INTERACT FORUM
More => Old Versions => JRiver Media Center 26 for Windows => Topic started by: goatherder on October 20, 2019, 04:03:32 pm
-
My one and only feature request:
- A modern UX, with the ability to be used like a modern desktop application in the vein of e.g. Explorer, that embraces actually modern hardware
For me, given what I do with MC it has been feature-complete for years. The BIGGEST issue for me however has been the visuals and UX, especially since the 2012-ish timeframe.
My reason for using MC on my PC's is to have a powerful library manager and playback setup wherever I happen to be. Again, feature wise MC delivers on that front. However despite upgrading software over the years the UX hasn't changed - and the move to expand to other last-gen OS's like OSX and Linux instead of fully taking advantage of Windows 8 onwards just seems to have served as an excuse to rehash the same UX over and over again, and there's been no move forwards to embrace modern convertible OS usage.
I still can't reliably operate any major MC control by ad hoc touch using any of my current hardware: Surface Book 2, Surface Pro, Lenovo X1 Yoga, etc (And recent versions of MC doesn't appear to run on the Surface Go at all for some reason). Not even listboxes. It even struggles with HiDPI from what I can see when trying to use it on my >4K monitors.
Obviously you are not there prodding at every control, but things like moving sliders are a very natural action on a modern laptop - but on MC it's a supremely dicey prospect in a way that it isn't on any major current, actively developed Windows desktop application.
I figure things are going to get even more painful when my Surface Pro X turns up and if 32-bit MC works on it.
It hasn't happened in 6 years so I very much doubt it'll ever happen, but it doesn't hurt to ask so that I'm not constantly looking for something else that does some of what MC does but is actually modern.
-
My one and only feature request:
- A modern UX, with the ability to be used like a modern desktop application in the vein of e.g. Explorer, that embraces actually modern hardware
For me, given what I do with MC it has been feature-complete for years. The BIGGEST issue for me however has been the visuals and UX, especially since the 2012-ish timeframe.
My reason for using MC on my PC's is to have a powerful library manager and playback setup wherever I happen to be. Again, feature wise MC delivers on that front. However despite upgrading software over the years the UX hasn't changed - and the move to expand to other last-gen OS's like OSX and Linux instead of fully taking advantage of Windows 8 onwards just seems to have served as an excuse to rehash the same UX over and over again, and there's been no move forwards to embrace modern convertible OS usage.
I still can't reliably operate any major MC control by ad hoc touch using any of my current hardware: Surface Book 2, Surface Pro, Lenovo X1 Yoga, etc (And recent versions of MC doesn't appear to run on the Surface Go at all for some reason). Not even listboxes. It even struggles with HiDPI from what I can see when trying to use it on my >4K monitors.
Obviously you are not there prodding at every control, but things like moving sliders are a very natural action on a modern laptop - but on MC it's a supremely dicey prospect in a way that it isn't on any major current, actively developed Windows desktop application.
I figure things are going to get even more painful when my Surface Pro X turns up and if 32-bit MC works on it.
It hasn't happened in 6 years so I very much doubt it'll ever happen, but it doesn't hurt to ask so that I'm not constantly looking for something else that does some of what MC does but is actually modern.
That's a long description of your view of a problem, but it lacks any specific suggestions for the UI.
For touch screen, Panel might work.
-
That's a long description of your view of a problem, but it lacks any specific suggestions for the UI.
For touch screen, Panel might work.
There's plenty of contextual info in that post - MC Windows is an incredibly old-school app underneath.
I mean even down to the very basics: What happens when you swipe on a list? Currently it'll click on whatever you happen to put your finger on. I'm kind of amazed I have to explain this in 2019... 2013, when I was making the same complaints, I can understand to a degree but not now. Every other actively developed desktop program I use- even equally old-school looking apps like BlueBeam Revu - are aware.
-
Plan A: The UI is dated and is begging for a makeover. Instead of in-house development, consider outsourcing the UI work to a firm such as The Skins Factory. Start with three skins: Light, grey, and dark. Perhaps the colors can be customized by the user via slider controls.
If not in the budget, Plan B: An Option to disable left-hand panel (not hide), thereby relegating into context menu, tab, or pop-up. It could be a button "Tree", "Navigation", or whatever. If using context-like menu it could be something like a sticky where the pop-up stays visible until "closed". This would also apply to Tagging (with the option to detach).
Thanks
-
Regarding skins, try the Modern Cards skins which have a modern look and feel. There's already light, grey and dark editions of the Modern Cards skins. :)
-
Regarding skins, try the Modern Cards skins which have a modern look and feel. There's already light, grey and dark editions of the Modern Cards skins. :)
Problem is that skins don't do anything to modify the user interface behaviour. It's not a skin problem, it's deeper than that. The current scope of skins doesn't do anything to alter the UX to a modern look, let alone the actual usage experience. Modern Cards looks just like MC, it's barely distinguishable from a copy of MC ten years ago with Purity and doesn't bring anything actually new to the table.
My issues with touch meshes with this problem - MC behaves exactly like Windows XP targeted applications did in this respect that I had lots of issues with using on e.g. the X61 Tablet 10+ years ago.
Again, back then I could have said "it's super niche, OK" and I did - but with Surface now, this is mainstream.
In daily use I don't have *any* applications like this anymore.
-
Just so you know ...
Your UX comments are only annoying unless you can define "modern".
-
Your UX comments are only annoying unless you can define "modern".
I am not bothered by the look or UX of MC, but I'm an old guy. However, even I know that a modern UX supports touch controls and doesn't rely on things like right-clicks. Where a right-click brings up a context-sensitive dialog, a modern UX has a meatball or kebab control that opens a menu of options. Top menus are replaced with something like a hamburger or kebab (because menu bars that don't take up too much screen real estate are really difficult to use accurately with a finger). Right now there are some controls (or information) that appear only when you hover over an area with the mouse - which doesn't work when the control is with a finger instead of a mouse. So you replace the hover event with a meatball control. Actions that are commonly used (such as Play, or Add to Playlist) are sometimes replaced with icons instead of menu items that appear when the image is hovered over or right-clicked. A modern UX generally avoids modal dialog boxes - and especially multi-paged modal dialogs. I could go on, but that should be a good enough start to the definition of "modern" (at least from the perspective of someone well over 50).
-
I like old guys.
We have some of this in Panel.
It seems, in general, most appropriate for Panel, JRemote, Gizmo, etc. They could be considered shells for devices that have no mouse or keyboard. JRiver for Android, too. It is the MC engine but the UI is designed for touch.
Overhauling MC itself would be a ton of work and would probably irritate a few people.
-
Honestly what you call a "modern UI/UX" and the breadth and depth of functionality in Media Center just don't fit together.
Everytime I see an application receive a "modern UI overhaul", I see functions being taken away, because "modern" means simpler, and thus you get rid of stuff.
I don't think we would have wide support if we made MC Standard View modern/"simpler" by removing features in the process. Unfortunately that may mean it will never be perfect for touch control in Standard View. But when there is directly conflicting design goals, you can't fullfill all goals.
-
Everytime I see an application receive a "modern UI overhaul", I see functions being taken away, because "modern" means simpler, and thus you get rid of stuff.
I invite you to compare the current Explorer.exe vs Explorer in XP. See, I don't even need to get to applications (and again, most actively developed desktop applications now take this into account).
Modern in the context of productivity in 2019 doesn't mean "for the iPad". I guess the reason most here don't appear to understand this is because you're hanging onto clapped out legacy hardware.
-
I invite you to compare the current Explorer.exe vs Explorer in XP.
I invite you to find a comparison that actually has as much feature complexity and depth as Media Center, instead of a very simplistic file browser. :)
Modern in the context of productivity in 2019 doesn't mean "for the iPad".
And yet you equate "modern" with the Surface, which is just another tablet-sized device (or tablet+ if you want, 13" laptop is still tiny). In such a space-constrained environment the point about having to strip away functionality to make it usable stands even more.
