, 2002, 09:32:32 pm »

When butting against weighty problems it always helps seek advise from others who have gone before. Can't think of anyone more famous for wrestling with the simple/complex problem than Einstein. A pair of quotes:

"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler."

and the profound but depressing:

"Problems cannot be solved at the same level of awareness that created them."

Some examples of simple/complex:

The mouse. Very simple, very powerful.

MS Word. Very complex, but can be used in a simple mode. EG most folks format documents with spaces, tabs and new lines rather than defining templates and styles.

MJ is complex, but not so much compared with the aggregate complexity of the 3-5 apps that it replaces, because the alternative is (for instance) learning to rip w/EAC, burn w/Nero, Tag w/Dr.Tag, label with ? play with ??.

I really don't think that adding a fat load of behavior options that users can look for and play with change the perceived complexity of the program for the newbie. Look at it this way, either folks like things as they come out of the box or they want to look and fiddle. By all means the defaults should make it behave most like everything else. But all other things (like price) being equal, the only reason why a user will pick MJ over ?? is because it offers something the other does not.

A dude that said that "I've had MJ for quite some time and feel like I'm out of my league." Ok. Maybe it would be good to spend some time understanding what about MJ makes folks feel overwhelmed. There may be insights to be had there. But the question is complex compared to what? To other audio applications or compared to putting a CD in a boom box and pressing play?

As for wizards. Uck. I've never met a wizard that I liked. They always seem to get in the way of understanding. Rather than knowing how something got done they always do a bunch of stuff and leave you in some weird place. Bad bad bad. Better spend the effort working on a UI that promotes understanding.

Goodnight Gracie.

roving cowboy · « **Reply #25 on:** August 31, 2002, 10:13:20 pm »

even though i do not post here much only a little now and then. and i do get mad sometimes in my posts. mainly when something so needed has been made for the pay only folks. like tag info. was in version 8.0315 or did you get that changed back..

i have been a huge fan eversense version one. remember the box with the horns.? the first time i saw that was on the tv set when someone did the david letter man show. saying the tech was stolen so they had to block the non mentioned big company that stole from re pattening it. then they could release it. how long ago was that? well i seen this back in 1999 on the net. then went and grabed it. and been pushing it eversince. and the guy on the tv said that he had to wait a few more yrs for the stolen patten to run out. yep i got a good memory only i thought it was johnny rivers that made this not james river. sorry.
just a little 5 min. on the tv made me a fan. so any bells and whistles you add is just more icing on the cake.

only that 40 dollar thing??

i am not in need of a lot of bells and stuff but i like to play with them

i have all versions of this backed up like any good little mjb fan. but i miss the eq that is not in this version i have on this computer. and it seems the line in is not on this one either. but this computer is not anything for work just listing to the tunes for this computer so the free one for here is fine.

I know you need to make money. i just like to get things for free like everyone else does.

if you add in the different levels like they did in the first page 2000 program which i also went straight for the advanced level.

that is the best idea so far.

but make the advanced level the part you get when you buy it.

and the beginner one the demo.

and the expert users the free one.

that sounds best on my end. that way i wont lose anything i use and if i want the advanced i would have to brakedown and buy it then.

just dont take away my visualsation studio

roving cowboy

zevele1 · « **Reply #26 on:** September 01, 2002, 01:31:17 am »

Well..First i want to say that i'm just a very dum average user.

There is a lot of things in Media Jukebox i do not know how to use because ,for a start i do not know enought about 'the thing' that MJ works about.
I mean i am just lost with tags,still do not understand really the matter.So i am lost with MJ fonctions about tags.

Do not know if 3 levels are needed.I use GetRight who has 2 wizards[?] or 2 modes[?],2 levels
The first one is for mister average,easy to set and the program works fine.The second one 'advanced' has A LOT of options.After some times i used the 'advanced',but there is still a lot i do not use and do not understand.
I know a download manager and a jukebox are not the same.But the main thing is that in 'average' level,you set throught a wizard,you do not have to mess around inside the interface.Impossible with a jukebox,you DO HAVE to work inside the interface.

