Topic: Netbook as a Remote aka Tremote (Read 101445 times)

glynor · « **Reply #100 on:** July 06, 2009, 03:14:45 pm »

If the above explanation is too long for you, I'll boil it down:

If you want to use the Library Server feature AND the Tremote feature of MC14, but you don't want to use Tremote to control the computer that is serving the library (or want to remote control multiple, different machines) you can't do it. You can only use Tremote to control the Library Server machine, and not any of the clients. You are forced to choose between these two features.

Listener · « **Reply #101 on:** July 06, 2009, 03:33:00 pm »

Glynor and Doc Cilantro,

I read your posts whenever I see them. There is one thing I object to in your recent posts in this thread: you both seem to be saying that the current tremote functionality should not be included but to do what you needs instead.

I've been waiting a long time for the ability to use MC on a laptop to control playback on a server PC. It may not be what you want but it will be very useful to me.

I think that JRiver should provide a toolkit of network functionality. The existing Library Server functionality is useful in some cases. The Tremote capability to control playback from a PC acting as a remote will be useful in some cases. Being able to FULLY control MC from an even smaller device will be useful in some cases. Having storage, control and playback on 3 PCs with 3 instances of MC will be useful too.

I'd hate for this discussion to turn into a "Do what I want and not what he wants" argument.

Bill

swinster · « **Reply #102 on:** July 06, 2009, 04:36:46 pm »

Glynor - your system set-up is similar to what mine will be, and I too can see an issue with the media being served from the actual server! To this end, I am forced to install the quietest drives I can (also decoupled) in my HTPC.

I have been reading this thread for a while and have bought MC13/14 with the idea that all units it s installed on will be fully controllable from any device. I had thought that ANY remote device would be able to control ANY MC unit, not just the server. Controlling the endpoints is vital in overall functionality I feel. Surely, this must be achievable?

WinoOutWest · « **Reply #103 on:** July 06, 2009, 05:02:22 pm »

I have a similar setup except the Library Server runs on the HTPC and not the server. HTPC is setup to start @ 6am everyday and shuts down every night automatically. Server is on 24 x 7 and is simply a data repository. So for me the current functionality works - although MC14 crashes constantly so I am not using it regularly yet.

glynor · « **Reply #104 on:** July 06, 2009, 10:57:43 pm »

Quote from: Listener on July 06, 2009, 03:33:00 pm

There is one thing I object to in your recent posts in this thread: you both seem to be saying that the current tremote functionality should not be included but to do what you needs instead.

Woah. Simmer down there! I'd suggest no such thing. I just think it can be done better, I'd by-no-means suggest they take either feature out (not that they'd listen to me if I were anyway). That's absurd on the face of it.

The problem isn't one of technology with Tremote, which works unbelievably well in it's current implementation. It is mostly UI-design that creates the current limitation, which is by-no-means insurmountable. This is a product in an early phase of development. I think JRiver encourages, and depends on, the feedback from their users (especially now).

JimH · « **Reply #105 on:** July 06, 2009, 11:33:46 pm »

Quote from: WinoOutWest on July 06, 2009, 05:02:22 pm

MC14 crashes constantly so I am not using it regularly yet.

If you haven't, please start a thread. See the "Stability" link in my signature.

Update DirectX from Microsoft if you haven't done so.

Sheugel · « **Reply #106 on:** July 08, 2009, 12:56:03 pm »

The future Archos 9 looks promising for the Tremote! :

http://www.archos.com/products/nb/archos_9/index.html?country=us&lang=en

Daydream · « **Reply #107 on:** July 08, 2009, 03:11:30 pm »

Quote from: Sheugel on July 08, 2009, 12:56:03 pm

The future Archos 9

I was just thinking about it.

Rumors are it's gonna be ~$500 in US.

JONCAT · « **Reply #108 on:** July 09, 2009, 04:45:34 am »

Glynor's system compared to mine makes a point:

My main HTPC is my "server". I have a 5TB box on a long E-Sata cable.

So whether we have a true server tucked away or a main "serving" HTPC, the system needs to be designed for control at the server, and pushing out via remote control. I understand some want to be able to remote control another PC running JRiver with the GUI, and not just the web-interface. I say fine, integrate that into the future of Tremote.