A overhaul of the UI that you would call modern is just not going to happen anytime soon, sorry. We have alternate interfaces that may be suitable to touch screen use, and we're open about hearing suggestions to improve those.
-
I invite you to find a comparison that actually has as much feature complexity and depth as Media Center, instead of a very simplistic file browser. :)
And even then that argument falls apart. We're talking about the absolute basics - very simplistic aspects here in terms of long and potentially multi-column'd list navigation. For that, Explorer alone is an excellent illustration of the incredibly dated UX of MC.
And yet you equate "modern" with the Surface, which is just another tablet-sized device (or tablet+ if you want, 13" laptop is still tiny). In such a space-constrained environment the point about having to strip away functionality to make it usable stands even more.
Last time I checked, my Surface Studio isn't a 13" laptop for starters. Neither is my 15-inch Book 2, which has enough room to plunk my Dials onto and do stuff, let alone a finger or two. Not even mentioning that fact that it is absolutely possible to intract in a modern manner with desktop apps on my Surface Pro, Lenovo X1 Yoga / Tablet, etc - while the same apps allow me to be as effective from a non-touch UX aspect on my Lenovo P920's and HP Z8's. The 10-inch Go is, sure, somewhat irrelevant - and it is actually so, since recent versions of MC doesn't appear to want run on either of mine for some reason.
Of course, all this actual experience is dependent on you actually having modern hardware and non old-guy sausage fingers. I believe I can accurately assume from your writing that you don't fall into either camp. Perhaps maybe if you educated yourself instead of looking to refute someone with experience when you clearly don't, our exchange might be different.
-
I'm thinking out loud here, so to speak.
All things considered, does having a "modern UI" really matter that much? I'm of the mind that MC already looks good enough with the Modern Cards skins on both Windows 10 and macOS and most Linux distros. Honestly I would much rather have software to function as expected and just work, which it does. Trying to redo the UI would take a long time to do - I believe it was mentioned it'd take at least a year to a year and a half to do!
That said... I do agree touch support could be improved in MC right now with the current skins. On every single one of them on a Windows tablet trying to scroll through panes with your finger is a bit of a pain (no pun intended) and I always end up having to use the on-screen touchpad feature of Windows 10 to navigate. I can't really think of any good suggestions on how to improve this though, except for maybe have MC "know" when trying to scroll up and down over the scrollbars.
Having an option in skins to set and have a hamburger menu to replace the File/Edit/View/Player/Tools/Help menus like modern web browsers do now is kinda intriguing as well. If that was supported, I'd actually try to integrate it into my Modern Cards skin forks and create a hamburger menu button. I'd probably place it on the right side of MC under the search bar. :D
EDIT: Here, I made a little mock up using the Modern Cards: White Edition skin with the menus removed, a hamburger menu added to replace the menus under the search bar and the Previous/Play/Pause/Stop/Next buttons raised up. The obvious problem would be maintaining a "reverse compatibility" with an option to display menus instead of a hamburger menu, of course. I can also see how using a hamburger menu could be quite confusing for some users too. It looks okay I guess, but perhaps it's not my cup of tea personally. :P
(https://i.imgur.com/ID3aDTn.png)
-
A touch friendly MC UI equates to a completely new UI so I think we can guess at the chances of that happening :)
How would you interact with it via touch though? For me, the UI is essentially a spreadsheet and I can't imagine how touch is relevant there. Perhaps others use it differently though.
-
Thankfully MC's standard view is not designed for touch screen usage
-
Your UX comments are only annoying unless you can define "modern".
Ribbons are modern. All software I use in my profession have moved to ribbons. They take up space on the screen, make users learn symbols instead of using good ol words, and are so crammed full that they require more clicks than the menu they replaced. They are fine once you get used to them but it's debatable if they are better.
Does someone have an example of a touch friendly interface that's similar to MC?
A touch friendly MC UI equates to a completely new UI so I think we can guess at the chances of that happening
I disagree.
Look at Windows File Explorer, in a recent Windows 10 version, as an example of a good touchscreen implementation.
When dealing with lists of files and folders:
Left mouse click selects items.
Left click and then drag to move files/folders
Right mouse click opens up right click menu.
There's no scrolling with the clicks, you need to use scroll wheel.
If using touch:
Tap to select items.
Tap, hold, then drag to move files/folders.
Tap and hold to bring up right click menu.
To scroll just drag your finger around.
To scroll just drag your finger around.
This is where MC needs to change. When I drag my finger in MC it drags whatever I touched as apposed to scrolling.
Fix/change this and MC will be touchscreen friendly.
Windows on screen keyboard works great and has Select All, Copy, Past, etc when you hit Ctrl.
I currently use MO 4Media as a touchscreen interface for MC. It works very well. I hope very much that it will continue to be released for Windows. I do try Panel from time to time and it's improving continuously. The problem I have with it is dealing with the extremely large number of files I always have. Loading Artist images for 6000 artists takes too long (latest version is actually pretty good). My suggested solution to this as follows:
For all remotes add the option for text only Artist/Album Artist views. Let users browse an image free list, after an artist is selected, show the Artist image and album art (or whatever the next field you are using is).
-
Problem is that skins don't do anything to modify the user interface behaviour. It's not a skin problem, it's deeper than that...
My issues with touch meshes with this problem - MC behaves exactly like Windows XP targeted applications did in this respect that I had lots of issues with using on e.g. the X61 Tablet 10+ years ago...
Again, back then I could have said "it's super niche, OK" and I did - but with Surface now, this is mainstream.
In daily use I don't have *any* applications like this anymore...
Like some of the other "older guys" on here I'm struggling by your thoughts here. I have used a Surface and Surface Pro for maybe five years now and love them, but its their utilitarian nature that appeal to me. The're compact, powerful, frugal with battery usage and the touchscreen makes them more capable than a Galaxy tablet and it leaves the iPad/iPad Pro in the dust. However, due to the extremely small screen, I don't often use it for playing music. I'd use it at work playing a local copy of my library off an SD card slipped in the back and it was OK. The widgets, sliders and scroll bars were so tiny that using it touch mode was frustrating; so much so I just purchased a Bluetooth mouse and tossed in my computer go-bag for these issues. For JRiver, these can be fixed with a different skin so I'm confused when you say its deeper than a skin problem. In the same vein, I could say that most (if not all) of the MS Office Suite has the same issue with touchscreen use although the visual is pretty modern as far as office utilities go. Can you give me an example of software you consider modern and in touch with the more modern physical interfaces?
-
Look at Windows File Explorer, in a recent Windows 10 version, as an example of a good touchscreen implementation.
do you mean good as in functions correctly or good as in a enjoyable/productive interface? for me that is an example of the former not the latter so, from that point of view, fixing this in MC would be a poor use of scarce engineering time. Obviously this is completely subjective though so no doubt it is frustrating if you want to use it like that.
-
do you mean good as in functions correctly or good as in a enjoyable/productive interface? for me that is an example of the former not the latter so, from that point of view, fixing this in MC would be a poor use of scarce engineering time. Obviously this is completely subjective though so no doubt it is frustrating if you want to use it like that.
I would say that functions correctly equals productive. I would also say enjoyable since it doesn't piss me me off.
It's subjective indeed. I use Microsoft Surfaces a lot so I switch between mouse and keyboard to touch quite frequently. My work laptop is also my mp3 player for my car (MC will be confirmed touch friendly when I feel completely safe using MC while driving). I like to use the same interface for touch as non-touch, Windows 10 I believe accomplishes this. I can use the same interface on an 8 inch tablet as I use on a massive TV screen. Having a separate interface for touch was attempted and failed with Windows 8. Other examples of trying to have keyboard mouse and touch are the extremely awkward Chromebooks and whatever Samsung and Google are doing with their new tablets that have keyboards. Windows has been refining their touch since 2012. I think they have finally got it right and they set the bar.
-
Of course, all this actual experience is dependent on you actually having modern hardware and non old-guy sausage fingers. I believe I can accurately assume from your writing that you don't fall into either camp. Perhaps maybe if you educated yourself instead of looking to refute someone with experience when you clearly don't, our exchange might be different.