Concerning price
Today,i understand a large part of Media Jukebox fonctions and 'with some little fonctions more[name of artist\song when MJ in the toolbars,play a sound when ripping finish...] i would pay more for MJ,up to $50.
But last summer,when i had problems with RealJukebox and Windows format and had a look around,I WOULD NOT HAD PAY $50 for Media Jukebox.

Media Jukebox played my WMA and i was able to play cds with mp3 on it.
To me was the good thing.I had a look at this place and just felt that such a spirit deserve my money.
I sent $25 after few days of trial period.As i say $25,i would have not send $50.

I did not understand all the MJ fonctions,for a part i even did not know there are this fonction and this one and so on.And ,after 30 days of use,i was still not aware of all the MJ power

If you opt for a 'shinning diamond' at $ 50-60,you may need to give more fonctions in the free version to get people realise the full power of MJ and upgrade.
I do know about the free fonctions,but you may need 'to give more' in the fields where you have 'unique' like tags and organisation.

Last,at $50-60 i'am not sure if i will upgrade at each new version who are out so fast

Nila · « **Reply #27 on:** September 01, 2002, 02:29:26 am »

Ok,
This thread is VERY interesting and is nice to see such important options discussed so openly with all of us and to see you wanting the users choice as to the direction of the company.

I think the real key here to some extent like people have said: a basic user and an advanced users mode. EAC has it and it works well for them.

Also, I dont think you should try to make it just purely advanced and for a niche market. It makes less money for you guys and means the whole world wont be converted and if we can convert the whole world then you can start introducing your own standards etc and make the whole world just accept them like they do when IE introduces it's own propriatry tags etc.

I think the real key though to giving all these features is in how it's all laid out. Right now all the options are in one big box for instance with just different options on the left that give more options on the right. This way will get HUGELY complex if more and more features are added. Possibly even just doing something as simple as having a tab at the top of this box that says: basic/advanced as the two tab options, clicking on the advanced tab will show far more options, clicking the basic will just show ones that the average basic user might want. By making the switch between basic and advanced so blantent and obvious and not yet another option hidden in amoungst the rest you are likely to avoid the problems you were talking about whereby users cant find an option because they're in basic mode. MOST (obviously there are a few people with absolutely no brains) people will look for their option, if they cant find it they'll click the advanced tab and then look for the option there.

It'd make changing between modes sooo simple that all the beginers will click the tab at the beginning to see what it's about - if they find it too complex they'll switch back until they're more competant and then switch back to advanced. The more power users will switch to the advanced, love what they see and just leave it in there.

Another VERY good suggestion that was made was the Wizards.
A few well set up wizards would make the whole configuration for the basic user no problem. Album View now has one and it takes all the guess work and advanced power understanding out of the program.

You could even have a menu option, maybe next to Edit or tools that was called: Configuration or Wizards - and have all the wizards in there along with the options. Trying to make the wording and layout as simple and self explanatory as possible for beginners I feel would make a LOT of difference.

Also, for the wizards: a few I would STRONGLY recommend, even just now without adding more options - that would help beginners set up MJ just how they like it (and therefore get you alot more happy customers and therefore more $$$) would be to show these wizards as soon as MJ was ran for the first time ever:

1. Instantly ask them if they want to customise the toolbar, and change the toolbar so that it has a ? next to the X in the corner that explains EACH toolbar option with a little tool tip.
2. give a wizard that sets up the 'general' options for the user as well as the Startup settings, playback.
3. another wizard that helps them order the columns in the order they want and lets them turn them on or off. It should also help them set up sorting order for MJ, a default for which I would suggest (please disagree anyone if this isn't what you use) should be: artist/year/album/track # - all ascending.
4. Burning and ripping/encoding then should be done through a wizard along with an option at the very beginning asking them if they wish to configure burning or ripping/encoding or both.
5. Media Library should then also have a wizard to create view scheme's for them as some basic users might not understand what this is about.
6. Possibly one also to show them the features of smartlists and what they can do and to help them set them up.