However, the future of this calls for a fully functional system of control.

I still see this as a zone issue. You pick the server or your main HTPC, where-ever your data is stored, and have zones & netzones: other PCs can search for a Library Server (or maybe be detected by the server) and once connected show up as a netzone on the master machine (the server or main HTPC, any system you choose as the "master" box).

This offers flexibility given that some will use a master box tucked away, NAS, or hardwired data storage.

There is no reason, given the aformentioned proposal, that another PC could not act as a remote control for any other instance of JRiver (a tablet/Archos 9 mounted in your kitchen wall). Actually, this would be desired as one could then control the master and have access to all zones/netzones.

It's a big loop but it offers a LOT of functionality, and if ever executed properly, would seem to give everyone what they are asking for. Plus, current remotes/plugins are already familiar with JRiver zones.

LISTENER - I hear what you are saying. Actually, I currently have no real need for any of this, but could in the future; I'm honestly just trying to come at this from a logical systems analysis persepective, hoping everyone can find merit in the solution.

cheers,
DC

aussie1 · « **Reply #109 on:** July 11, 2009, 09:00:52 pm »

My setup is similar to Glynor's. I have a server PC used for storage of all of my music, pictures and video. MC runs on this machine and the library is shared through library server. In other rooms, HTPCs use MC locally to connect to the Server PC to access the shared library through library server. The HTPCs do not use local libraries. Some of these HTPCs control multiple zones.

Many others place multiple audio/video cards in their server machine and pipe everything around the house from there. For my situation, I prefer to have a thin, quiet client machine that accesses data over the network located next to the receiver/amp and TV. This allows me to browse the web or access other files/applications and play them on the TV and receiver/amp in addition to playing all of my media through MC. By connecting to the library on the server machine, I only need to maintain one version of my library.

Thus, I think controlling both the server machine and multiple client machines is important. In order for me to make use of Tremote, I would need to be able to control MC on my local HTPCs.

S

glynor · « **Reply #110 on:** July 12, 2009, 11:17:05 am »

I thought I'd mention that I don't want to use the HTPC for my Library Server because the HTPC does a bunch of other stuff that makes it an unreliable server. For example, I actually use mine for gaming (hence the Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 3.6GHz and the Radeon HD4870 1GB), and when I'm running games I don't like to keep a bunch of services running. I reboot it sometimes for other OSes (I actually have a couple of old DOS games that are still fun) and whatnot. Plus, since I use the living room machine for gaming, I keep it heavily overclocked and tweaked all the time, which sometimes requires being shut down for full days of testing when I modify something or decide to tweak it for additional performance.

Part of the POINT of how my HTPC is set up is that it is completely unnecessary for the rest of my network to keep running. It is a client, that I can take down, reboot, and shut services down on without a care in the world. The server will keep recording my TV shows, serving my media, and the rest for me and for the rest of the machines on my network.

swinster · « **Reply #111 on:** July 12, 2009, 03:48:36 pm »

Quote from: glynor on July 12, 2009, 11:17:05 am

The server will keep recording my TV shows, serving my media, and the rest for me and for the rest of the machines on my network.

Glynor - just out of interest, what do use for the TV Shows (MC, MythTV, MediaPortal, other) with what hardware (DVB-T, DVB-S or DVB-C). Does this setup enable ordinary TV watching through the HTPC? Off topic I know, but intrested in you setup as this is almost identical to the way I am going.

glynor · « **Reply #112 on:** July 13, 2009, 09:29:43 am »

Quote from: swinster on July 12, 2009, 03:48:36 pm

Glynor - just out of interest, what do use for the TV Shows (MC, MythTV, MediaPortal, other) with what hardware (DVB-T, DVB-S or DVB-C). Does this setup enable ordinary TV watching through the HTPC? Off topic I know, but intrested in you setup as this is almost identical to the way I am going.

I'll reply in a PM to avoid polluting the thread with off-topic things.

JimH · « **Reply #113 on:** July 15, 2009, 02:09:31 pm »

Here's a review of the Asus Eee PC T91 touchscreen:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/07/15/asus-eee-pc-t91-review/

JONCAT · « **Reply #114 on:** July 15, 2009, 02:24:38 pm »

Exactly, and since everyone designs a storage/playback system that offers their desired level of flexibilty and usability, it would seem logical to allow the user to choose which system is the master.