Goat,
I'm willing to entertain a discussion on this subject but the more you resort to this crap, the less likely I'm going to regard you as someone with something worthy to say, tread lightly. There was no insult in Hendrick's reply but I'm sure both he and I (and others) are trying to understand your perspective
-
I think the OP has a very valid point concerning scrolling: currently in MC you need to find a scroll bar and it’s “handle” and move that; whereas in modern UIs you scroll by dragging within the respective pane itself; the scroll speed depends on the “velocity” of the movement; and the scroll action has a certain inertia to keep rolling once you lift your finger, and to “brake” when you reapply the finger.
I also think he has a point concerning zooming; in many of MCs windows you can change the thumbnail size by means of a slider; but this could also be done by pinching.
-
PS you could also consider swipe right to add a track to playing now, or swipe left to remove it.
PPS and holding a finger down would bring up the right click context menu.
-
Please don't ever turn MC into a "modern app". Ugh.
-
Goat,
I'm willing to entertain a discussion on this subject but the more you resort to this crap, the less likely I'm going to regard you as someone with something worthy to say, tread lightly. There was no insult in Hendrick's reply but I'm sure both he and I (and others) are trying to understand your perspective
I guess having to explain the perspective is what I'm tiring of in 2019.
I think some of the basics have been reiterated by other users regarding navigating lists in MC for starters. I mean, even just that would be a huge improvement - but I'm assuming curing that will mean that MC has to differentiate between touch and tap, which should actually resolve other interaction issues. To clarify, I'm not even mentioning stuff like gestures - I am referring to basic interaction elements you'll, as I again said, find in Explorer in Windows 10.
-
I guess having to explain the perspective is what I'm tiring of in 2019.
That doesn't mean you have to start Ad Hominem attacks and start insulting older users by implying "non-superannuated Windows users" know so much better, as you did in the other post.
There have been good solid cases, and opinions, on both sides of the "modernisation" discussion. In my opinion, Microsoft broke Windows Explorer when they modernised the interface, and only "fixed" it when they added back functions that were in the previous version, such as right-clicking. The Office suite has been pretty much broken since they went to the ribbon paradigm, making it much harder for a power user to get things done.
A touch paradigm doesn't allow for hovering over an item, or right-clicking on an item to access a menu, at least not without making all elements bigger, which means removing other elements. Both of those functions provide a more detailed level of control in a specific context, such as for a specific file or group of files, which I believe is required for an application such as MC.
If you want an App with a touch paradigm, JRemote, MO 4Media, and Panel are the way to go, because touch means a simplified App, and those fit the bill. I would suggest that you champion improvements in Panel that give you the functionality and level of control that you want. Frankly, I think Panel could use a champion and improvement. Particularly when used on a tablet or larger touch screen.
The MC Standard View is a workhorse interface, capable of detailed maintenance work with fine control, and actions that are context-sensitive. It will never be a good candidate for touch control. Possibly the scrolling issue could be accommodated though.
-
The Office suite has been pretty much broken since they went to the ribbon paradigm, making it much harder for a power user to get things done.
I work at a fund - and I think it's fairly safe to say I'm an Excel "power user". I have zero issues with the ribbon'd Excel on my non-touch workstations, as well as touch tablets / convertibles - on which the adaptive interface works very well. I do notice some less mentally flexible individuals do indeed have issues with any changes to the Excel user experience - something that they apparently expect never, ever to change.
I also live in Outlook. On which I can scroll by touch just fine without making my finger extra pointy and heading to the scroll bar by the way, as I should be able to in this day and age.
-
I do notice some less mentally flexible individuals do indeed have issues with any changes...
There you go again. While I understand that you might be frustrated with the issue and the perspective of some users, it seems to be you that can't learn. Why do you need to include offhand insults?
Why don't you look to the positives and comment on them? Why don't you take up the challenge and champion improvement in Panel if this is so important to you?
I think JRiver is listening, but they haven't heard much that they can do economically and within a reasonable time frame.
Do you write Excel macros using touch tablets/convertibles? If not, why not? It would be possible, but not as productive on a touch tablet with an on-screen keyboard. This is the same issue as using MC Standard View to do detailed maintenance functions.
-
There you go again. While I understand that you might be frustrated with the issue and the perspective of some users, it seems to be you that can't learn. Why do you need to include offhand insults?
Because being dismissive based on your limited experience is something that comes from a *learned* individual? The street flows both ways, dude.
Why don't you look to the positives and comment on them?
Because what's wrong is pretty cut & dried.
Why don't you take up the challenge and champion improvement in Panel if this is so important to you?
If I want a decent simplified interface to my media I'll just point Plex to it as I do now, and it also manages not to look like it's from Y2K.
I think JRiver is listening, but they haven't heard much that they can do economically and within a reasonable time frame.
You know, the more I look into it - especially combined with the MC issues with other OS's - the more I think they realise it requires a fundamental rewrite of the fatally old-shool present codebase of MC. But if they're considering that at some time - and they should be IMO - it definitely should be something they think about, in terms of having less of a separation between the UX elements of MC and the UX layer of each respective OS.
Do you write Excel macros using touch tablets/convertibles? If not, why not? It would be possible, but not as productive on a touch tablet with an on-screen keyboard. This is the same issue as using MC Standard View to do detailed maintenance functions.
I certainly make changes to my models, and that is just as much the point - most of y'all who can't see this, again relatively obvious in 2019, point is that touch use isn't an either/or: I don't lose 100 IQ points and turn into an iPad user the moment I prod the screen. It is just another native way of interaction in Windows that's a regular option for picking the best way to intract with - just as much as keyboard shortcuts are. If people ask for keyboard shortcuts, do you start your dismissive comment with "why would we need a command line interface in MC?" (though actually, PowerShell integration would be pretty cool).
-
There is certainly something to be said for giving some screen real estate to a context sensitive toolbar (e.g. ribbon interface) vs the context menus (which are often deeply nested and/or massive scrolling lists) MC currently uses. I find this approach is not nice to use and plays badly with both screen resolution and cursor position.
An example of each aspect:
nesting = "send to > playlist" is a particularly egregious example as playlists can be organised into a tree structure and the menu nested will naturally honour that nesting
long scrolling lists = selecting an attribute to add as a new column to a worksheet, the list is massive and is not searchable
somewhat ironically the latter would benefit from some grouping (aka nested menus in the current impl) just as the tag window breaks attributes into groups
-
Because being dismissive based on your limited experience is something that comes from a *learned* individual? The street flows both ways, dude.
Dude, you should read what you write, and look in the mirror.
There is a lot that could be improved in the MC interfaces, UI and UX, but your approach isn't going to get any traction.
There is certainly something to be said for giving some screen real estate to a context sensitive toolbar
I've seen some good context-sensitive toolbars, but not so much in ribbon implementations.
long scrolling lists = selecting an attribute to add as a new column to a worksheet, the list is massive and is not searchable
In this specific example Matt, pressing the first letter of a field name will jump to that area of the list. Not searchable, but fast access to the field you want, if you know what it is called.
In fact in many areas of MC, pressing the first letter of what you want, sometimes by first hovering over or clicking an item in a list, will jump you to that part of the list.
-
I've seen some good context-sensitive toolbars, but not so much in ribbon implementations.
In this specific example Matt, pressing the first letter of a field name will jump to that area of the list. Not searchable, but fast access to the field you want, if you know what it is called.
In fact in many areas of MC, pressing the first letter of what you want, sometimes by first hovering over or clicking an item in a list, will jump you to that part of the list.
I tend to think some sort of toolbar would be nicer than the current approach, no particular opinion on best way to do that (though I often think of MC in IDE terms, i.e. should have multiple dockable views that you can move around at will).
Thanks for the tip. Unfortunately I think this is a small but good example of how the UX of the MC UI is not so good. It is not remotely obvious (there is no hint anywhere that it will do this), not entirely helpful (e.g. say I want to see the columns that contain 128) and doesn't work at all consistently (once I've pressed one key, it ignores the rest and I have to close the menu and reopen it to "search" again).
