Print

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

[flac.rules]

I have a couple of things I would really like to see in MC, for instances a home automation module, with EIB/KNX-support. Lets say I am willing to pay 500 dollars for this. This is obliviously not enough to to pay the work needed to do this. But maybe other people would like to add in some funds, and the whole thing doesn't have to be payed either, it just will be cheaper for the developers to implement, as some of the costs are payed. Would it be an idea to have a solution like this for many wanted features? A pool where people can pay for the development of them? Or is this just stupid? I feel it would have to generate enough for JRiver to hire more people, if not, we will only pay more for the same amount of development Any views on this?

[Bow]

Sure would be nice to be able to switch off sons guitar amp from mediacenter or its peers  .
But are you sure that such an interface havent been done ?

[glynor]

I don't know that MC wants/needs to be a home automation solution.

What about Girder or something like it?  Why does what you want need to be part of MC?  Couldn't you use something that can control both MC and your home automation needs?  MC is extremely controllable and works well with Girder (and things like it)... I use Girder myself.  Now... I don't know much/anything about EIB/KNX support, so maybe there is something else special there and why it makes sense to have it as part of MC, but...

I don't see it.

[flac.rules]

I don't know that MC wants/needs to be a home automation solution.

What about Girder or something like it?  Why does what you want need to be part of MC?  Couldn't you use something that can control both MC and your home automation needs?  MC is extremely controllable and works well with Girder (and things like it)... I use Girder myself.  Now... I don't know much/anything about EIB/KNX support, so maybe there is something else special there and why it makes sense to have it as part of MC, but...

I don't see it.

Why not girder? Because as far as I can see, its pretty cumbersome to send a command from MC to girder, which then again possibly have to send a command to another program. Besides it doesn't support EiB/KNX directly. Controlling MC via girder isn't ideal either, as the MCC-commands isn't flexible enough (you can't use several of them), and setting up a proper GUI is not as easy. I guess you could make MC launch VLC every time you see a video also, but having it integrated is a better solution in most cases.

But thats really not the main point, no matter what functions are suggested, obliviously the team could say no. And I was thinking more about the general idea. I just took the example i personally would be most willing to pay for.

[glynor]

Controlling MC via girder isn't ideal either, as the MCC-commands isn't flexible enough (you can't use several of them)

I control MC with Girder using all sorts of esoteric MCC commands.  What do you need that you can't do?  I'm not aware of any MCC commands that "don't work", but maybe it is in some space I didn't ever explore. 

If you send Windows Messages instead of calling MC17.exe, it performs extremely well via Girder.

[glynor]

But thats really not the main point, no matter what functions are suggested, obliviously the team could say no. And I was thinking more about the general idea. I just took the example i personally would be most willing to pay for.

I get that.

I've suggested a "Pro" or "Server" edition of MC in the past that would sell for more money.  Jim isn't interested, at least at this time.  They're focused on making the best MC that they can, and not "splitting the baby".

As far as a one off "we want this and we'll pay for it ourselves" thing... That's a business decision that I can't really comment on, so I commented on what I could.  Contracting a developer, even for a relatively small coding project, is likely going to be an order-of-magnitude more expensive than you might think, though.  And there is quality-of-code concerns too...  It is going to take the contract worker so long to get up-to-speed on the existing source and methods, and then you are going to have code contributed (that needs to be maintained) from a third-party who has no long-term commitment to the product.  That's not really ideal.

So... I'd be skeptical, but, again... It isn't my call at all.

[flac.rules]

I control MC with Girder using all sorts of esoteric MCC commands.  What do you need that you can't do?  I'm not aware of any MCC commands that "don't work", but maybe it is in some space I didn't ever explore. 

If you send Windows Messages instead of calling MC17.exe, it performs extremely well via Girder.

I see my sentence could be misunderstood, I ment that you can't send several commands at the same time, for instance you can't invoke the MC.exe with several MCC-commands added on.

I am not sure i understand your last sentence? What is "windows messages" in this situation?

[flac.rules]

I get that.

