Topic: Why now? (Read 2616 times)

jmone · « **on:** June 23, 2012, 07:24:25 am »

I must admit I don’t get the dichotomy when Jim has posted for the last couple of years the evils of Apple after screwing over JR regarding iOS device support and pushed for user to protest to Apple and/or support Android… but then posts a poll about supporting OSX!?!?! I’d personally much rather see JR release an iOS client version of Gizmo but till the recent poll had thought Apple was considered the Devil incarnate to JR. Then again I’m easily confused!

JimH · « **Reply #1 on:** June 23, 2012, 07:32:27 am »

Quote from: jmone on June 23, 2012, 07:24:25 am

... Then again I’m easily confused!

So am I.

Windows has been such a dominant OS for a very long time, but with smart phones and tablets, things have changed.

Our code is uncoupled from Windows now. We have most of the building blocks we need for Linux or Mac.

We don't have a working program yet, but we're pretty far along. Sometime this year, we'll have something.

jmone · « **Reply #2 on:** June 23, 2012, 07:45:41 am »

Quote from: JimH on June 23, 2012, 07:32:27 am

....but with smart phones and tablets, things have changed...... We have most of the building blocks we need for Linux or Mac.

This is part of my confusion. I absolutely agree with you on the phones and tablets...but they are dominated by iOS and Android, and this is not related to supporting OSX or Linux....yet the discussions seems to mix the two together.

What are you after?
1) Front end consumption on phones and tablets = Gizmo dev on Android AND iOS (and maybe WinMo/8),
2) Back end serving then you want support for Linux NAS, or
3) a full OSX Version

Each have their own market, dev challenges and ultimately a payback (positive or negative) for the effort expended.

JimH · « **Reply #3 on:** June 23, 2012, 07:48:56 am »

And further more ...

UNIX
We have deep UNIX roots, going back to 1987 when we released a little program called Deja Vu. It was a Terminate and Stay Resident app for DOS. You could hot key from DOS to the program and it provided Wyse 60 terminal emulation, so you could log onto a UNIX system. Originally this was with a serial connection, but we figured out how to use it with a modem. We bought a Telebit 9600 baud modem for about $800, so we could set up uucp connections to a few of our customers. This allowed us to send and receive e-mail. E-mail was a miracle.

JimH · « **Reply #4 on:** June 23, 2012, 07:52:26 am »

AUDIOPHILES
Maybe you've noticed that we have a lot of audiophile users posting. It's about 1/3 of our business now, and in the audiophile community, for whatever reason, there is a belief that Macs are better. That's changing now, but perhaps 1/2 of the audiophile market love their Mac's.

JimH · « **Reply #5 on:** June 23, 2012, 07:55:04 am »

Quote from: jmone on June 23, 2012, 07:45:41 am

This is part of my confusion. I absolutely agree with you on the phones and tablets...but they are dominated by iOS and Android, and this is not related to supporting OSX or Linux....yet the discussions seems to mix the two together.

OSX and iOS aren't so far apart. Android and Linux aren't either. In fact, they all have a common heritage in UNIX.

Quote

What are you after?
1) Front end consumption on phones and tablets = Gizmo dev on Android AND iOS (and maybe WinMo/8),
2) Back end serving then you want support for Linux NAS, or
3) a full OSX Version

Each have their own market, dev challenges and ultimately a payback (positive or negative) for the effort expended.

Given time, we'll do all three.

JimH · « **Reply #6 on:** June 23, 2012, 07:57:22 am »

OEM BUSINESS
The whole family of DLNA devices uses Linux. We could probably get some of this business if we had a Linux solution. Or we could provide devices. Or we could provide a package that a user could install on old equipment to get a DLNA renderer. Theater View on your TV instead of the primitive DLNA menus that now exist.

jmone · « **Reply #7 on:** June 23, 2012, 08:02:52 am »