DC

Quote from: glynor on July 12, 2009, 11:17:05 am

I thought I'd mention that I don't want to use the HTPC for my Library Server because the HTPC does a bunch of other stuff that makes it an unreliable server. For example, I actually use mine for gaming (hence the Core 2 Quad Q9550 @ 3.6GHz and the Radeon HD4870 1GB), and when I'm running games I don't like to keep a bunch of services running. I reboot it sometimes for other OSes (I actually have a couple of old DOS games that are still fun) and whatnot. Plus, since I use the living room machine for gaming, I keep it heavily overclocked and tweaked all the time, which sometimes requires being shut down for full days of testing when I modify something or decide to tweak it for additional performance.

Part of the POINT of how my HTPC is set up is that it is completely unnecessary for the rest of my network to keep running. It is a client, that I can take down, reboot, and shut services down on without a care in the world. The server will keep recording my TV shows, serving my media, and the rest for me and for the rest of the machines on my network.

Efjay · « **Reply #115 on:** July 16, 2009, 11:43:34 am »

I am not a computer guy so perhaps I missed the answer in the thread but does this mean that the netbook would function as a remote in a manner different than simply running library server? And, can this be run with a monitor (say, to display the playing now on a monitor but run the program through the netbook.)?

JimH · « **Reply #116 on:** July 16, 2009, 01:31:45 pm »

Quote from: Efjay on July 16, 2009, 11:43:34 am

I am not a computer guy so perhaps I missed the answer in the thread but does this mean that the netbook would function as a remote in a manner different than simply running library server? And, can this be run with a monitor (say, to display the playing now on a monitor but run the program through the netbook.)?

The description is in my first post.

It's different in that the playback is on the PC across the room. It's for use as a remote from a couch, for controlling the playback of the machine across the room. The function is just what you'd expect from a remote. This will seem less strange as the hardware evolves into small touch screen PC's.

ThoBar · « **Reply #117 on:** July 17, 2009, 01:23:01 am »

Check this touch screen device out....

http://gizmodo.com/5163636/asus-eee-keyboard-pc-should-arrive-in-may-or-june-for-400+600

Now an MC control interface on tis would be NICE

swinster · « **Reply #118 on:** July 17, 2009, 03:11:40 am »

Quote from: confishy on July 17, 2009, 01:23:01 am

Check this touch screen device out....

http://gizmodo.com/5163636/asus-eee-keyboard-pc-should-arrive-in-may-or-june-for-400+600

Now an MC control interface on tis would be NICE

Ouch - price $400-$600 for a keyboard and tiny display.......

JimH · « **Reply #119 on:** July 29, 2009, 08:47:22 am »

Here's a CNET article on the general lack of success for touch screen devices in the past.

Shiraz · « **Reply #120 on:** July 30, 2009, 04:03:16 pm »

I've been using my eeePC (the original, 701) as my remote for a few weeks now with MC14 to very good effect. I like it much better than remote desktopping (faster, smoother). I use this in combo with Airfoil (affordable WLAN audio streaming) so that my little white eeepc controls all the music in my house. I'm really looking forward to tremote implementing automatic library synchronization so I can tag with the client without needing to manually sync afterwards. Once that's in, I think it'll be pretty polished.

What would be be suuuuuuuuuuper sweet is if J River could dedicate some coding resources to implementing something like Airfoil right into Media Center -- this would be a killer Media Center 15 feature and a logical next step I would think -- combined with Tremote enough to even be the primary marketing tool, I would think ("Media Center now streams wirelessly to different rooms in your house, controllable via any computer in your house or via wireless remote!").

Getting back to the now, Airfoil in particular is sweet because their speaker client software is free so you can stream to any computer in the house that's hooked up to speakers.... OR you can stream to any Apple Airfoil Express router (they have line outs) which are pretty cheap on eBay, thus it's modular and much cheaper than dedicated streaming solutions.. this in combo with tremote is ultimately a lot better than stuff like Sonos because you get the deluxe Media Center interface instead of the severely limited interfaces.