I've suggested a "Pro" or "Server" edition of MC in the past that would sell for more money.  Jim isn't interested, at least at this time.  They're focused on making the best MC that they can, and not "splitting the baby".

As far as a one off "we want this and we'll pay for it ourselves" thing... That's a business decision that I can't really comment on, so I commented on what I could.  Contracting a developer, even for a relatively small coding project, is likely going to be an order-of-magnitude more expensive than you might think, though.  And there is quality-of-code concerns too...  It is going to take the contract worker so long to get up-to-speed on the existing source and methods, and then you are going to have code contributed (that needs to be maintained) from a third-party who has no long-term commitment to the product.  That's not really ideal.

So... I'd be skeptical, but, again... It isn't my call at all.

Well, I am not suggestion a server version. Just that when people come with feature requests, they sometimes are willing to pay extra for that feature to be implemented. (directly to j. river, not pay more for the program), a donation of sorts if you want. I don't think it will pay the total costs, JRiver would still have to put in resources themselves, but some features would be cheaper to implement for them, because they get financial support. I am not sure how good the idea is, but I feel it might be a solution for major undertakings, which some people are willing to pay well over the program price to implement.

[glynor]

Windows Messages are a function of the Windows API.  Typically you'd use them when coding one application that needs to use another, separate process (perhaps written by a third-party) to perform some function.

Here's the Microsoft Developer documentation page:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms632590%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

Girder (and other similar automation applications, I'm sure) exposes a PostMessage GUI wrapper that allows you to create and send these messages to any application that knows how to handle them, so you can use them without having to code your own application to send them.  MC17.exe is essentially the same thing, just built to service only MC itself.

When you call MCC functions in Girder via the Windows Messages API instead of by calling the MC17 wrapper executable, it performs much better.  I'd assume this is because there is some small amount of overhead required to setup and load the MC17.exe process, which needs to be executed over and over again for each MCC you send via that mechanism.  So... When you call MC17.exe /MCC whatever, then Windows has to load a new process, allocate memory to it, execute the command, then shut down the new process, and repeat.  Whereas if you just send the PostMessage via Girder, it just sends it using a process already running and active on the system.

Can you describe what you need to be able to send to MC simultaneously?  I'm not saying something doesn't exist, I'm just curious mostly.

[rick.ca]

Just that when people come with feature requests, they sometimes are willing to pay extra for that feature to be implemented. (directly to j. river, not pay more for the program), a donation of sorts if you want.

Cupcakes seem to work. Maybe cash is worth a try.

[nwboater]

Cupcakes seem to work. Maybe cash is worth a try.

How about a boat ride?

Rod

[flac.rules]

Windows Messages are a function of the Windows API.  Typically you'd use them when coding one application that needs to use another, separate process (perhaps written by a third-party) to perform some function.

Here's the Microsoft Developer documentation page:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms632590%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

Girder (and other similar automation applications, I'm sure) exposes a PostMessage GUI wrapper that allows you to create and send these messages to any application that knows how to handle them, so you can use them without having to code your own application to send them.  MC17.exe is essentially the same thing, just built to service only MC itself.

When you call MCC functions in Girder via the Windows Messages API instead of by calling the MC17 wrapper executable, it performs much better.  I'd assume this is because there is some small amount of overhead required to setup and load the MC17.exe process, which needs to be executed over and over again for each MCC you send via that mechanism.  So... When you call MC17.exe /MCC whatever, then Windows has to load a new process, allocate memory to it, execute the command, then shut down the new process, and repeat.  Whereas if you just send the PostMessage via Girder, it just sends it using a process already running and active on the system.

Can you describe what you need to be able to send to MC simultaneously?  I'm not saying something doesn't exist, I'm just curious mostly.

Thanks for the info, i will check that out.

If i remember correctly, it was fromt he time i used a separate front-end, I wasn't able to start MC with a given file, in theatre mode and full screen.

[flac.rules]

Cupcakes seem to work. Maybe cash is worth a try.

Well, cash will probably be cheaper for me than flying to the US and baking a cupcake

[MrC]

While you can throw cash around, throwing cupcakes is much more fun.