-
Yep, it is a simple left to right character search.
You can type multiple characters to refine the search though. Also, you don't need to close the menu to reset the search, just wait a second or so, then MC resets and you can start the search again.
I can't say that functionality is entirely consistent internally in MC, but it is pretty common. As we all know, MC has a steep learning curve.
-
definitely quite confusing to use without any sort of visual indicator of what is happening, usually you either filter the list as you type or highlight the matching characters, either would improve accessibility of that feature.
more generally IMV the worksheet view could do with a "design" view that lets you choose columns, sort order and so on in one place rather than via an assortment of right click menus.
-
You can right click on the title bar to add or remove tags. You can also drag and drop them.
-
goatherder,
Please just make your suggestions without the [blank] insults.
Your approach is unwelcome and will lead to limited or no forum privileges.
If you can clearly present good ideas, we will consider them.
-
I also live in Outlook. On which I can scroll by touch just fine without making my finger extra pointy and heading to the scroll bar by the way, as I should be able to in this day and age.
Try the option to enlarge scroll bars.
-
definitely quite confusing to use without any sort of visual indicator of what is happening, usually you either filter the list as you type or highlight the matching characters, either would improve accessibility of that feature.
more generally IMV the worksheet view could do with a "design" view that lets you choose columns, sort order and so on in one place rather than via an assortment of right click menus.
I agree with both these points. Particularly the "filter the list as you type" version, for any content not just left to right, and if the matching characters were also highlighted you would have visual feedback or what you have typed without having to show a separate field.
The default sorting in Views still catches me out on occasion.
-
Try the option to enlarge scroll bars.
Do you mean the "enlarge scroll bar on mouseover" control?
Aside from it, again, not being the point - i.e. MC doesn't make any distinction between any type of finger-on event, it simply interprets everything as a mouse click of course (and I don't know how to put the nature of the issue more concisely than that) - that particular control doesn't appear to work on any of my installs, desktop or not.
-
definitely quite confusing to use without any sort of visual indicator of what is happening, usually you either filter the list as you type or highlight the matching characters, either would improve accessibility of that feature.
more generally IMV the worksheet view could do with a "design" view that lets you choose columns, sort order and so on in one place rather than via an assortment of right click menus.
I think the optimal solution has already been applied to Theater View. Once you start typing your keystrokes are displayed in a nice popup. Not sure if this can be done in standard view without OpenGL but it works really, really well in Theater View.
-
I think the optimal solution has already been applied to Theater View. Once you start typing your keystrokes are displayed in a nice popup. Not sure if this can be done in standard view without OpenGL but it works really, really well in Theater View.
that isn't optimal IMV, something like https://plan-three.github.io/material-ui-autosuggest/ is much more useful for long lists where you might not know the exact value
-
that isn't optimal IMV, something like https://plan-three.github.io/material-ui-autosuggest/ is much more useful for long lists where you might not know the exact value
I feel like this takes up too much screen real estate, but it certainly is functional.
-
I'm not sure I want to wade into this by FWIW (from my POV),
- STD View : I like it. Works well on a PC with mouse of keyboard to doing my Maintenance.
- TheaterView on HTPC : I like it. Works well with a Remote Control. It could be "fancier" but to be realistic we use it on all our HTPC to find and watch the content not to sit watching TheaterView itself.
- TheaterView on Touch Screen : We use a Touch Screen, All-In-One PC in the Kitchen and this is the one area I think Improvements could be made. Attached is a Pic of how HD Home Run's App does this and it is more Touch Screen friendly that Theater View. The Right Side Panel appears when you touch the main screen, you can then finger scroll through to find the next channel to change to. It is more like the experience you get with Mobile Apps. A similar look and feel is with other apps from the Cable Provider, Netflix etc. In this regard, TheaterView is the "odd man out". It's not that TheaterView does not work with Touch, it's more that the layout used by other Apps (including MC's own Remotes) work better for Finger Control.
So the only thing I'd suggest is that on the Desktop Versions of MC add an option to present the UI used for Remotes / Android Client as an idea.
-
"- TheaterView on HTPC : I like it. Works well with a Remote Control. It could be "fancier" but to be realistic we use it on all our HTPC to find and watch the content not to sit watching TheaterView itself. "
agree, but it never hurts to have an attractive interface. New user need to have a good impression. Not all go for the deep mod-ability that jriver allows.
Some want the database and once in a while a new flashier look.
Although it functions lovely
-
In regards to the TheaterView UI being modern.. absolutely needing a "Right Click" is one of the things keeping MC's TheaterView from being modern in my opinion.
It's designed for HTPC use, right? To be used by a remote or something simple, right? Yet when watching movie, if you want to switch between different subtitles, or audio streams, you have to use a mouse or configure something to emulate the "right-click" button.
I know I have posted a few questions in recent years, where the answer provided was usually involving a right-click button.
-
I'm pretty sure pressing up or down brings up an options menu where you can do things like pick a different audio stream. You just have to scroll through the various options menus
-
That's correct, an OSD of Menu options are shown when pressing the Up or Down arrow on the RC. Then use Left / Right to select the option you want to change.
-
^^^ this certainly works but is a bit clunky. Just like my request for direct access to a chapter list, direct access to audio and subtitles would be nice.
Cheers,
Peter
-
This comes up EVERY year, and every year it gets argued as if the ui is good enough. We, the users, aren't developers, so if shouldn't be up to us to explain how to program a better ui. Look at the plex apps, they are constantly being improved. Heck even groove music on win10 has a more modern ui (I don't mean it has uwp, I mean it is modern in its approach).
I love jrmc, I have used it for over 10 years and have paid to upgrade every year, but the interface hasn't changed in all that time so please put upgrading the ui on the road map at the very least.
-
You are absolutely right, Daniel. The owner chooses not to see it.
A little bit of Design Thinking methodologies would go a long way for JRiver.
-
Generalities don't help. Specifics do.
-
As an old guy myself I don't much care for change as I had a difficult time transitioning from old tube type generously sized oscilloscopes to the new smallish footprint Tektronix solid state o'scopes due to button size and my fatter than normal fingers. I almost had to quit one job because of it. That being said, MC works for me for the limited uses that I expect from it and I have no issue with donating to the cause every year or so.
-
Generalities don't help. Specifics do.
We are being specific. The UI needs overhauling. We are not designers so I know I for one, can't say you should do this or that as that is not my forté but I do know when something needs improving.
I really wish I could say, that part of the interface needs to changing to x and this one needs changing to y, but I am not a professional UX designer. You need to hire a UX pro. I know that costs, but I would be willing to skip the upgrade price and pay full price again if I knew it would help cover those costs. The program is really feature rich now, so maybe focus on UI for the next version and just fix bugs for everything else?
-
Your implication is that we are not UX professionals. As one of the designers of one of the most popular media programs sold, I think your position is questionable.
I understand that you don't like what we've done, but if we did something else or hired someone else, there is no guarantee that you would like it better. We've worked with "professionals" a couple of times when we did work for large companies. I didn't like their work either.
It's often just a matter of taste, and we can't please everyone. But we could easily piss off some existing customers.
So please be specific and we will consider your suggestions.
-
I'm going to read between the lines here and assume that they want something that looks more like Plex or Kodi. I'm not sure which elements they have in mind; personally, I find those UI's to be too busy. Some of the work done on the file info popup in MC by other users is similar in regards to the abundant icons and such.
-
This comes up EVERY year, and every year it gets argued as if the ui is good enough. We, the users, aren't developers, so if shouldn't be up to us to explain how to program a better ui. Look at the plex apps, they are constantly being improved. Heck even groove music on win10 has a more modern ui (I don't mean it has uwp, I mean it is modern in its approach).
I love jrmc, I have used it for over 10 years and have paid to upgrade every year, but the interface hasn't changed in all that time so please put upgrading the ui on the road map at the very least.
