Print

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

[ThatAdamGuy]

I realize that this may be heresy, especially since I'm rather new to MC (though I've spent quite a few hours with it already), and I have pretty much jumped in right at beta10.

However, I'm wondering if the company behind MC and its users might not be better served if MC narrowed its focus to music management.  I realize that, for whatever reason, J. Rivers seemed to move in the opposite direction (Music Jukebox --> Media Center), but I respectfully question whether this was the right thing to do.

In particular, there are already quite a few very-good to outstanding programs that handle images... from Jasc, Adobe, Photools, and more.  Their programs handle not only cataloging, but also templated HTML'ing and other sophisticated auxilliary options and features.  In fact, as much as I am impressed by MC10, I cannot fathom using it for image management, given the far-richer feature set of competing products available today.

And also, at the core, I don't feel that music has that much in common with imaging.  I mean, heck, why not throw document management or scanning into MC, too ?  In my mind, this seems just as far removed.

I understand and respect that many people in this forum and many other current customers may disagree with me, or even be outraged that I am suggesting the removal or discontinuation of further updates on modules they find useful or essential.  However, in my defense, I worry that the time J. Rivers' programmers spend on non-music aspects of MC take away from the time they could be refining or expanding the music-specific options of the program.

The bottom line is that I worry about this company trying to do too many things, and end up not doing many of them as well as could be done if a tighter focus were applied.  Considering that 90+% of the posts here seem to be about music issues, I also wonder if there are really that many people who use the other features of MC, particularly the imaging parts.

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to consider my concerns on this issue.  I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

[KingSparta]

I worry that the time J. Rivers' programmers spend on non-music aspects of MC

No need to worry or lose sleep, they have a boss and a plan for the future.

that they will share at a later date.

[NoCodeUK]

As a music product MC is very mature...remeber it has been a music product since version 1.  This means that a lot of the music functionality is laready highly developed...think MS Word in terms of word processing.  In the other areas MC is quite immature having only added most of these in version 9.  This is why currently MC development time is being specnt on these features...Take into account that the products you are comparing MC to in other areas apart from music are quite mature...MC is the best in its class for music management due todevelopment over 9 versions...there is nothing to say it wont be the same in other areas too...just give it the necessary time to mature the other areas to the same level the music is at...

Adam

[MarSies]

He Adam,

One of  my reasons for buying MC is that it could handle different things and indeed be a mediacenter. On the other hand you make an interesting point. Because I use other programs to handle foto's, tv and video. Eventhough it's easy to sometimes use MC.

MC is indeed not mature in those other disciplines. On the other hand as far as I'm concerned there are defenitely area's that can be improved on the music management part.

In my opinion you've made a point worth thinking about!

MarSies .....

[rocketsauce]

I mean, heck, why not throw document management or scanning into MC, too ?

Oh, maybe you missed this thread:

http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?board=3;action=display;threadid=17741

Rob

[Doof]

The fact that MC handles video as well as audio is the whole reason I bought it. If I had wanted only music, I'd probably be using Winamp. I'm not entirely convinced about using it for images yet, but once I get my digital camera this Christmas, then we'll see.

The points you make aren't new by any stretch. It's one of the reasons that MJ8 is music only. They had decided at one point to support two versions; an all media version and an audio only version. Whether they still plan on doing that, I have no idea.

[Jaguu]

Well, I tried some of those specialized image cataloging apps and I must say that none has the excellent tag management that J River offers. Here I am pretty free to setup my image collection any way I want.

It is true, some features of more specialized image products are still missing here, but I assume they will work them out over time.

I have been in the software industry for the last 20 years and I can say, no product bundle is perfect from the beginning. There is always a leading app and some weaker apps tied together. But over time some bundles became quite successful such as MS Office.

I feel and hope that Media Center will go along that line and become the Number 1 all-comprehensive Media Management tool available on the market.
They are not there yet, but they have come along way so far. The flexibility of their database far surpasses everything else I looked at.
 

