More > Media Center 17
Where We're Going Next
JimH:
Thanks very much for the feedback (so far).
I'm going to reply here to most of the suggestions, and also put in bold some of the ideas that we will try to do.
I'll put my reply below each person's comments.
glynor
--- Quote ---Better resources for beginners and intermediate users
--- End quote ---
An obviously good idea.
rick.ca
--- Quote ---automatic identification and tagging using available meta data sources on import and as required.
--- End quote ---
That's what carnac is.
gvanbrunt
--- Quote ---MC should be "cloud" provider:
- It should offer Gizmo like support to all major devices. So iOS, Blackberry, Android and Windows Phone 7, and Windows clients.
- It should offer dynamic streaming to these devices so streaming adjusts to the bandwidth available.
- It should offer access to the library through web services. This support is there now, but there may be some things still missing.
- It should offer access to the library through a web site. This support is already there as well.
- It should offer access to all these services in an easy to setup, and secure fashion. JR has made some great strides in the ease to setup department, however I would suggest creating a few Wizards to walk end users through setting things up.
MC should also be "cloud" consumer:
- It should have a frame work for easilly writing "drivers" to connect to cloud services that will be offered.
--- End quote ---
Nice goal, hard to know how to do it.
--- Quote --- I expect a great many of these in the near future, so the more the better. It would be ideal if it was something end users could extend...
- It should be able to offer these services to any of MC's clients.
--- End quote ---
KingSparta
--- Quote ---Cloud storage For Performer Store Would Be Nice.
--- End quote ---
We're limited to what the record labels will allow.
park
--- Quote ---adding functionality to Gizmo on the various platforms should be given special attention
--- End quote ---
I agree. We see tablets as great remotes, great streaming devices. We'll try to stay ahead in this area.
vagskal
--- Quote ---Integrate online streaming music services in the database. Today users have physical media files on hard drives (and soon in some cloud) as well as access to streaming services but no software that combines them in a seamless way. Let users add albums and songs on Spotify and have them treated in the MC database as if they were physical files (allow tag changes, ratings, play counts etc.).
--- End quote ---
Nice idea. We'll do what we can.
--- Quote ---Support for iThings.
--- End quote ---
It's on our short list. We're limited by what Apple allows.
--- Quote ---A versatile statistics/report feature including graphs
--- End quote ---
Hmm....
marko
--- Quote ---Big Things? Raw file development and management. Ability to export to a choice of file types jpg, png tif etc. in a choice of formats for a choice of destinations, flickr, email, local HD etc. etc. which would allow me to bin Lightroom.
--- End quote ---
I agree these would be nice to have. I'm not sure there is a broad need yet. We'll consider it.
--- Quote ---Would it be possible to have a client MC using a served library, with merged local records.... that would be pretty big too
--- End quote ---
Of course it's possible. Is it necessary? I need to think about it.
rjm
--- Quote ---[Books] I started with all (pdf) books in MC. Then along came mobi/epub and I needed something to manage their metadata so I now use Calibre for epub/mobi and MC for pdf. Then I wanted to search content so I had to introduce another application for indexing and searching. But most search engines do not index epub/mobi so I currently only have content search on pdf. Three different apps plus a search gap is not a stable situation.
[Audiobooks] MC is perfect for all audiobook tasks except one metadata related thing. I create a local text file and/or links to info about the audiobook such as the plot and reviews. When browsing audiobooks in MC I crave for a feature that would pop up info when I hover or click something.
--- End quote ---
Lise also wanted playback of notes and that should be possible.
--- Quote ---[Video] Not so good for metadata
--- End quote ---
It's on our list.
MrHaugen
--- Quote ---real user based database system
--- End quote ---
Nice to have but not a broad demand yet.
--- Quote ---enable Theater View to be totally skinnable
I've not looked much into skinning my self, because I've gotten the impression that this is not very well supported, and I'm lousy with that XML language or what you call it. So, please correct me if I'm out of line here.
--- End quote ---
Take a closer look when you have time.
--- Quote ---Better support for module skinning. Every part of MC Theater View have to be programmable. Move them where we want, increase/decrease size, change textures, colors etc.
--- End quote ---
Does XBMC do this?
--- Quote ---We have artist images now, so I see no reason why we could not get Series art and Season art (episode would just be standard folder.jpg)
I think I have a complete Theater View setup in my head .....
--- End quote ---
Maybe spend a few minutes and try to summarize why it is better. Or add specific suggestions on how Theater View can be improved.
We aren't in the mood to rewrite Theater View. It's on at least its third rewrite already. And it works without much trouble with a touchscreen, a mouse, a keyboard, or an MC Remote. That wasn't easy to do.
TheLion
--- Quote ---- Blu-Ray playback - full menu support (make it wife friendly)
--- End quote ---
Agreed. If we can, we will
--- Quote ---- Picture/Photo viewer - support for color management and HQ scaling algorithms (Lanczos). To make it viable for viewing HiRes/HQ photos from DSLRs and not just snapshots.
--- End quote ---
I need to understand this one first.
rpalmer68
--- Quote ---If the community can help improve/develop Theater View once it's skinnable I think that would be fantastic, as it does lag behind other similar products in my opinion.
--- End quote ---
It's been skinable for a couple of years, but we haven't seen much interest.
--- Quote ---Under improved TV support I would like to suggest that MC start making more efficient use of a tuner by being able to record multiple streams off the one tuner, or at least not use two tuners to record two recordings that are one after the other on the same channel!