Ugh,
In reading two pages of commentary on this subject, I have a mental short list of some of the common items people are listing, but for the life of me I just don't see Plex or Groove music as capable or modern based on their abject lack of customization and overall power and control, but this is why I'm with JRiver because of the level of customization and control I can have over my library. Being a lifelong engineer, form follows function so adding new widgets and do-dads for the sake of visual edification isn't my thing. However, I do acknowledge that these things are what made IOS such an attractive environment for people to use. Typically hiding some of the more detailed features of a system behind higher level controls seems to work better for the casual user but leaving that high level of customization for the expert user is why I feel some systems are favored more than others. Throughout all this I can understand the thought that the UI in JRiver is dated and I believe its mostly due to the underpinnings that don't react well to alternate input streams besides Keyboard and Mouse. I have opinions on the goals of these improvements should be but since I'm primarily a Keyboard and Mouse (or stylus) user AND I typically use JRiver in Theater mode with a remote, I have little specific input that would be valuable to the mainstream
-
I'm going to read between the lines here and assume that they want something that looks more like Plex or Kodi. I'm not sure which elements they have in mind; personally, I find those UI's to be too busy. Some of the work done on the file info popup in MC by other users is similar in regards to the abundant icons and such.
Agreed, I much prefer the direction that MS started going towards before they went totally insane with their ribbon toolbar. In Excel, when you select a cell and right click on it, just about every option specific to a cell is available on that menu. Although I still find myself mostly using keyboard shortcuts in Excel over mouse maneuvers or adventures into the ribbon bar (Ctrl-V / Ctrl-C / Ctrl-N / Ctrl-O / Ctrl-S...). I also tend to compile macro's to make repetitive, multistep processes a one-click-and-done thing
-
... Being a lifelong engineer, form follows function so adding new widgets and do-dads for the sake of visual edification isn't my thing.
Yes, form follows function. And less is more.
-
I'm going to give an idea that randomly came to me. It's probably not feasible at all but I just wanna pass it along while I'm thinking about it.
So, right now using standard view MC on a touch screen can be pretty annoying at times. Currently we have a standard view, mini view, display view, cover view, theater view, etc. Why not create and add something like a "touch view" that's optimized for touch devices? It could use Panel (or even JRemote's UI/looks as a inspiration) as a basis for the new view and then expanded upon. Sure, I could just load Panel in a web browser, but being able to do it within MC itself as one of its views would be quite handy when using touch devices (since loading Panel in a web browser while MC is open in another window seems cumbersome to me).
Nonetheless, don't mind me, I'm just thinking of random ideas. :)
-
Interesting idea. I think you know you can run Panel on the same machine as MC.
Theater View also has a skin called something like Obsidian Touchscreen.
-
Yep, but opening a web browser while MC is open to use Panel to control MC is kinda cumbersome.
Theater view is an option too of course, but having MC running full screen would also be annoying, especially when I want to do other stuff while MC is running minimized in the taskbar playing back music. The idea is more-or-less a mixed hybrid of standard view + theater view + Panel touch controls, that's makes using a touch screen simple but it wouldn't have to run full screen like theater view (unless the user would want to, of course).
So having a new touch optimized view of MC, that's touch friendly like how Panel is but it doesn't run full screen like theater view (unless the user wants to), but could run in a "normal" window (which like standard view MC can be windowed or maximized) like would be perfect.
Thinking more about it, you guys could probably get away with making new a "modern UI" by creating new views for MC, while pleasing people who want a "modern UI" while retaining standard view so those (like myself) who want it aren't pissed off by the change. Making those alternative views likely wouldn't be too hard to do, compared to redoing MC's UI from scratch, which I really don't think is needed as something "new" could be created with new views and skins for those views.
-
Sounds like you have your finger on the pulse of this more than I do Donkey, all my media centers run on dedicated machines.
-
Thinking more about it, you guys could probably get away with making new a "modern UI" by creating new views for MC, while pleasing people who want a "modern UI" while retaining standard view so those (like myself) who want it aren't pissed off by the change. Making those alternative views likely wouldn't be too hard to do, compared to redoing MC's UI from scratch, which I really don't think is needed as something "new" could be created with new views and skins for those views.
That's an interesting idea. Users could make a new view but instead of choosing panes or categories they could choose "Touch". This way the only other things that would have to be touch friendly would be playing now and the tree in standard view.
Yep, but opening a web browser while MC is open to use Panel to control MC is kinda cumbersome.
Perhaps a toolbar button that can be edited to choose a browser.exe, users could edit the startup page of their chosen browser to be localhost:52199.
I already mentioned the issue of dragging files as apposed to scrolling in MC. Two other areas that could use some fine tuning are for touch are:
- Seeking in videos there is no fine seek. It's hard to get within a couple minutes of where you would like to be.
- Volume. Like seeking, it's hard to get exactly where you want. Digital knobs would be awesome for this. Basically just like the many android apps that use them.
-
A. I can't tell if Goatherder is complaining only about touch screen handling, or if he wants a full MC interface change. If it's just touch screen support, then this can be done without a major interface change. It will still take time and effort, but it's not a full re-engineering of the interface. It's just making touch interactions (like scrolling on the main screen without using a scroll bar) work as touch users expect.
B. "Modern interfaces" in this discussion all seem to be about Microsoft. I find this to be laughable. If nothing else, they fail in interface design because they keep changing it for the sake of change. I do not find anything Microsoft makes to be a model to be emulated.
C. This is one reason why MC is so successful: The interface mostly does not change from version to version. This is incredibly important. Re-learning an interface every version or two is a terrible user experience. The idea that the interface MUST change every version or two is incredibly backwards. It's counterproductive for people that use the software. MC SHINES in this respect. Everything I learned in version 20 is applicable in version 25. In some software, each time you upgrade, you have this experience of not being able to do basic things without a lot of poking around or reading. I have never had this experience in MC: It always just works like it used to. I can not overemphasize how important this is. You might say this is a principle reason why ITunes failed. It's one reason I left ITunes years ago.
Brian.
-
I still think back porting the Touch UI from MC for Android as a View Option in the other MC Clients would work for those after a "modern touch" UI.
-
Exactly, that's what I was thinking with my idea above. JRiver for Android uses Panel as its touch-optimized UI on Android, but it also could be adapted to the desktop version MC as the basis of a new "touch view" without needing to use any web browsers and Panel - it'd be baked within MC itself. :)
Perhaps a toolbar button that can be edited to choose a browser.exe, users could edit the startup page of their chosen browser to be localhost:52199.
Except, in my opinion a new "touch view" shouldn't need to rely on Media Network being enabled to be able to use it. I keep Media Network disabled on Windows, Mac and Linux because I technically don't need it (whereas on the Raspberry Pi I do need it), and MC closes faster with it disabled.
What I'm thinking is take what Panel does and base what it looks like and create a new, local "touch view" within MC that doesn't need to rely on Media Network or a web browser to work - it'd be like any other view in MC with its own skins, for example.
-
I still think back porting the Touch UI from MC for Android as a View Option in the other MC Clients would work for those after a "modern touch" UI.
Make it UWP app.
I am aware that I am one of the few people in existence that uses UWP apps. Note that MO 4Media has a UWP version that works perfectly as a touch interface for MC. There's only a few apps in the Windows store so there's literally no compitition. The store's search is horrible though so no one would ever find your app if you made one.
-
The idea that the interface MUST change every version or two is incredibly backwards.
Except that is not the idea. The idea is that you CANNOT change the interface. Think about that for a second. You get what JRiver offers (or don't) and variations on the same theme. Users don't have much of an option.
-
Take example of Foobar2000. The program can be used as a simple player from the 90's with only a playlist, an iTunes clone (the one I have right now) or if you search in Deviant Art you can find skins that transform it in to another thing entirely. And don't start that it's not the same. The only 2 things that are missing from you is the video library and the TV support.
And AFAIK it's work from only one person and it's FREE.