To the poster above, you can order touch screens for the different sized eeePC's from dealextreme.com for super cheap. So if you get a used 701 and a touch screen you're coming out way ahead then buying the dedicated touch screens mentioned just above this post.

Cheers,
Shiraz

burre · « **Reply #121 on:** August 08, 2009, 04:49:45 am »

Just a question; Will it be possible to have the server PC MC minimized while in use by the remote? Often, this second PC is used for web-browsing while I am seated in the sofa for music listening, and with Rivermote, every time I press something on the Iphone MC becomes the active window on the server. This is annoying for the person web-browsing, when scrolling or typing. (FTR, Yes, I understand I can't use the Iphone for this feature, am considering the ASus T91.)

Oh, and THANK YOU!

morrison · « **Reply #122 on:** August 15, 2009, 04:03:31 pm »

Tremote management Library Client - please, this is planned? Without this, for me it is useless - I do not have the playing zones on my server..

Maybe control all clients zones on Tremote machine?

I have vaio ux, samsung q1 - and cannot use this (

Chad · « **Reply #123 on:** August 19, 2009, 02:59:26 pm »

http://www.iekiosk.com/mini-mustang.htm

Another hardware possibility.

JimH · « **Reply #124 on:** September 03, 2009, 11:15:06 am »

Toshiba has a new 7 inch touchscreen planned. Via engadget.com.

tjobbins · « **Reply #125 on:** September 03, 2009, 06:50:49 pm »

Thank you, thank you. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

I first requested this feature back in 2005 I think it was, but never remembered to come back and lobby for it. I'm so glad it's been implemented, for me it's by far the biggest and best feature of MC 14.

For years I've been using VNC on my laptop to connect to my HTPC and control MC, which is OK for music but very inconvenient for video due to slow screen refreshes. Now I can control most things from my laptop as if it were playing the media itself, and it's awesome.

There are a couple of feature requests I'd like to make:

At the moment, it seems that there's no way to delete files from the remote library. In my MC client I can select a file, and choose Delete From Library and also Remove From Disk. It then disappears from the client, but remains in the server library, and is not deleted from disk. What I'd like is for any operations performed in MC when in client mode to always affect the server only - if I delete a file, it goes from the server. The Client is simply a user interface to the server in all respects.
Similarly, I'd like the ability to import files into the server, from the client. This would be a little more complex, because it would mean that when I choose Import, I should see a File dialogue that is relative to the server, not the client. If that's too complex, then an alternative would be to allow the use of pre-defined Auto Import folders from the client. Meaning that I would first set up these folders on the Server, and then the Client would be able to trigger imports from those folders into the server library
Same thing applies to renaming, copying and moving files - it seems that at the moment these operations would be attemped relative to the client, and therefore would not work. I'd want those operations to be performed by the server always.

To give you an example of why the above would be great: I have a large number of home movie video clips which are unsorted, uncategorised and generically named. What I want to be able to do is watch these full screen on the HTPC, while simultaneously manipulating them - deleting from disk, renaming, giving star ratings, etc. I've tried to do this in the past either through VNC or just with a wireless keyboard/mouse, but I could not find keyboard shortcuts that would work while MC was in full screen mode. So I'd be forced to drop out of full screen mode, perform the action in the playlist, then go back to full screen to watch the next one, etc - which is a bit of a pain. If TRemote were extended to allow full manipulation of the remote server library, it could greatly improve on this procedure, because it would allow me to manipulate the library from my client MC while leaving the HTPC permanently in full screen mode.

Anyway, thanks again for the awesome feature and I'm sure there is lots more to look forward to!

tjobbins · « **Reply #126 on:** September 04, 2009, 07:05:28 am »

A bug (or missing feature):

Opening URLs doesn't work from the client. On the client I go to File -> Open URL, I paste in a web radio station (like http://bbc.co.uk/radio/listen/live/r6.asx). The client shows Opening URL... and spins for a long time, then eventually on the server it says "The database entries for the selected files are missing or invalid."

(Opening the same URL from the server itself works fine.)

Same thing happens if I try to access any of the websites saved under Audio -> Connected Media. Example, SomaFM -> Mission Control. Clicking this link on the server itself plays fine, but clicking it on the client pauses for a while then gives the following message on the server: "Media Center encountered errors while trying to play the last several files. Please make sure the path in your media library point to the right location."

tjobbins · « **Reply #127 on:** September 04, 2009, 08:30:30 pm »

Following on from my earlier post - it seems that the client is not able to update the server library in any way.