Tip's of the Day can also be used to give the user alot of information.

Things like the: File naming and location, encoding and device settings could all for instance be put under one screen called: Ripping as they are all directly connected to this activity.

Having thousands of options isn't a problem, setting them all up so as not to confuse the user is the problem. Take MS word for instance. This program has TONS of powerful features and can do all kinds of things. Most users however only use it for standard letter writing type tasks without every touching things like mail merge, macro's etc.
It has all the options and power but it's just laid out well. That's what MJ's mission I think is.

And as for putting up the price, I think you'd be scaring off alot of users which would have a negative effect on your profits. I think either keep it the same and use suggestions from this thread on how to keep beginners happy or else maybe as someone else suggested have a double pricing scheme - standard/advanced. It'd be the same as the way you've disabled some options now when the trial period is over.

I really think the secret is not so much in the number of options you have, but in how these are presented to the user and how they are laid out and mixed. There is no such thing as too many options, just a thing called too confusing. That's what you have to overcome.

One possible solution might be to try a few different layouts for the options screen and just get everyone on here to test the different layouts and see which one they find the easiest etc.

Wizards are definitely the easiest way however to get beginners to comfortable set up a lot of different options to make MJ run how they want it to.

Jaguu · « **Reply #28 on:** September 01, 2002, 03:15:23 am »

The Microsoft way with Word and Excel was: adding, adding, adding, adding features release after release until they became the number one and could set and keep their high price!

In earlier days I also thought about this novice vs. advanced levels for user interfaces, but nowadays I prefer the Microsoft way to have all features at my disposition like above programs. I do not know every single feature of Word and Excel, although I am quite an expert. But it is a real commodity to have 99% of the features available if you should ever need to use them! Working with software is like appetite. The more you use a piece of software, the more things you want to do with it.

When I want to perform a certain job, I just query the help until I find out how it can be done. And most of the times there is a solution. A very good Help that explains things in detail is essential.

The only thing that is important: it has to perform the basic tasks out of the box such as playing, ripping, burning, managing media, cataloguing, watching images and videos.

I also feel that the more individual programs MJ can replace the better. With Office you hardly need extra apps or add-ons, because something is missing.

So you could develop some big vision for MJ like: What Office is for work, MJ is for entertainment. Probably there are still a few steps to go until you reach that goal!

I also read once in a interview with Bill Gates himself about adding features at Microsoft: It is based solely on numbers. They add features requested by the masses of users and not by the few. That's why some features like managing disk partitions never make it to get into Windows, very few compared to the masses are using these features.

I know you are not a friend of Microsoft, but if you want to become great, it may be wise to learn from those that already made it!

By the way: I got into MJ about one year ago, because I felt that WMP was very limited in organizing my media collection, although overall I found that WMP was very good - but in one mayor feature they failed!

Jaguu

KingSparta · « **Reply #29 on:** September 01, 2002, 03:25:39 am »

Or Maybe Media Jukebox As A Basic Shell Program With Add-Ins (Sample Prices)

Media Jukebox(Free)
---- Play Options(Free)
---- Basic Tag Editing (Free)
---- Basic Skining(Free)
---- EQ(Add-In $5.00)
---- DSP(Add-In $5.00)
---- Visuals(Add-In $5.00)
---- Advanced Tag Editing(Add-In $5.00)
---- Slide Show(Add-In $5.00)
---- Advanced Skining(Add-In $5.00)
---- TV Support(Add-In $5.00)
---- WebRadio(Add-In $5.00)
---- Rip(Add-In $5.00)
---- Burn(Add-In $5.00)
---- Media Server(Add-In $5.00)

Etc...