-
OK,
In an effort to better understand some of the issues in this thread, I've opened my Surface pro, tossed the keyboard in another room and I'm going to Install and operate MCWindows 25 over a week. I started this experiment on 10/20 and here are my observaitions. The first batch were noted in the first 10 minutes of setup/operation
- Install wizard window will not expand, hard to read "the fine print" (pinch to zoom)
- Install wizard window will not scroll with finger swipe
- Buttons are responsive but there is little control for moving windows or lines of text up/down/left/right
- Menu items and selections are difficult to navigate via touch (sizing, spacing)
- On-screen keyboard does not pop up when attempting to connect to an MC Server (to enter the key code)
Over the last four days, I've used my Surface Pro as an MC Client and have mostly operated it in Theater mode which does alleviate some of the issues using a touch screen (mainly size & spacing) but it does not provide the assurance of accuracy or feedback that would make me comfortable using only a touch interface. In several cases, I fund myself grabbing my mouse or re-connecting the keyboard to use shortcuts; and I would never, never, freaking never use this setup to tag or edit my library (screen is way too small, Control hotspots are vague and crowded making It difficult to select one function/menu item/etc.). I don't feel touchscreen systems with small screens are an efficient system to enter or edit large amounts of data since I use keyboard macro's and shortcuts almost exclusively rather than left or right clicks or menu selections. If I had a 30" touchscreen monitor I would probably change my opinion on this, but those are way above my pay grade presently. A re-designed skin would help somewhat but in touch mode, how do you differentiate between play now, play next, or add to the end of the now playing list unless you use the theater menu under "playing now"? It would be so much nicer to simply touch and hold, be presented with a list of applicable actions, then select the one that you want than having to navigate through menu selections
For my own conclusions, I can understand the complaints regarding a "modern UI" from a daily use perspective, but not from a setup or intensive management use perspective as there isn't a piece of software I use (or have used) that would fit that bill currently (without mouse, keyboard or stylus). Unfortunately, as many other longtime members have said, to rectify this would require a re-write of the application; which I totally believe. MC was not written to encompass the Windows 10 Framework and does not make use of the touch screen interface capabilities included therein. I know from the number of posts on the subject that this is a popular idea, but I'm also not sure how far up the priority pole Id put this requirement as it really comes down to the type of user your trying to draw to the application, the cost/benefit equation and the future goals of MC.
-
Thanks for your testing and the details.
-
It would be interesting for you to use Panel. It has the commands you've mentioned.
-
Your implication is that we are not UX professionals. As one of the designers of one of the most popular media programs sold, I think your position is questionable.
I understand that you don't like what we've done, but if we did something else or hired someone else, there is no guarantee that you would like it better. We've worked with "professionals" a couple of times when we did work for large companies. I didn't like their work either.
It's often just a matter of taste, and we can't please everyone. But we could easily piss off some existing customers.
So please be specific and we will consider your suggestions.
I wasn't implying anything. I'm sorry if you mistook what I said as an insult, that wasn't my intention at all. I will say again, I love MC and am grateful for all the work you guys put into it.
I used plex as an example not because it flies the flag for perfect design, far from it. I used it because they are willing to adapt and improve. The groove music example is only for its ui, the program is woefully lacking for features but it's interface is modern and clean and imo attractive.
I just don't see why asking for the ui to be improved after over 10 years of nothing changing is too much to ask. Things change. Look at phone UIs over the last 10 years, they are way better than they were then. Not just because of touch either. An interface can be modern without being touch centric. And asking us to "just use panel" is ridiculous. Why should I have to open another application, especially a web browser, just to get a different interface. Besides, I view panel as a nice way of interacting with MC using a mobile device, not for use on the same PC as MC is running on.
If nobody cared about UX, we'd still all be using DOS. Even the Linux environment is being improved all the time to make it more modern and attractive.
You want specifics? Ok, I'd love MC to use Windows jump lists (introduced 10 years ago in Win7). I would like to be able to "grab" the title bar and drag the program across screens, even if it's maximised. I would like to be able to hide the menu bar and shrink it to a hamburger menu, or similar. The tag editor needs to be able to be used in the main interface, not just in the sidebar. The theater view skin needs modernisation, it needs to be "flatter" and move away from the faux 3d buttons that are very old fashioned now.
I have many more, but the basic tenet is that it needs modernizing.
-
Coming back to this thread, it's good to see many comments addressing the root of the problem instead of an entire sea of old-schoolers who wilfully misunderstand [Modern & Touch = "dumbed down iPad app"].
Taking the Mac version of MC, there are many areas in which it doesn't conform to OSX UX norms either... so as I said before I'm assuming that a lot of the UX elements are 'baked in' to MC, don't conform to anywhere near recent Windows frameworks but were ported wholesale to other platforms.
But either way, overhauling the visuals has got to become a priority at some point, especially as older users who're happy with the Windows 2000 / XP-era visuals start to "retire"... why not address it earlier than JRiver has to?
-
it needs to be "flatter" and move away from the faux 3d buttons that are very old fashioned now.
I wish to neither derail the train nor rain on the parade. I mostly agree with David's sentiments that the main GUI and Theater View both need sprucing up and polishing. Less crowded, smoother.
But I felt compelled to jump in because this one piece I quoted above is crap. This is Jony Ive thinking he knows better than the rest of the world, and having the political juice at Apple (formerly) to shove it down everyone's throats, and making it fashionable so that people confuse it with actually being good.
Flatter is NOT better. The world should have learned a lesson from the Ive-esque versions of IOS with their anti-skeuomorphism rampage: let's get rid of all buttons and everything recognizable and replace it with nice flat text.
The fact of the matter is it makes things worse, not better. Such UIs are harder to navigate and understand. People using these types of interfaces often don't know where to tap because there are insufficient visual queues between text that operates as a button and text that doesn't.
Don't fall into this trap because some people think flat is fashionable or sexy. Soon some idiot like Jony Ive will say zippers look so old-fashioned! We need trousers without zippers!
They might look cool, but good luck getting them on.
My rant is over, and I now apologetically return you to the unending debate on UI modernization.
-
You want specifics? Ok, I'd love MC to use Windows jump lists (introduced 10 years ago in Win7). I would like to be able to "grab" the title bar and drag the program across screens, even if it's maximised. I would like to be able to hide the menu bar and shrink it to a hamburger menu, or similar. The tag editor needs to be able to be used in the main interface, not just in the sidebar. The theater view skin needs modernisation, it needs to be "flatter" and move away from the faux 3d buttons that are very old fashioned now.
I have many more, but the basic tenet is that it needs modernizing.
One feature I'd like to see would be making the Tag Editor and display dockable so I can move it to the other monitor and still have room to work on the individual files and views while a large tag viewer is still open
-
I wish to neither derail the train nor rain on the parade. I mostly agree with David's sentiments that the main GUI and Theater View both need sprucing up and polishing. Less crowded, smoother.
But I felt compelled to jump in because this one piece I quoted above is crap. This is Jony Ive thinking he knows better than the rest of the world, and having the political juice at Apple (formerly) to shove it down everyone's throats, and making it fashionable so that people confuse it with actually being good.
Flatter is NOT better. The world should have learned a lesson from the Ive-esque versions of IOS with their anti-skeuomorphism rampage: let's get rid of all buttons and everything recognizable and replace it with nice flat text.
The fact of the matter is it makes things worse, not better. Such UIs are harder to navigate and understand. People using these types of interfaces often don't know where to tap because are are insufficient visual queues between text and operates as a button and text that doesn't.
Don't fall into this trap because some people think flat is fashionable or sexy. Soon some idiot like Jony Ive will say zippers look so old-fashioned! We need trousers without zippers!
They might look cool, but good luck getting them on.
My rant is over, and I now apologetically return you to the unending debate on UI modernization.
Well, I was going to comment on this but you've done an admirable job for me so Ill be standing down. I actually prefer 3D buttons that appear to be pressed when you press them. If there's no visual or audible indication that the button was pressed, did you really press it? This is one of the main reasons I initially went with the IRule remote control for my iPad mini. It has different PNG files for pressed and un-pressed conditions so I get a visual indication that the button was pressed.