From the client, I've tried setting ratings, changing a track name, etc, and the changes are never seen by the server. And if I then close the client and re-open it, the changes it made will be reverted back.

I thought this should work, because of the feature supporting multiple concurrent read/write access to the DB etc?

Am I doing something wrong?

tjobbins · « **Reply #128 on:** September 04, 2009, 09:27:57 pm »

Quote from: tjobbins on September 04, 2009, 08:30:30 pm

From the client, I've tried setting ratings, changing a track name, etc, and the changes are never seen by the server. And if I then close the client and re-open it, the changes it made will be reverted back.

I needed to run Library Sync after making changes on the Client. Now it is updating OK for making edits from the client..

But it doesn't work with deletes - if I choose a file on the client and then Delete it - either a normal delete or a Delete and Remove from Disk - then do a Library Sync, the file will not disappear on the server and will reappear immediately on the client after the Library Sync completes.

I can workaround this in the short term by rating as 1 star stuff I want to delete, then doing a batch delete of all 1 stars at a later point on the server. But this isn't ideal in case I wanted to rate stuff as 1 star without wanting to delete it.

tjobbins · « **Reply #129 on:** September 05, 2009, 07:41:46 pm »

One more example of where the client can't update the server:

I wanted to change the definition of a View Scheme. I edited it on the Client, then did Library Sync; after Sync, the client reverted to before the change, and the server was not affected.

hit_ny · « **Reply #130 on:** September 06, 2009, 11:19:32 am »

Quote from: tjobbins on September 03, 2009, 06:50:49 pm

Thank you, thank you. Thank you, thank you, thank you!

I first requested this feature back in 2005 I think it was, but never remembered to come back and lobby for it.

Much earlier, try 2003

Quote

10. An alternative Media Server mode that allows the client to control the server - the client MC basically becomes a remote control, changing what the server is playing.

How bout that

If you did not know what a Tre-mote is, one glance at that description and its crystal.

Its interesting to go through your list and see what has been realised since then.
1. NO
2. YES
3. NO (see 3rd party app like autohotkey)
3a.NO
3b. YES
3c. NO (see 3rd party app like autohotkey)
4. YES (via expressions)
5. YES
6. i think so
7. YES
8. Not sure
9. YES
10. YES
11. NO

tjobbins · « **Reply #131 on:** September 06, 2009, 12:33:40 pm »

Quote from: hit_ny on September 06, 2009, 11:19:32 am

Much earlier, try 2003

Its interesting to go through your list and see what has been realised since then.

Haha! Thanks for digging that up. Well good to see how loyal and patient I've been

And yeah they've done most of the things I've requested. Items 3 and and 3c are still missing and I was just thinking about them again yesterday. I think those should be quite easy to add (hint)

hit_ny · « **Reply #132 on:** September 06, 2009, 02:14:56 pm »

Quote from: tjobbins on September 06, 2009, 12:33:40 pm

Items 3 and and 3c are still missing and I was just thinking about them again yesterday. I think those should be quite easy to add (hint)

See modified post above.

boydn · « **Reply #133 on:** September 06, 2009, 11:55:33 pm »

I leave the volume on the MC PC set to 100 and control with the receiver.
Are you guys leaving receiver volume on XX and controlling with windows/MC slider?

JimH · « **Reply #134 on:** September 09, 2009, 11:02:57 am »

Engadget.com reports that Samsung just released a similar solution.

tjobbins · « **Reply #135 on:** September 12, 2009, 08:02:34 pm »

One more example of an area the TRemote client can't control - Drives and Devices. Clicking on this item on the TRemote client shows the local Drives and Devices, not those of the server. So it's not possible to trigger DVD playback using TRemote.

I guess all my examples point to the same thing - the current TRemote implementation, working via the Library Server, presents quite a few limitations to remote control. Things that aren't part of the library, like a DVD drive or a randomly opened URL, cannot be triggered from the client.