Listening to: 'Der Kommissar' from 'Rock Of The 80'S Volume 4' by 'Falco' on Media Jukebox

sekim · « **Reply #30 on:** September 01, 2002, 03:39:56 am »

KingSparta,

That could get complicated if someone has a system crash and needs to redo everything.

KingSparta · « **Reply #31 on:** September 01, 2002, 03:50:20 am »

Not Really

MJ Restore Page

InStall The Following

[X] Media Jukebox
[X] EQ(Licensed)
[_] DSP(Add-In $5.00)
[_] Visuals(Add-In $5.00)
[X] Advanced Tag Editing(Add-In $5.00)
[_] Slide Show(Licensed)
[X] Advanced Skining(Licensed)
[_] TV Support(Add-In $5.00)
[_] WebRadio(Add-In $5.00)
[X] Rip(Licensed)
[X] Burn(Licensed)
[X] Media Server(Add-In $5.00)

[Download only Licensed Items & Free Items] [Download Selected] [Download All]

Etc...

The Restore Page Could tell a user what was already licensed, and select the items, the user then has a choice to add Add-on items and pay for the new add-ons at the same time.

the user hits the download button and it all installs.

Listening to: 'Died In Your Arms Tonight' from 'The Best Of' by 'Cutting Crew' on Media Jukebox

ejgutierrez · « **Reply #32 on:** September 01, 2002, 04:01:52 am »

i think you should give to the users all kind of configurable options. Using wizards or advanced preferences. An average user would only learn basic things about mj. he wouldn't learn difficult options or loose time reading a lot of documentation.
In my case, i have a pub in spain and i need mj for playing videos and visualizations in full-screen mode in a projector. mj for me its a great program but it has two "problems":

1 - As i know it doesn'n support winamp visualizations ( which reduces considerably the number of visualizations that i can play in one night). It hasn't been implemented a plug-in for supporting winamp visualizations.

2 - When i play the videos in full-screen everytime it changes the song it appears a really annoying toolbar. Although i select the option auto-hide bars, the first three seconds it appears and then it hides.

This problems i think there would be easy to solve with options ( specially the second one) and believe me it would "save my life". The first one is probably more complicated, but with a plug-in manager like WMP or Winamp, it shouldn`t be very difficult.

I want to say with this example is that a little option or feature can help a lot of people and can help a lot. Give to advanced users opportunity to configure mj as they like or need. And let beginners to listen songs with play and stop button.

sekim · « **Reply #33 on:** September 01, 2002, 04:07:31 am »

Maybe. But this adds more for J River to do. Recall the licensing woes? It really isn't difficult, but there are still many banging their heads trying to figure it out. Careful, and simple instructions are needed for this. Or an easier way for the restores and what not to be implemented. But, one must keep in mind that this is really kind of a first release as far as this type of licensing structure goes. In the future, things may get easier for all involved. Something to think about along with v 9 itself.

zevele1 · « **Reply #34 on:** September 01, 2002, 04:29:07 am »

I stand on Nila side
Look like good ideas

Mirko · « **Reply #35 on:** September 01, 2002, 04:54:40 am »

@KingSparte

This sounds like a good idea. But... as I may know some customers, they tend to not pay at all. _If_ they pay for a program, they usually want to have "all in". I personally wouldn't like it very much to pay for every bit of software, that I want to use (e.g. DSP and EQ). But the positive about your idea is that I don't have to pay for things I personally don't like (Visualizations).

On the other side: paying over 50$ for a good Jukebox seems like a lot of money. My favorite idea is the "beginning, advanced, experienced" type of interface. I personally don't like this, because I think I didn't get everything with beginning mode only (as this is the truth usually). And I think I'm quite able to decide which option to play with and which not (even if I don't I'm able to restore the old once).