In short, I agree 100%, carry on!
-
... instead of an entire sea of old-schoolers who wilfully misunderstand [Modern & Touch = "dumbed down iPad app"].
... especially as older users who're happy with the Windows 2000 / XP-era visuals start to "retire"
You seem to be unable to resist insulting people.
Not everyone shares your esthetic sense. Wer, for example, just above, seconded by Absinthe. And by me.
Please spare us your generalities. Be specific, and re-read your posts before you press the Post button.
If you can build a consensus on something, we'll consider it. Otherwise, you're just barking at the moon.
-
I think I've said all I can say on the subject, and other posters have mentioned why we needn't get into specifics - we're not your UX designers.
We told you what's wrong, we will feed back what you have rearchitected or you can consult us - that's our role as users. Responding to a demand to list every nut and bolt of the fix that someone as a dev in 2019 should be aware of is not in our scope.
The problem is, the j.River website frontpage perfectly encapsulates everything that needs to be said about the state / priority of UXD over there: It was almost 20 years ago I was putting together very similar sites for my nascent businesses when I was trying to get away from the super busy aesthetics of other sites by not-a-day-job amateurs of the time and make it more 'corporate'. 20 years ago.
-
EMPEROR: My dear, young man, don't take it too hard. Your work is ingenious. It's quality work. And there are simply too many notes, that's all. Cut a few and it will be perfect.
MOZART: Which few did you have in mind, Majesty?
- from Amadeus, by Peter Shaffer.
-
I think it's safe to say a brand new UI developed from the ground up is not going to happen any time soon. Why? Because designing and developing such a thing for MC from the ground up would be very time consuming (like over a year) as MC is a VERY complex application. In the end though, changing the UI is likely to upset users who are used to and would prefer the current UI, myself included.
I'm also willing to bet those wanting a new UI for MC are in the minority and not the majority.
That said, I still feel a good compromise here would be new views. I do agree that trying to use MC on a touch screen like a Windows 10 tablet is a problem, one that could be 'fixed' with a new touch-optimized view. Panel is great for this too, but you need to run it in a web browser even if MC is running on the same device to access Panel's touch friendly controls. It seems like a runaround solution to open MC on a device like a tablet, open a web browser to open Panel controlling that instance of MC on the same device when all you want to do is play your media quick and easily. Panel works best for devices that can't run MC or a remote app since it works nicely in a web browser.
Then, I ran the UWP version of MO 4Media on a Windows 10 tablet yesterday... and WOW! This is how MC should look with a touch-optimized view! Here, take a look...
Now Playing tab:
(https://i.imgur.com/M4jyFnW.png)
Library tab with Artist and Album selections under Audio:
(https://i.imgur.com/DLfcJvj.png)
Library tabs scrolling through Artists:
(https://i.imgur.com/R6RM3SE.png)
Library tab with Album selected with play menu open:
(https://i.imgur.com/cuTzTlG.png)
It really reminds me of Panel, but it's within a dedicated app! Just take something that looks like that, integrate it into MC as a "touch view" and I think that would help a lot with touch-enabled devices like tablets.
P.S. And no, IMO, it shouldn't be a seperate, dedicated UWP app. I hate to rain on your parade but UWP is a dead platform that nobody really uses nor cares about and there's really no reason to invest time and money in a platform really nobody uses.
My point is, something like that in the screenshots above should be integrated into MC itself as a new view, a touch view. :)
-
Adding another new view that has some distinct subset of features/quirks is a bad idea imv. If it is just another playback interface then why not use panel? It is why it is exists after all. The same time could be spent cleaning up some of the quirks in the main UI and/or improving panel.
-
If it is just another playback interface then why not use panel? It is why it is exists after all. The same time could be spent cleaning up some of the quirks in the main UI and/or improving panel.
Because Panel requires using it in a web browser. It's annoying to have MC open, only to open a web browser to open Panel to control that open instance of MC. It's just annoying. Like I said above, Panel works best with devices that can't run MC itself or a remote app, and it works very well for this. The other perfect use case for Panel is on a device for a one-off playback of media without going through the process of installing MC or a remote app. But to control MC that's running on the same device... it's just very off putting, IMO.
And yes, I know I could use Panel within the integrated web browser in MC itself. Still annoying to have to do that.
Adding another new view that has some distinct subset of features/quirks is a bad idea imv.
How would that be any different from the other views? Theater view? Mini view? Cover view? The touch view idea seems to line up with what those other views do and provide. And unlike the multiple posts basically saying "make a new UI" the idea would address something specific in MC that is currently lacking (touch screen support) without needing to redo the entire UI. :)
-
Because Panel requires using it in a web browser. It's annoying to have MC open, only to open a web browser to open Panel to control that open instance of MC. It's just annoying. Like I said above, Panel works best with devices that can't run MC itself or a remote app, and it works very well for this. Or on a device for a quick listen to something without installing MC or a remote app. But to control MC that's running on the same device... it's just very off putting, IMO.
So we add a button, call it Panel View, it opens in MCs built-in browser, and you would never know the difference, right?
-
So we add a button, call it Panel View, it opens in MCs built-in browser, and you would never know the difference, right?
The question is, why do it through the browser in that case? Why not do it natively without the browser? Panel would still be subject to the browser's quirks and I can't imagine performance being as good through the browser versus doing it natively, especially when it comes to thinks like loading thumbnails. And I'm not sure how well the IE engine will work with Panel as it's developed further because well, you know, IE's pretty much a dead browser now. :P
-
The question is, why do it through the browser in that case? Why not do it natively without the browser? Panel would still be subject to the browser's quirks and I can't imagine performance being as good through the browser versus doing it natively, especially when it comes to thinks like loading thumbnails. And I'm not sure how well the IE engine will work with Panel as it's developed further because well, you know, IE's pretty much a dead browser now. :P
Because Panel isnt going away, and doing twice the work means we can't do anything else for a while. I don't use touch screens outside of my Android devices, and contrary to what goat wants us to believe, I doubt that the majority of our users do either. It doesn't seem like a good business case to spent a lot of duplicated effort on something like that. And its a lot of effort.
-
Because Panel requires using it in a web browser. It's annoying to have MC open
Why is it annoying? What difference does it make which platform/container hosts the app? how is it any different to theatre view for example? that is effectively a separate app launched by the MC process after all.
How would that be any different from the other views? Theater view? Mini view? Cover view? The touch view idea seems to line up with what those other views do and provide. And unlike the multiple posts basically saying "make a new UI" the idea would address something specific in MC that is currently lacking (touch screen support) without needing to redo the entire UI. :)
if it is in the MC UI (without running in an embedded browser) then I would expect this to mean the MC UI framework has gained touch capability. If you have this capability then why not apply it to the existing UI?
as to why more views is bad, MC has previously had 2 mobile apps with distinct but overlapping features (gizmo, jremote) and 3 (or more?) web based views. This seems to have been cleaned up over the last few years so you have a clear strategy of 1 thing for each distinct purpose
JRemote for iOS/Android
Theatre View for a 10ft interface
MC UI for the admin console & library management
Panel for a simple playback interface (and as a catchall for any niche platform)
Throwing another simple playback interface into the mix is a step backwards on this score (and that means more effort to maintain things/less effort available to improve other stuff)
-
I personally don't see a reason to overhaul the MC GUI for one reason: It is the library management/administration/general UI. Yes, it is complex, but it allows you to do anything you would like to do with MC. And I don't think that complexity will scale well to handhelds, no matter how you redesign it. What OP really wants, I believe is a simpler UI like Panel that looks better than Panel. And I understand it to a degree. Panel is a bit bland, and a bit arcane to configure, and it possibly tries to carry over too much complexity from MC. Don't get me wrong, I love Panel - I just can see why people do not see it as a general solution.