What I would love to see is a remote mode whereby using the MC client is like using MC on the server in all regards (with possible exception of Open File and similar given the complexities of that.) So basically whenever something is done on the client, it would transmit that command to the server and have it perform the same operation. There would be no concept of anything local to the client, it would just be an interface to the server. It could even be a separate MC Client binary, with any features and interface items that relate only to local control removed.

I mentioned Open File as a complexity, and there are some others - for example, ideally the communication should be bi-directional, meaning that if the server MC wanted to pop up a dialogue, it would be triggered on the client as well. DVD playback is again an example here - when I put a DVD into my HTPC, MC will pop up a dialogue asking if I should play it or take no action. Ideally this dialogue would be triggered on the client so that the client can be used to make the decision.

So really what I'm describing is a facility which is just like controlling the server MC via remote desktop sharing like VNC or RDP, except implemented with a thick local client.

I think this would also answer the issues raised by others earlier in this thread - by decoupling client control from the library server, that would allow one to run a library server at the same time without interference.

Although the above may be complex or difficult, I do feel that it will be necessary in order to realise the vision of controlling MC from a tablet PC/netbook/etc. In order for those to be effective, the client needs to be able to trigger a complete range of server functions, and any concept of 'local' would be irrelevant and distracting, because the device exists only to control the server. If this can be achieved, then I think those devices will be a superb way of controlling a complex home theater without ever needing to access the server with a keyboard or mouse (or very rarely.)

(Final point - if the above were to be implemented, then this would also be an excellent chance for developers; J River could release the API that is used by the client to control the server. That would allow development of alternative, customised client interfaces by the community. This opens up all sorts of possibilities.- for example if I could trigger TV recording with a remote API call, then I could develop a simple email interface allowing me to email home if I forgot to record a program

I could maybe do this today by triggering MCC.exe, but I'd need to find my own way of executing that remotely on my MC server; a remote API that provides access to all MC features would be much more powerful. )

JimH · « **Reply #136 on:** September 17, 2009, 10:08:08 am »

Another candidate, the ITG XPPhone. Article at Pocketables (via engadget).

hit_ny · « **Reply #137 on:** September 17, 2009, 12:07:17 pm »

All these solutions appear quite bulky in comparison to this

Check out the compelling demo and observe the play between remote and backend.

All this functionality already exists in MC !!

What's missing is a small device with a close enough GUI that does not kill battery life like the one mentioned above ?

can find no mention of the processor used nor the OS that runs on it

DWAnderson · « **Reply #138 on:** September 17, 2009, 06:41:48 pm »

Quote from: tjobbins on September 03, 2009, 06:50:49 pm

Similarly, I'd like the ability to import files into the server, from the client. This would be a little more complex, because it would mean that when I choose Import, I should see a File dialogue that is relative to the server, not the client. If that's too complex, then an alternative would be to allow the use of pre-defined Auto Import folders from the client. Meaning that I would first set up these folders on the Server, and then the Client would be able to trigger imports from those folders into the server library

An easier and more limited way to implement this would be to have this work for imports to network shares that were visble both to the client and the server. Imports elsewhere should pop up a warning dialog saying that they won't be reflected persistently in the library.

MrHaugen · « **Reply #139 on:** September 18, 2009, 03:47:30 am »

Quote from: glynor on July 06, 2009, 03:14:45 pm

If the above explanation is too long for you, I'll boil it down:

If you want to use the Library Server feature AND the Tremote feature of MC14, but you don't want to use Tremote to control the computer that is serving the library (or want to remote control multiple, different machines) you can't do it. You can only use Tremote to control the Library Server machine, and not any of the clients. You are forced to choose between these two features.

Exactly. This is my problem as well. I do not know why it has been done like this. More easy to implement it that way? I'm going to test out the server soon, as the video fix have been implemented. But when I get a small fancy client with touch screen I'll have a problem.

The BIG problem as I see it.
- If you install the server function of MC, you'd most likely want to have it on a server, stoved away.
- If you want to use the Tremote you want to control something you can see and hear. Not much use of controlling the server in the closet is it?

Possible solutions:
- Build the Tremote functions totally on the side of server functionality (might be cost and time intensive).
- Make two separate connection methods and servers. Client/server and Tremote server, so they can coexist. One server function and one Tremote server function. Most of the code from the regular server function could probably be used again? Just have to separate the two clients by the connection method. You could enable two servers on one machine or using it on different machines.