--- End quote ---
park:
--- Quote from: vagskal on September 21, 2011, 12:21:44 am ---Integrate online streaming music services in the database. Today users have physical media files on hard drives (and soon in some cloud) as well as access to streaming services but no software that combines them in a seamless way. Let users add albums and songs on Spotify and have them treated in the MC database as if they were physical files (allow tag changes, ratings, play counts etc.). Then I might stop buying CDs and downloadable files. I want to collect things and see and handle/enhance what is in _my_ collection, not all the music available on some streaming service.
Support for iThings. Today I would hesitate to buy a software for playback on my home entertainment system that did not have a good iPad app.
A versatile statistics/report feature including graphs.
--- End quote ---
I agree with this 100%. I requested this myself a year or so ago. Picking songs from an online service and organizing them your own way is something that nobody else is even trying yet. It would be great innovation.
jmone:
I did this MCModel.JPG up a couple of years ago when Jim was using the play anything, anywhere and anytime motto (or something like that). So I dug it out again to see how things have changed, and what bits need futher work to support the various elements of the ecosystem:
Content (Docs, Music, Images, Video): I don't have much to add here as my focus is on Music, and Video though others have had suggestions for better Image and Doc support
Delivery & Consumption (On-Line, Physical Discs, Servers, Portable Devices, OTA): The obvious ones have been raised including iStuff, WinMo, Blu-ray menu, DVB-C/S
Connectivity: Again, not much to add as MC works well with the various physical connectivity options
Converter for Format, Time, Place or Device shifting: This has come a long way but there is still a bunch of stuff missing in achieve the "play anything to anything", examples are:
- Connected Media (eg Web Radio) --> MC Server --> Clients
- OTA TV/Radio --> MC Server --> Clients
- Video Format Conversion (eg like we now get for Audio)
- Caching on Clients for later playback
- Bandwidth Profiles for Streaming to clients (eg Movies over the WAN Vs LAN etc)
In Short, MC should be able to acquire any content from any source and transform it to suit the specific consumption requirements any client.
This model excludes the Presentation Layer, to which I would add similar comments to others such as:
- Meta Data collection, scraping and Mgt for Videos (from playlists, playback ranges etc)...just as you can with music now
- Meta Data collection, scraping and Mgt for Physical Objects (eg track and manage discs)
- Blu ray menu
- EPG Improvements
MC really has come a very long way :)
Thanks
Nathan
gvanbrunt:
In reply to Jim's comments on dynamic streaming. Most of the big cloud services today offer that kind of experience. I believe they do the conversion on the fly and if quality drops (the client sends performance data back) it starts a lower quality conversion on another thread and switches to it when enough is buffered. Easy in theory, maybe not in practice...
I have to disagree that there is not much interest in changing Theater View. I see the comment all the time and I see people I recommend MC to go with XBMC instead as it is "prettier". However I don't think it should be rewritten. I think there should be 2 versions. Keep the existing version which can be customized extensively and quite easily by the average user. Add a second type that works similar to XBMC and allows complex skinning.
I would suggest looking at XBMC an how it does it's skinning. If MC supported that level customization, people would switch in droves. Other than Theater View MC is superior in every way. If you want an example of what is possible download and give XBMC a try. Then you will see why many prefer that for HTPC use.
The other option is to create a "provider" for XBMC so you can view content there. That would give others the option of a more complex skinning experience if they wanted it without as much work. However one thing XBMC does have is better metadata support for movies. This allows for some great visuals using front/back covers etc.
Finally, I to would be willing create a document for JRiver that outlines a detailed plan. It would be how I think skinning could work by looking at MC's current skins, and that of XBMC. I would use my programming knowledge to guesstimate how MC is currently doing things so the plan would take advantage of existing code so less development is necessary. However, I'm only willing to go the lengths necessary to do this if I get some kind of commitment by JRiver that they will seriously consider doing it. From what I've seen up till now, there doesn't seem to be much interest in pursuing it on their part.
BTW I really like the fact that you can create a View in the current Theater view and have it work in all skins. That is not possible with the XBMC style of skinning. That is why I suggested having two front ends...
rick.ca:
--- Quote from: gvanbrunt on September 21, 2011, 10:45:05 pm ---I would suggest looking at XBMC an how it does it's skinning...
--- End quote ---
I wish someone who understands both programs would take a close look and identify exactly what is so appealing about XBMC—that would be feasible to incorporate into Theatre View. I've tried XBMC several times (including a number of it's more popular skins), and I just don't get it. It seems vastly inferior to MC. That's probably because I value most the ability to configure views for any purpose, present meta data in any manner, and a navigation system that's consistent regardless of how things are configured. I'm not interested in skinning unless it fully supports those characteristics—even if that means foregoing some "prettiness." On the other hand, if there are ways to incorporate some attractive visual aspects of XBMC into the existing Theatre View, those would be worth considering.
Two versions? We can already see the portion of users inclined to make full use of the existing capabilities of Theatre View is rather small. That seems to be learning curve issue, even though the configuration system is not particularly difficult to use. Is it realistic to assume the same users will overcome that barrier and master complex skinning?
This issue will fade somewhat once MC includes an integrated system for adding video meta data. Without a rich set of consistent meta data, the advantages of the Theatre View are difficult to appreciate. Meta data includes images like posters and backdrops that will also make Theatre View more visually appealing. Once MC automatically populates it's video records with meta data, XBMC users will come in droves. Once they're here, maybe they can suggest how to make it prettier. ;)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version