On the other hand, JRiver offers the great MCWS API. That makes it possible to write your own UI, using JRiver as Data Management and playback service. One could easily start to create skins based on that, heck, I guess you could whip up a Spotify or Volumio look-alike in a short time if you put your mind to it. But that may not necessarily be the JRiver team's task. JRiver could foster the community for creating such community efforts though, possibly.
-
On the other hand, JRiver offers the great MCWS API. That makes it possible to write your own UI, using JRiver as Data Management and playback service. One could easily start to create skins based on that, heck, I guess you could whip up a Spotify or Volumio look-alike in a short time if you put your mind to it. But that may not necessarily be the JRiver team's task. JRiver could foster the community for creating such community efforts though, possibly.
probably a bit optimistic, IME the easy way to use MCWS (i.e. using the Browse call) produces a UI that functions in much the same way as Panel so it's a bit of a pointless exercise
-
JRemote is built on MCWS.
-
probably a bit optimistic, IME the easy way to use MCWS (i.e. using the Browse call) produces a UI that functions in much the same way as Panel so it's a bit of a pointless exercise
How you choose to present the UI is really up to the developer. MCWS allows you to query the full hierarchical structure of the DB Views you configured.
-
How you choose to present the UI is really up to the developer. MCWS allows you to query the full hierarchical structure of the DB Views you configured.
yes sure this navigation structure is what jremote and panel use so the behaviour of a custom UI will be basically the same & then you have to find a way to host/run that thing.
IMV if this was a desirable direction then it would be better to make panel skinnable and extensible. The former is just css and since Panel appears to be built with create-react-app then using its support for lazy loading/coode splitting means it wouldn't be *that* hard to make it extensible. There is currently an option for changing the "appearance" of Panel in the MC options but that directory simply points at the entire built panel app. I suppose that means it might be possible to replace panel with an app of your choice but that's a bit of a sledgehammer approach.
-
How you choose to present the UI is really up to the developer. MCWS allows you to query the full hierarchical structure of the DB Views you configured.
There are a couple of notable issues, unless I just haven't figured out how to set up remote views to do what I want. In MC I have a view defined by Composer-->Genre-->Work-->Album. When I hover over a composer's name I can choose to go directly to any of the subcategories (which is quite useful in some cases). None of the MCWS apps I've tried have a way to do this - you just progress through the groups as defined. Is this an app implementation issue, a limitation of MCWS, or something I just don't know how to do?
The other issue is that albums with the same name are always shown together in all MCWS apps, but they are not in MC. For example, in the "Recent" view in MCWS I see Chick Corea's "Trilogy". If I scroll way down I can find ELP's "Trilogy". The MCWS apps show me a "Trilogy" stack near the top of Recent. If I click on that I see both albums, even though the ELP Trilogy was added years ago. I haven't figured out a way to prevent any MCWS view from doing this.
-
There are a couple of notable issues, unless I just haven't figured out how to set up remote views to do what I want. In MC I have a view defined by Composer-->Genre-->Work-->Album. When I hover over a composer's name I can choose to go directly to any of the subcategories (which is quite useful in some cases). None of the MCWS apps I've tried have a way to do this - you just progress through the groups as defined. Is this an app implementation issue, a limitation of MCWS, or something I just don't know how to do?
The information is available through MCWS, its entirely up to an application to present it. I've only primarily worked on mobile solutions, where such context-sensitive navigation is hard to represent properly, so its not present there.
-
For me the first step in the discussion is the differentiation between the different GUI MC offers:
- Standard View (for management purposes this is for me excellent and good enough)
- JRemote (could have additional functionality to have a better Ux:
a) Configure DSP functionality,
b) show audio path,
c) a top screen which shows the last played a/v files,
d) pre configured views to show composer/work for classical music)
)
- Android Remotes (I don't use them so I can not say anything about them)
- Theater View (could have additional functionality to have a better Ux:
a) Configure DSP functionality,
b) show audio path,
c) a top screen which shows the last played a/v files
)
- Panel (I use JRemote & Theater View)
-
One feature I'd like to see would be making the Tag Editor and display dockable so I can move it to the other monitor and still have room to work on the individual files and views while a large tag viewer is still open
+1 For tagging being dockable, and having a clipboard of commonly-used expressions available
-
- Install wizard window will not expand, hard to read "the fine print" (pinch to zoom)
- Install wizard window will not scroll with finger swipe
Coming next build:
Changed: Registering the license window of the installer for touch input so touch scrolling should work nicely.
You can size the window by dragging the bottom corner of the window and that works nicely on my touch monitor.
-
There have been a few repeated specific suggestions here to make MC "touch friendly". I think those are all that's needed as apposed to a complete interface overhaul. All I need to do with touch is browse audio/video and play it. I would never try to do setup, library management, tagging, etc with my finger. I would use a mouse. Just like I wouldn't setup theater view with a remote, I would use a mouse. I'm not sure if you can even buy windows tablets from a reputable brand anymore. Everything is a 2 in 1 these days and there's a lot of them. Touch may seem pointless for users that only use MC on an HTPC, but for those who use MC on laptops it's far from pointless. I travel for more than half the year and I'm sure I spend far more time with MC on my laptop than on my HTPC. I currently use Panel and MO 4Media while driving, but while on a plane or in a hotel I just use standard view. This use of standard view is what my suggestions have been for.
-
It's worth mentioning that the lists in Media Center are already registering for touch input and should scroll nicely as you flick. We have done some work on touch.
-
Split Touch Scrolling (https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,122761.0.html)
-
Options to open in a new tab instead of a modal dialog.
-
In no particular order:
1) Theater View - Functionally I think is good. It is easy to use and fairly easily customizable once you figure out that it is customizable. Performance could use a little boost. I know my machine is aging but I can play UHD video without problems I would like to click through the view without button delay. (I'm talking about when using an IR remote so maybe it is my setup but it always feels laggy at first.) As far as the look of it definitely dated. I personally don't care but can see how others want it to look more like the other players out there. I just looked and it doesn't seem that changing the Theater View skin is possible from theater view. People may be more likely to try different things if it was easier and more obvious. As far as I can tell I need to go into Standard View Tools->Options ->Theater View change the skin then switch to back to Theater View. I just looked at all the Skins and none looks "modern." I think that 3rd party skins are available if that is true I don't know where to find them.
2) I really like that I can interact with MC in so many ways. I use MO4Media as my remote and love the fact that a third party developer can do so much with my MC collection. It is great that you make this possible.
3) Standard View is complicated. There are a lot of options. This is not a complaint. I have done things like setup zones and zoneswitch but know that I haven't used nearly all of the options available to me. I'm not shy so if I don't figure something out I want to do fairly quickly I jump on the forum and ask. I don't think everyone has that mentality. This is where all the documentation threads come from.
Right now as I browse around Standard View there are a lot of options that I will never use such as getting artwork from a scanner. Is there are way to customize this view like I can Theater View? I don't see it. There are a lot of things I would get rid of for my views. This makes me wonder why not have a Simple View? Have only the features most people use and cut out all the rest of it? I don't know what the basics are but a guess would be importing, ripping, tagging, playback and playlists. I'm sure I'm missing a few key points but in this view there could be many fewer options which could be less intimidating to new users. A right click on a song would have just the basics not a list so long I have to push my glasses up on my nose to read it. It would by no means be a replacement for Standard View just an additional simplified version of it.
I don't do much tagging. Just the basics for me but a dockable tagging window sounds like a nice idea.
4) The homepage for JRiver could definitely use an update. Just look at the artwork on it. Home theater = a couch. Overall it looks very dated and I don't know that it says "This is the most complete and advanced media player out there" to a potential user. It doesn't need to be flashy but just a bit more up to date. And please don't ask for specifics. We all know what websites used to look like and what they look like now.
5) Form does follow function but functional things do not need to look bland. No real insight here but I own some very functional things that look beautiful.
-
An interface like Cyberlink PowerDVD19/18 etc etc would be fantastic in my opinion. Looks up to date for the 21st century and very user friendly. Don't get me wrong I can navigate MC proficiently as I've been using it for years and am old school, but updating the interface really is desperately needed!