Would it be hard to do?

JimH · « **Reply #140 on:** September 19, 2009, 07:47:06 am »

I'm not sure I follow this, but here's what I think you're saying:

A= your Tremote

B= your display across the room

C= your server

You want A to control what is playing on B
but
it is controlling C instead.

What if B is a client of C (B connects to Library Server on C)?

Can you not then run Library Server on B and connect to it with A?

llafriel · « **Reply #141 on:** September 19, 2009, 09:36:07 am »

Quote from: JimH on September 19, 2009, 07:47:06 am

I'm not sure I follow this, but here's what I think you're saying:

A= your Tremote

B= your display across the room

C= your server

You want A to control what is playing on B
but
it is controlling C instead.

What if B is a client of C (B connects to Library Server on C)?

Can you not then run Library Server on B and connect to it with A?

This is the scenario I tried to explain earlier in this thread. It doesn't work, MC on A reports an error when doing this. With my setup it does at least.

MrHaugen · « **Reply #142 on:** September 21, 2009, 05:06:41 am »

It might work. The problem is, why would you have such a setup? It's not possible for everybody.

I have a combined living room and bed room. I do not want the library server on at all times, and when I turn it off, the rest of the users in my apartment would not have access to any media. Even though all the files is on a file server. Almost the same applies for a family who have a media server with all their files. Why use a Client for the server function? People also often wants to turn off or put their clients to sleep.

It can't be hard to understand that the most heavy users want a separate server hidden away, and have full control of the client with Tremote, connecting to the server. What possible benefits would it be to use the Tremote to such a server?

JimH · « **Reply #143 on:** September 25, 2009, 04:16:56 pm »

xtacbyme, I split your post here.

tjobbins · « **Reply #144 on:** September 26, 2009, 05:59:59 pm »

Quote from: DWAnderson on September 17, 2009, 06:41:48 pm

An easier and more limited way to implement this would be to have this work for imports to network shares that were visble both to the client and the server. Imports elsewhere should pop up a warning dialog saying that they won't be reflected persistently in the library.

Works for me

StFeder · « **Reply #145 on:** September 27, 2009, 05:26:18 am »

I started using the tremote feature. There are some things I cannot figure out how and/or if they work...

If I change the remote PC to any "there" zone I'm able to control server playback (incl. volume) and add files to playing now.

But I'm not able to rearrange Playing Now. Doesn't work via "Sync current zone to" either. Changing repeat settings and reshuffle doesn't work.

Am I missing something? Or is this as it is expected?

GrantDG · « **Reply #146 on:** September 27, 2009, 06:04:59 pm »

I second this question - this issue was raised way back on the initial 14 release.

Is there an intention to address it?

JimH · « **Reply #147 on:** September 27, 2009, 06:12:25 pm »

Probably.

swinster · « **Reply #148 on:** September 28, 2009, 03:30:26 am »

I think the idea of being able to control a client has been raised many, MANY time. The server is not necassarity the machine you want to control via the remote.

I still think that if a small web server was included in the MC14 package, then JRiver could build an HTTP/Flash interface to control ANY machine.

I do belive that someone has actually done something like this as an add on app - it would be good for JRiver to add this to the MC14 code.

Shiraz · « **Reply #149 on:** October 03, 2009, 02:07:39 pm »

I want to make an emphatic +1 vote for TJRobbins posts about making Tremote control more aspects of the server. I especially could use file deletion, but many of the other aspects he mentions are limitations I've specifically felt while using Tremote. Having originally used remote desktop to control the server, it does become apparent what Tremote cannot do. That said, I'm extremely grateful that Tremote exists at all. Currently I use remote desktop to do what Tremote can't, using Tremote for general playback and tagging.

Plus a question: can Library Sync be automated? Ideal would be that the libraries would sync up automatically, anytime there is a change at either the client or server side... or at least just have it run every x minutes.

And while I'm at it, a third easy question: can a Tremote MC client be launched by default with the Zone set to the server (ie. "There: Zone 1").

Cheers,
Shiraz

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: Netbook as a Remote aka Tremote (Read 101445 times)

JONCAT

JONCAT