Maybe the options should be logically ordered and should be described in detail (on the dialog or maybe in tooltips). Then even a beginning user may understand the "why's" behind the most features. I consider myself an experience user of software in general, but I usually find out more day by day. And I like that feeling.

If JRiver has do decide "more options" against "add complexity" I think man has to think over the way options are presented. It's not a good idea to see "more options" and "add complexity" opposite (because this is not always true, look at word for example).

HTH,
Mirko

sekim · « **Reply #36 on:** September 01, 2002, 05:49:40 am »

How about J River thoughts on this? How complex do you guys want to make it? You've read many opinions, and you must have a few of your own. Care to share where you guys think MJ should be heading?

Afterall, you have the final word.

JimH · « **Reply #37 on:** September 01, 2002, 06:01:57 am »

Machinehead,
Like I said above, we're worried about how complicated the options are becoming. It's common for someone to suggest a little change that we can implement in a few minutes, but if it requires another check box, we have to ask ourselves "is this something many people will care about?"

The three modes (beginner, intermediate, expert) sounds good, but it will trip up people. For example, Nila suggested tabs for each mode. We know from experience that some people will miss the fact that there are tabs (the v8 properties page, for example).

Similarly, having an "advanced" button would clean up the interface, but some people would ask "How do I ....".

Organizing options was suggested by Mirko, but there are a lot of options that don't fit under a category that can be described simply.

Support is a big issue in this. We need to minimize the number of times people have to ask. It's frustrating for the asker and it's time consuming and tedious for the person who answers.

Keep in mind, also, that the people who spend much time here tend to be the more experienced users. We're getting a slightly skewed picture.

The discussion above is very helpful.

Thanks,

Jim

sekim · « **Reply #38 on:** September 01, 2002, 06:15:37 am »

Keep in mind, also, that the people who spend much time here tend to be the more experienced users. We're getting a slightly skewed picture.

Maybe Jim. But I would venture a guess that at any given time there are a lot of lurkers reading and picking off tidbits of info as well. Many, myself in particular, have no qualms about posting to these boards. So I guess I would consider myself an advancing user. Or a chatterbox, that should really get a life, who doesn't mind answering questions that I know. Have you ever counted how many hits you have in a day? May tell of a clearer picture.

Galley · « **Reply #39 on:** September 01, 2002, 06:26:39 am »

The user levels is the best idea. I have never liked wizards; I feel that if the user needs a wizard, then the program may not be designed as well as it could have. I designed the "add new bookmark" dialog box to be as easy to use as possible, which is why it is divided into sections.
View it here

ejgutierrez · « **Reply #40 on:** September 01, 2002, 06:36:14 am »

as someone said before, i think we can watch the behaviour of word or excel users.
There are a lot of user that only use word for writing, changing the font type, changing the font size, underline, and little more.
In the other hand there are advanced users that uses all the options and posibilities of word ( macros). You use word and you buy or install all the options. The way you use word is up to you. ( asking how to make this, reading books, searching on-line manuals ...). If you are interested in doing one thing, you have to "move" to learn it.

And if you are not interested simply, use the simple things word has. How many people that use word know macros ? 10% perhaps ? But word is a complete word processor, and it gives to the users the oportunity of using macros. If you learn macros you will have plenty of benefits. If word didn't support macros it would be a poor word processor.

Mj in my opinion has to have a lot of options, and allow users to configure it. Its up to the users how to make it. Of course you can help them ( faq, how tos, forums ...). The problem would be if mj dont give the users the oportunity of making it. As my example above, for me the problem is that mj dont allow me to hide always the bars in videos. For you perhaps is a minor thing, but for me its not. And if there were a way to hide the toolbars, i would have to read all documentation, ask in forums, .... everything in my hand to make it.