Ahh the good old days of BBS and acoustic couplers

Seriously, I can see the following makes sense if the ports are easy:
- Linux MC Server version for the NAS Market: While I take it the port of the core MC code for the DB and Audio is straight forward, I've no idea if you plan to release a cut down feature set as I'm guessing that the dev effort to replace all the 3rd party stuff you need for Video Transcoding, TV Tuner Support etc to get an equivalent feature base up an going is going to be significant. There is certainly a big community support but most of this is freeware/shareware so who knows how this will translate into sales
- iOS Support: I'd really think this is a missing market for JR. Even I'm more than happy to suggest that iOS is 50+% of the smartphone/tablet market (Glynor?) and you have just ignored it. Port Gizmo and allow an off-line/local library and you don't have to even worry about sycning with iTunes as you will replace it.
- WinMo/8 Support: No idea how it will take off. I loved WinMo6.5, hate WinMo7 and who knows on WinMo8
- OSX: This one really worries me..... I can see this as a very big dev effort as you will want a full MC feature set up and going so will need all the 3rd party stuff working for Video, TV, BD etc etc.

jmone · « **Reply #8 on:** June 23, 2012, 08:18:25 am »

Quote from: JimH on June 23, 2012, 07:55:04 am

Given time, we'll do all three.

I'm sure you know the how, what, where and why of this....and it is certainly not my business to tell Grandma/JR how to suck eggs.....but please don't swallow more than JR can chew. Your business has grown so well over the last 24 months by a dedicated focus on expanding the feature set you offer rather than the breadth of OS you support. I'd hate to see MC become a "Jack of all trades, master of none" if stretched to far.

MrHaugen · « **Reply #9 on:** June 23, 2012, 08:36:40 am »

Quote from: jmone on June 23, 2012, 08:02:52 am

Ahh the good old days of BBS and acoustic couplers

Seriously, I can see the following makes sense if the ports are easy:
- Linux MC Server version for the NAS Market: While I take it the port of the core MC code for the DB and Audio is straight forward, I've no idea if you plan to release a cut down feature set as I'm guessing that the dev effort to replace all the 3rd party stuff you need for Video Transcoding, TV Tuner Support etc to get an equivalent feature base up an going is going to be significant. There is certainly a big community support but most of this is freeware/shareware so who knows how this will translate into sales
- iOS Support: I'd really think this is a missing market for JR. Even I'm more than happy to suggest that iOS is 50+% of the smartphone/tablet market (Glynor?) and you have just ignored it. Port Gizmo and allow an off-line/local library and you don't have to even worry about sycning with iTunes as you will replace it.
- WinMo/8 Support: No idea how it will take off. I loved WinMo6.5, hate WinMo7 and who knows on WinMo8
- OSX: This one really worries me..... I can see this as a very big dev effort as you will want a full MC feature set up and going so will need all the 3rd party stuff working for Video, TV, BD etc etc.

Very good summary. I agree with you. I can't help but to think that there are better approaches than jumping right on to a FULL feature set port to OSx. Even though Mac might dominate the high end PC market...

Starting out small, and getting a feel for the market might be a good thing here. I'm also afraid that you can bite over more than you can chew with a huge project like a OSx (or even worse a full Linux port). I would hate to see that. Apart from the company I work in, you are the second one that I hope really makes it in every way.

glynor · « **Reply #10 on:** June 23, 2012, 10:30:08 am »

Quote from: jmone on June 23, 2012, 08:02:52 am

- OSX: This one really worries me..... I can see this as a very big dev effort as you will want a full MC feature set up and going so will need all the 3rd party stuff working for Video, TV, BD etc etc.

One thing I've learned over my years watching this company...

They have a seemingly unending capacity to amaze me. Take, for example, Red October. I remember epic discussions about the issue where I argued that it could be worthwhile but would require a massive development effort, hurting development elsewhere and probably complicating the UI in myriad ways.

And then they did it. In something like three weeks flat, while still making progress on other items at the same time. (I think maybe, a little, just to spite me because I'd challenged Matt's developer-fu.) It was a bit rough at first, but I don't think anyone could argue that it hasn't been great for business and that rather than make the UI more complex, it actually helped quite a bit and made MC more powerful. Carnac and the Auto-Metadata system followed the same pattern.

I guess what I'm saying is... Like George Michael: You got to have faith a-faith a-faith-aaah!

They do, mostly, seem to know what they're doing.

jmone · « **Reply #11 on:** June 23, 2012, 04:51:03 pm »

I'm sure your are right! I've expressed my thoughts on priorities etc and like always we now just hold and and see where the MC ride takes us.

