Print

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

[tseipel]

Hello,

I have been happily using MC on my Windows 7-based machines for quite some time. I recently purchased a 13" MacBook Pro and have two questions:

1. Does my current license allow me to download MC on my Mac, or do I have to buy a separate license for the Mac software?

2. I use MC to edit metadata in my lossless FLAC library. I bought the MacBook because we are expecting our first child and my in-laws will be moving into my office, thereby making it difficult to use my workstation. Can I edit metadata (Alt+Enter) in the same fashion on the Mac? Will my Windows 7-based music server have a problem with files that have been edited on the Mac?

I'm trying to avoid installing Boot Camp on the Mac in an attempt to make an earnest effort to try/accept Yosemite. That said, I intend to continue using Windows 7-based machines for playback. Any input into which option (MC for Mac versus Boot Camp/MC for Windows 7) that addresses my metadata editing/compatibility question would be sincerely appreciated.

Best regards,
Tim

[JimH]

1.  Mac is a separate license.

2.  Editing tags works and is compatible.

[tseipel]

Thanks for the reply Jim.

Tim

[glynor]

Also, FYI, the Mac version can connect to and use a Library served by a Windows machine and is fully functional (including tagging).

The MC trial is full featured. Use it.

Lastly, I LOVE Yosemite.  Really.  Been rock solid, and very fast.

[mstan]

Also, FYI, the Mac version can connect to and use a Library served by a Windows machine and is fully functional (including tagging).

The MC trial is full featured. Use it.

Lastly, I LOVE Yosemite.  Really.  Been rock solid, and very fast.

Glynor, I also like  Yosemite except for networking with Windows. 

I host my media on a  MacPro and share to Win7.   Under Yosemite, JRiver will play audio but will stop audio whenever I try to record TV at the same time and will give tag writing errors for theTV recording.  No such problems under Mavericks but even there I have had to disable smb2/3 on Win7.   If you have a solution to this I'd like to hear it.

[glynor]

Glynor, I also like  Yosemite except for networking with Windows. 

I host my media on a  MacPro and share to Win7.

Yeah.  Don't do that.  Do it the other way around and it works fine.

OSX's SMB sharing has actually improved a bit since the bad-old-SAMBA-days in my testing, but it is still pretty brain dead.  As a SMB client, though, it is finally decent in Yosemite.  I no longer have any issues accessing my Windows-hosted shares.

[mstan]

Yeah.  Don't do that.  Do it the other way around and it works fine.

OSX's SMB sharing has actually improved a bit since the bad-old-SAMBA-days in my testing, but it is still pretty brain dead.  As a SMB client, though, it is finally decent in Yosemite.  I no longer have any issues accessing my Windows-hosted shares.

Yes, agree, the client works fine.  I can fire up the Mac version of MC and stream video from the MC server on Win7 without  a problem.   But not the other way around.   The only reason I host media on Mac is because I use ZFS pools which you can't do on Windows.   I am tired of waiting for Apple to fix SMB so I am planning on moving to a ZFS based FreeNAS server.   

Appreciate all your help - you are one knowledgeable dude!

[glynor]

FreeNAS uses SAMBA and is basically just as brain dead, in many of the same ways.   

Assuming you can't afford an Isilon (which is where we store our VMs and whatnot at the office, and works perfectly between OSX and Windows) I'd really recommend trying to serve shares from a "real" Windows box.

[mstan]

I was wondering about SAMBA on FreeNAS but didn't know it was that bad.   There is an option to run NFS shares - Mac OS Handles that well but does Windows?

Yes, that Isilion looks like an expensive enterprise solution so not likely.  I like the data protection from ZFS in conjunction with ECC ram on the MacPro.  However I could do a Windows box for a data server and archive/backup data to ZFS.   Of course if JRiver does a full up version of MC for Mac then I am good to go with current config.

[glynor]

Well, at least FreeNAS is free so...  

They might have some secret sauce now.  Last I looked at it was years ago.  We still answer support threads here about it though.

Windows really prefers SMB/CIFS shares. I think you can make some things work with NFS shares, but it is probably clunky.

[mwillems]

Out of curiosity, what's wrong with samba (I'm asking that sincerely as I didn't know there were issues with it)?  

I've been running some samba 4.x shares hosted on a linux box in a mixed linux and windows environment for about 8 months and haven't any issues to speak of. What should I be on the lookout for in terms of filesystem mischief? So far, the samba shares work for me just like any other windows network share. I'm not running FreeNAS, so I don't know if they're using an older version of Samba, but the current mainstream linux samba packages have been smooth as silk for me so far.

The only thing I can say that's suboptimal is that JRiver's auto-import misses filesystem events on the shares once in a while, but that happens to me with windows shares too (and local NTFS drives   ), so I can't really fault samba for that.

Am I sitting on a timebomb?  What sort of trouble should I be expecting?  

Also, forgive me if this a dumb question, but I thought samba was just a specific opensource implementation of SMB/CIFS, but the discussion above seems to suggest they're meaningfully different?  Is it just that samba is a poor SMB/CIFS implementation?  Is there a better FOSS implementation out there?

Sorry for all the questions, I just hadn't ever heard anything bad about samba's performance before, other than configuration challenges. It did take me about 6-8 hours of fiddling to get everything working correctly, but I assumed that was attributable to me being a linux noob; after that it hasn't given me any trouble... yet  

[JimH]

I don't think there is anything wrong with SAMBA.  I think it's only the Mac implementation that may be a problem.