Give the users freedom to choose

DocLotus · « **Reply #41 on:** September 01, 2002, 06:53:49 am »

JimH wrote

>>Keep in mind, also, that the people who spend much time here tend to be the more experienced users. We're getting a slightly skewed picture.<<

* 95 percent of people don’t participate in forums… they are the common users or ‘solders’.

* 5 percent of us do participate in forums… we are the leaders or ‘generals’.

* Solders without leaders are useless in battle against a well lead opposition (Microsoft?).

* Wars are fought by ‘solders’ but are won by ‘generals’.

Point is… we are the ones who have to take the lead & plot the future direction of MJ so the ‘solders’ don’t have to go to war to often.

JimH · « **Reply #42 on:** September 01, 2002, 06:59:14 am »

ejgutierrez,
> As my example above, for me the problem is that mj dont allow me to hide always the bars in videos.

I noticed that the first time you said it. We can do it, but it won't get done if it hides in a thread here. Please start a new one and explain why you need it.

ejgutierrez · « **Reply #43 on:** September 01, 2002, 07:36:07 am »

yes, but i only use it as example of complexity in this thread. This feature could be done, but i guess it would be a check box or something like that in display options preferences.

as i said before mj has to have all the complexity the community asks for as far as developers agree with it. Increasing complexity will increase flexibility and more users will be happier with the product.

My answer to this thread is be as complex as you can. The only thing is how to implement this complexity. ( wizards, different level downloads, full-advanced options plug-in ...).

AlonsoN · « **Reply #44 on:** September 01, 2002, 08:13:29 am »

Wizards and Tutorials.

I was sitting in the thinking room and take back a little of what I said. I don't like wizards as they tend to be used, but wizards and/or interactive tutorials might be a great tool to help users with some of the more advanced and less obvious functions of MJ.

For instance look through Interact at what questions tend to come up from new users trying to spread their wings and help with those things. Burning, Media Server, Web Remote, Smart Lists, Labeler, wma vs mp3 vs ape vs oog come to mind. Imagine list of tools under an Assistants menu. That would be enough to point users to some of the powerful features of MJ and get them familiar and comfortable with them.

I posit this: If folks see references to things that they don't already know how to use from experience with other applications they think "complex and scarry" but once they use a function it becomes "useful, easy, obvious and necessary" The trick is getting them to cross that Rubicon. So it's not the pages of options that turn folks off, but menu options and forms that don't immediately click.

Look, there could be seventy different ways that MJ could behave when the user shuffles and plays songs, but that won't bother anybody because they won't know about it unless they GO LOOKING for options. They will get bothered when the option they are looking for is not there. If it's not there they will say "Uck, it's complicated and still does not do what I want." Even worse will have a nagging doubt that it does, but they can't figure it out.

On the other hand menu options like Media Server, Download Manager, MusicEx Manger, Smartlists, that are right there in your face, and are not obvious because they are not familiar. Those are the things that you have to lead the user by the hand through so they become easy and obvious.

lee269 · « **Reply #45 on:** September 01, 2002, 08:35:26 am »

Hmmm... a tricky one. As far as options go, I would say throw in the kitchen sink, but maybe that makes me an advanced user. Obviously you want to attract new inexperienced users, but it is the sheer power and flexibility of MJ which generates such loyal support.

Im not sure I like the beginner/advanced mode idea. Ive never seen this implemented successfully in an application, although Im sure there are some out there which use this to good effect. I think you would be passing the problem down a level, because you could have the same arguments over which features go into each mode, etc. PLus, as has been said, I think it might make answering support queries more confusing. In one sense you almost have beginner mode already in the form of mini-me, which could appear as a simple player.

I think wizards could go a long way to helping users get the best out of the options in MJ. In particular I think Nila has identified the main areas where wizards could be used to good effect, especially a 'setup wizard' to configure main options when MJ is first installed (many programs already have this) and a playlist/smartlist wizard to help users realize the power of smartlists.

