Print

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

[jhuff]

why is it that when my 9.1.307 version checked for updates it did not recognize the 9.1.308 version (last known stable?) was available. I could have gone on along time suffering with the 9.1.307 version which has yet to exit gracefully, usually causing a reboot to be neccessary. I am growing very dissapointed in this product and the seeming endless problems it causes me. If I had wanted to have to support all the software on my computer myself I would be running LINUX! Wait, I guess I may as well be running Linux. It would at least prevent me from falling for and paying for stuff like Media Center. I would realize at the outset that I and I ALONE am responsible for making this stuff work on my PC and would save me alot of money. No more good money after bad. Thanks for the best Linux advocacy money CAN buy!  

[jhuff]

Well, some good news at least, at long last MC has exited gracefully. Still no excuse for my previous complaint though. Very poor support here JRiver.  

[KingSparta]

Still no excuse for my previous complaint though.

yes you had to wait 3 whole mins.

[jhuff]

Still getting "there was an error getting the current version number. Reasons: the website may be down or your not connected to the internet". I have an always on broadband cable connection. Why does this happen?  

[hakuin]

Hmmm.

IMHO, your comments are way off mark.  It eeems to me to be quite clear that if you choose to involve yourself in the MC forum and continue to download build by build, then you are implicitly becoming a different type of "user" than the average person out there who downloads the latest version of WMP.....  you in essence are a lead user, participating in the development process of a product -- by choice -- probably because you either are a feature junkie and enjoy it, or because you find being part of the process fun.   If that is not your cup of tea, than you don't have to drink it --   use Media Jukebox 8 or a "public" release version of MC9......but once in this mode, you can't go comparing an early version of the product to the build-by-build versions that add lots of new features (but of course also introduce new bugs).    Decide if you want to be an apple eater or an orange eater, and then don't compare apples and oranges.   Anyway, that's my 2 cents -- not at all trying to be belligerent (in case that tone comes through), but I just think that your final assessment of MC isn't justified....i have tried all the music apps out there and always come back to the j river product.

cheers.
Lee

[JimH]

hakuin,
not a belligerent post at all and thank you.  very well put.

jhuff,
oh brother.

kingsparta,
any wrestling on tonight?

Listening to: 'Mi Chiquita Quiere Bembe' from 'The Complete RCA Recordings - Volume 1 - Disc 4' by 'Tito Puente' on Media Center 9.1

[jhuff]

3 minutes is not the point. There is a routine in MC that is supposed to check for later more stable versions and I usually trusted it. The last time I trusted it, it fed me a buggy version and failed to find the next "stable" version as soon as it was available. Had this bit of code done what it is supposed to do I would still be a happy camper. It still does not seen to be working correctly as you may notice from an earlier post of mine. If this was an isolated incident I could cut you guys some slack but it seems to be a trend rather than an exception. There is still one way you could pull your potatoes out of the fire and that would be to try to tell me that I misunderstand how MC is supposed to work and then provide me and many other frustrated users out there I am sure with some educational opportunities. Please show us how it is supposed to work. Most beta testers do not have to pay for the privilege.  

[JimH]

When we release, we do it in stages.

1.  A release is posted here first.  

2.  If it survives and looks OK, we post it to the downloads page.  Usually this takes at least a day or two.

3.  If the release still looks good after it's on the downloads page for a few days, we change the file that tells installed versions of MC what the latest build is.

You found a build that was in stage 2.  It was available on the downloads page, but it hadn't been pushed yet to stage 3.

You would have a lot more fun here if you would back off a little.

For the record, we like Linux.   Before that we liked UNIX.  Before that, DOS was pretty good.  CP/M was about as good as it ever got.

[KingSparta]

>> any wrestling on tonight?
don't know don't care really unless it is on when i turn on the 10pm news then it means i need to turn the channel after the girls leave the ring or before my wife yells at me for watching the girls.

I scanned 100 or so more pictures today i have about 100 more from yellowstone to scan and about 100 from germany etc....

[xen-uno]

> If this was an isolated incident...

It is indeed isolated, otherwise you'd see a ton of posts here by other users...and you don't. Ocassionally, when problems do occur, a user will post here looking for solutions...without the attitude. He/she is met with open arms by a helpful user/administrative group. Could it be some other conflicting software (ie early versions of Nero, WMP9 beta)? What do you have installed? Sys info pasted here from MC>Help>System Info would be helpful also.

10^-27

[JimH]

I got yelled at for reading LowRider magazine a long time ago, but it didn't stop me.  It was about cars, I said.

[KingSparta]

It is indeed isolated, otherwise you'd see a ton of posts here by other users

there was a problem with users and windows 98, 98se, and WinMe and the upgrade download.

I don't think users of windows 2000 and windows xp seen it.

i don't normaly download that anyway, since i always keep backups just in case.

[jhuff]

hakuin;
I do not consider your post to be beligerent. I can understand how mine could be considered beligerent as I am expressing some rather hostile dissapointment. I do not go out to the web site every night and get the latest build. If I was doing that then I would be running version 9.1.310 right now.

The last time before tonight I downloaded a new version, 9.1.307, that was recommended by the "Check for updates; Ctrl +J" that seems to execute every time I start MC. This does not download the latest version from what I had previously belived. I had previously thought it downloaded the latest known stable version. Perhaps I have misunderstood the function of this previously considered to be handy tool.

This was my first encounter with any 9.1 version and I am not impressed. As I have previously stated this version caused me no end of troubles. I finally got fed up with it and after spending several evenings trying to use this tool to "check for updates", in hopes there had been a known issue that was addressed in a newer version, I finally decided to go check for updates on my own. Then I discovered, as I had suspected, that there were several newer versions, that 9.1.310 was the latest version but "There may be some known (and unknown) bugs." Red flag.

Below that I noticed that there was a "latest known stable" version and I thought to myself "surely this is the one I already have that is causing my headaches" but I decided to check it for myself because I was "checking for updates" manually as the "check for updates" tool was no longer "trustworthy".

Then I clicked on the "latest known stable" link and checked the version #, 9.1.308, and then checked my version #, 9.1.307. At that point I lost all confidence in the "check for updates" tool. Not only had it fed me a buggy version but it had failed to deliver the "latest known stable version" as soon as it was available.

If I had been doing as you suggest I would have known all of this weeks ago. Perhaps I should adopt this mode of behaviour as that seems to be the way the developers expect this software to be used. Sorry if I seem bitter, but I did not go out seeking this, the "check for updates" wizard suggested that I might benefit from a version that I did not benefit from. I will soon be exploring the wonderful adventure of downgrading to the 9.0 version and never considering the "benefits" of a 9.1 version ever again.
I am using XP Pro.  

[Charlemagne 8]

Very poor support here JRiver

You would be right about that except for the fact that it's the best.

[jhuff]

Sorry again but I do not come here to have fun. I bought the product to have fun. I come here when it fails to deliver.

I probably should have stuck with W2K too. Sometimes "one step beyond" can be a step too far. Unnecessary features come at too high a cost.

[JimH]

jhuff,
As you don't seem to be happy with answers you're getting, I'll close this thread.