As I said before...
If you all wish to continue the philosophical debate of overall design methodology and user ability/necessity to circumvent, or the need to do so, please move it to another thread. I really just want feedback on this particular issue here.
Yet, you insist upon ignoring me, and responding with inaccurate and unhelpful information
In the context of the fundamental design, it's obvious.
No, it is NOT "perfectly obvious why showing a list of only one item is necessary". In fact, it's bad behavior to ask the same question over and over, which is what this really is. I picked a movie, then MC presents me with a screen requiring me to make a choice, with the only option being the exact same thing I just chose. It's absurd, not 'perfectly obviously necessary'. I understand WHY this currently happens, but that doesn't make it necessary. Nor does it require a "complete redesign" of Theater View. Considering Matt just wrote an internal convolution mechanism that manages any number of inputs, in any number of formats, converting to any number of outputs, in under a week, with little/no prior knowledge about the topic 10 days ago, I'm pretty sure he can figure out [if list of options in screen to be presented]=1 or [same item just selected], skip display of item, and instead just display the result of that unnecessary selection of the one and only option from the to-be-skipped screen. He's a pretty smart guy, I'm sure he could do that without redesigning the entire Theater View system.
It could be debated in the context of a completely different design, but that would be pointless.
You're not even reading and understanding what I'm writing. I don't want any "redesign" of anything. It's not necessary, or desired. If you care to start paying attention, what I said is
I suggested that a list containing one item should be skipped. I don't think it's that hard to understand or implement.
Apparently I overestimated you're ability or willingness to understand this. I'll try again for you...
If a view needs a selection made, but contains only one item, I don't need to be asked, the decision can be made for me. One option=no choice. i.e. skip it! If you actually try to follow along, the screen I'm suggesting be
sometimes skipped only has 2 possible ways out of it, select the exact same thing I just selected, or go back to the screen from where I just made the choice, thereby reversing the choice I just made to get here. There is NO other possibility of doing anything else here. Since it makes no sense to go back to the screen I just left, the only logical thing that can be done is to chose the only item available here. I simply suggest that MC make this obvious/only/logical choice for me, i.e. continue to the result of that inevitable choice.
A fundamental redesign will not be considered.
Not only was one not requested, it's unnecessary. But more importantly, I was unaware that you were in charge of decisions as to what will or will not be considered regarding a business you neither own, nor work for. When did this wonderful power get bestowed upon you? Your sense of self-worth is astounding!
You're choosing to ignore what I've already explained in order to continue a pointless discussion.
No, I have not ignored it "in order to continue a pointless discussion". Instead, I specifically asked you to take it elsewhere
because I don't want to "continue a pointless discussion" with you. You clearly don't understand the topic, and are therefore not discussing it. The only thing pointless about any of this is your input here.
I've suggested different ways to handle the situation which are possible using the current design. It's understandable you might prefer something different, so I've also commented on an additional feature that would help, but you're choosing to ignore that as well.
As I've said in response to many of your suggestions, I have no real desire to create numerous complicated views with complicated expressions to do simple things. I also said that if the very specific request I have made cannot be done, then that's fine also. I'll live with the small little annoyance. I will not spend hours circumventing things because you insist that's the only way to fix this.
This is why constructive suggestions rarely go anywhere. They're usually overwhelmed with persistent complaints the program should work in a way that avoids the trouble the user brought on themselves by ignoring the perfectly sensible way it was designed to work.
Nothing you've typed thus far, in this thread, or the one referred to earlier, is constructive to me, or my request. It's convoluted, condescending, arrogant, insulting and completely misses the point of the thread(s). Your only suggestion, from what I can see is "to simply use a separate view for displaying movies series." as a solution to my very first sentences in this thread, which read
When browsing Movies in Theater View, I want them sorted by name, mostly. However, some movies are all part of a series, so I want the series sorted by name along with the single movies that are not part of a series.
Are you really suggesting the solution to 'sort them all together' is 'to have separate views'? Wow!
If you don't like groups of one, don't define categories that result in them. Or create an alternate view.
So, to restate, you're
constructive suggestions are 1) don't do the thing you want to do, or 2) create the thing that you've already tried unsuccessfully to create. Genius!
As I've already said, I don't know any other way to get the results I want without having some view that results in a category of one. I'm not willing to dedicate hours to creating convoluted views, based on complex expressions so that's not an option either.
The other option you're not considering there, is "request that the developers of the program make a simple change that has no downside, no adverse effects, makes perfect logical sense, and is likely easy to implement". Which is all I'm trying to do.
It's clear you think it's a dumb request. That's fine, I don't care what you think. I wasn't asking you. I've even asked you not to respond, yet here you are again, clogging up what could have been a simple request thread, that might have led to me and others getting a change that would benefit us. By this point, anyone that can make the change I request, or might comment on the usefulness of my request in their personal usage of MC has long since stopped reading the
drivel words you've dumped all over this thread now too.
Or participate in a positive discussion about a possible new feature that would eliminate the issue. There might even be a solution along the lines you suggest, but it will likely never happen because you unwilling to discuss how it might work.
Just more proof you don't even read anything that I've written. This is EXACTLY what I've tried to do. You, on the other hand, have written this...
The premise the current design is flawed and others are too brainwashed to be able to see it is dishonest to the point of being silly.
How do you really think that is helpful? If you see that as anything other than a condescending, unhelpful, holier-than-thou, insult to me and Daydream who's comments you are replying to, and pretty much everyone else that you call "brainwashed", you need some serious help.
Your aggressive, 'I'm the only one that gets it and you're all idiots' tone is not what ANYONE would call "positive discussion"
If you insist on continuing trolling here (I'd prefer you don't), it had better start off with an explanation of what you think I want (so I can see if you've finally understood), then a possible solution. Anything else is unnecessary, and unwanted.