Listener · « **Reply #12 on:** June 23, 2012, 08:38:09 pm »

Quote from: JimH on June 23, 2012, 07:52:26 am

AUDIOPHILES
Maybe you've noticed that we have a lot of audiophile users posting. It's about 1/3 of our business now, and in the audiophile community, for whatever reason, there is a belief that Macs are better. That's changing now, but perhaps 1/2 of the audiophile market love their Mac's.

I think there is a difference between audiophiles as a whole and those who post frequently on the audiophile forums. However,

- Bringing out a Mac OSX version of MC would have merit as an offensive action and as a defensive action.

- You might have to make MC more obvious for newcomers to learn to use AND get up-to-date documentation. MC will be compared to iTunes over and over. If MC looks much harder to use, you may suffer from bad press in general.

- You will need to provide full support for syncing with all iDevices, full support for using iDevices as remote controls for MC and streaming audio and video to devices like the Airport express and the Apple TV. You would be claiming that MC does more than iTunes and does things better than iTunes. If there are major holes in your functionality, your story won't sell.

On the plus side, the Apple world is much more uniform than the Windows PC world. After a big initial effort, support might be pretty manageable.

----
I see the Linux situation as being different. I think a Linux product would sell poorly and be a big support burden. Distribution hell. Driver hell. Audio framework heck. However individual parts of MC would have value separately: the server functionality in a NAS+ type product, UI functionality on smartphone and tablet to control the system and playback functionality for a headless device (like a Sonos node, a Logitech Squeezebox w/o a display or an Airport Express.)

--- my consumer feedback
As a consumer, I've cooled on buying a Mac as a dedicated MusicPC. Apple doesn't offer the functionality I want. Every time I evaluate a Mac alternative, it winds up to be more expensive and less functional. I might be a customer for MC in a Mac buit don't count on it.

I'm considering using peanut processors (Raspberry Pi like devices ) as headless playback devices. That part of my audio system would be Linux based.

Bill

jmone · « **Reply #13 on:** June 23, 2012, 09:02:46 pm »

I agree with Bill that you will need to have the iOS supported sorted out before any OSX release.

[FlameSuit] And given the first sneak peaks pics of MC for MAC are out, I'm no longer worried about the dev or support effort given the work JR has done to simplify the UI for Mac Users [/FlameSuit]

jmone · « **Reply #14 on:** June 23, 2012, 09:18:27 pm »

Quote from: JimH on June 23, 2012, 07:48:56 am

We have deep UNIX roots, going back to 1987 .....

If these leaked MC for Unix shots are anything to go by your 1987 Unix coding skills are certainly evident!

Scolex · « **Reply #15 on:** June 23, 2012, 11:18:10 pm »

Quote

[FlameSuit] And given the first sneak peaks pics of MC for MAC are out, I'm no longer worried about the dev or support effort given the work JR has done to simplify the UI for Mac Users [/FlameSuit]

ROTFLMFAO!!!

jgreen · « **Reply #16 on:** June 25, 2012, 12:00:29 pm »

All thriving companies must keep comparing their products to their peers in the marketplace, and asking fundamental questions. JimH is simply doing this and I'm amazed at the hairballs that have been coughed up over this. It's just questions!!

Listener · « **Reply #17 on:** June 25, 2012, 12:51:52 pm »

Quote from: jgreen on June 25, 2012, 12:00:29 pm

All thriving companies must keep comparing their products to their peers in the marketplace, and asking fundamental questions. JimH is simply doing this and I'm amazed at the hairballs that have been coughed up over this. It's just questions!!

Jim asked questions in several threads. People responded with useful points of view. I'm sure that Jim can take what he needs from the responses he got.

Bill

gvanbrunt · « **Reply #18 on:** June 25, 2012, 08:06:45 pm »

Sorry Jmone, but that Unix mock up is way to user friendly to gain acceptance in that market...

Something more like the VI interface would be awesome.

Fred1 · « **Reply #19 on:** June 26, 2012, 05:55:30 am »

I appreciate the new interest in other OSes by JRiver very much.
After i had used MC for so many years, it became more and more useless for me because of the lack of support for my iDevices.
After i turned to Apple's side of the universe for my private computing, i didn't update my MC licences any more for a couple of years now.
But reading of MC for Mac brougt my interest back immediately.

Would be nice if MC on the Mac had a remote control as good as - or even better - than the remote-app on the iPad.

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: Why now? (Read 2616 times)