Finally, I think you should have an 'MJ Assistant' - perhaps a little animated paperclip - which monitors your activity intelligently and pops up to offer you help when it identifies what you are doing

JimH · « **Reply #46 on:** September 01, 2002, 08:52:58 am »

> Finally, I think you should have an 'MJ Assistant' - perhaps a little animated paperclip - which monitors your activity intelligently and pops up to offer you help when it identifies what you are doing

Oh, please....

sekim · « **Reply #47 on:** September 01, 2002, 09:50:59 am »

Assistants = aggrevation. Nobody wants some standing pat answer from a pre-programmed animated thing. Think of how many people dispence with the skins. I am now a convert (no skins) since installing XP. Same crew would hunt down the assitant and lynch it. If it came up as a window where you could type in your question that would be better. Perhaps a toolbar button that has easy access. Or a script for a toolbar, like the address bar, that a help question could be typed in and press go, find, whatever.

On the other hand, this kind of option would also take away programming time from the very features the folks in this thread are looking for. Trade off anyone willing to put up with? Not likely. Now your in a catch 22 of not alienating current, and diehard faithfuls, and at the same time overwhelming the new user with the not-so-obvious things MJ has to offer. What to do, what to do??

I don't envy any of you guys in the next few months of development of version 9. Must really suck to have so many strings attached, and all pulling in slightly different directions. I assume there are going to be many brainstorming sessions by the J River gang from this point on to figure where this all going.

You did let this cat out of the bag, and now the fun really begins. How to tame it while being hobbled with all them strings pulling...

lee269 · « **Reply #48 on:** September 01, 2002, 09:57:54 am »

Sorry JimH, couldnt resist. 'It looks as if you are creating a new playlist. Would you like some help?'

Ive been thinking about this a bit more though. Generally the way I use MJ is not to save loads of playlists, but build them up for an evenings listening and then clear playing now the next time. My wife is probably a typical 'beginner', and I have had tried to show her how to use MJ in the past (with some success but I am not the best teacher I admit).

The concept of playlists and playing now is not difficult to get over, but I get the impression that its not intuitive for the new user to know quite how to get stuff into the playing now playlist. Partly I think this is because the tree has too many nodes, with no way to hide unneccessary branches. I get a TV tuner node, but I have no TV card in my PC. A way to hide branches you dont want would really help here. The next thing is reorganising playing now - my wife double clicks the files she wants and MJ is set to add them as next to play, but then she wants to reorder them in playing now. Drag and drop is fine here, but what I am leaning towards is something that has been asked before - a third playing now window. To be able to drag files from a media library pane to a playing now pane is as simple as I can think of. For my part I never use the 'target', just right/double click on the file. I dont think the target is intuitive enough.

At the very least I think that people are used to a row of menu items and a toolbar row below that. Implement this and have standard toolbar buttons 'Playing Now', 'Media Library', 'Create Playlist', which could point to wizards. Also, you have 'Rip CD' and 'Burn CD'. Ive just looked in WMP and it has 'Copy from CD' and 'Copy to CD' - to me this would seem to be more understandable to new users.

Im not holding up WMP or Real as models of useability excellence - in fact the reason I bought MJ in the first place was because it is a proper organisational tool, a standard windows application and not a style-over-substance skin obsessed player.

lee269 · « **Reply #49 on:** September 01, 2002, 09:59:59 am »

Oops, sorry MachineHead. In case it was not clear - I was joking. Office Assistant is the first thing I turn off on a new install of Office.

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: How complex should MJ be? (Read 8281 times)

sekim

DocLotus

DocLotus

phelt

kthlnstz

phelt

Chico

sekim

joe|PLS|mama

Mr.X

DocLotus

Chico

sekim

AlonsoN

roving cowboy

zevele1

Nila

Jaguu

sekim

ejgutierrez

sekim

zevele1

sekim

sekim

Galley

ejgutierrez

DocLotus

ejgutierrez

AlonsoN

lee269

sekim

lee269

lee269