[zevele10]

Well as you know , i'am really a 4 letters bastard concerning the mess that MC is.
I mean they have to find a way to give us the possibility to hide stuff we don't like.
They started a still very comestic changement on it.
But i NEVER minded that they have to remove all the non musical stuff.

And ,really , there is no way to say that the music part lacks progress.
Look at the burn in 9.1 compared to 8 or even 9.0
And wait for JohnT to give us the new rip and burn fonction....
Look at all the others music only fonctions new since 8.

It looks like all the non musical stuff is not yet at the top...BUT WAIT..

Years ago ,i got on a disc a free cd with Media Jukebox 5 on it
I gave a try and was back to my 'RealJukebox plus ' in no time
Gave a try to Mj 6 - the bambou skin was so cute- but do not see the point to spend on it.
Payed to get 7..and since saw an amazing evolution [ to much to me  who is slow to understand ] giving to this day the most terrific player you can find.

It would be the same with non music stuff in the time to come , but not to  the detriment of the music part.
Of this ,i'am sure.

Listening to: 'Satisfied Woman' from 'South East Tour' by 'Big Brother Ernie Joseph' on Media Center 10

[LisaRCT]

Listening to: 'Satisfied Woman'

Now there's a thought  


Even if some of the other functions were to never evolve, I see them as handy.
Let's say there are better programs for each function . . unless I need the extra functionality toey offer I am gonna do some stuff right here in MC rather than load another software for just basic tasks.
It doesn't take away from the music to have these abilities, and makes MC handy since it is always openned anyway.

Now, add the improvements that are sure to come with further MC development and all those other apps (well many/most/some at least) will one by one become unecessary.

These folks have demonstrated the caliper of work they can do . . .give em some time  

[Lynn]

I tend to agree that in trying to be the swiss army knife of media products a lot has been left un-done to support music.

There are many products that can play music on a pc, and support plugins to add new features.  In fact, winamp provides a much broader support for plugins.  So just playing music is not what I find is useful in MediaCenter.  It is its organizational abilities that makes it unique.

However, even in the core are of strength there is much left undone.  

For instance, wouldn't it be great to store Artist bio information at the Artist level, not at the track level?  

Or how about a more elegant way to manage tags in general? Seems like this area continues to be problematic. What is shown, when. When is it saved, etc. seems to change with each beta.

Or how about working a useful way to display album images that allows easy access to tracks within albums without filling the screen redundantly with the same image over and over.

Or how about a look ahead feature that apply re-play gain 'on the fly' to the next song in the queue.

Or how about native support for FLAC?

etc.etc.etc.

If there was a poll for usage, I suspect most people who have bought MC (NOT those of us who frequent this forum), just use it for music. Even within the forum, I suspect that most use it for music.

Leaving behind MJ8 as music only, or some other orphan version, and not addressing the need to focus and grow features for music has left many needs un-met.  This puts the MC product at risk from competition that will surely over time fill these gaps.  

[ThatAdamGuy]

As others have echoed here and I was getting at in my original post, I don't doubt that the MC programming and development staffers are talented and well-meaning.

It's just that in my many, many years of computing, I have *NEVER* seen a swiss-army-knife program actually have consistently top-notch components.

And someone mentioned MS Office?!  For shame!  That's one of the most hideously bloated and problematic "does-everything" products I've ever had the misfortune of working with!  Outlook's e-mail functionality is mediocre at best, for instance.  And the security issues?  The crashes?  Ack!

I guess what particularly frustrates me is that MC doesn't get the praise and attention it well-deserves at present for its music capability, largely, I think, because it's now pigeonholed into the "all-in-one" category that is so understandably despised by the majority of computer users based on past experience.

I am a musician and a life-long geek, and I had just heard of MC recently.  I mean, really, what does one usually hear about when music software comes up: MusicMatch (ack!), RealOne, WMP, WinAmp, etc.  With MM and WinAmp in particular, these programs are focused nearly 100% on music, and so they largely own the space.

I don't want a program that is filled with code that enables me to handle my music very well, and also offers some (but not extensive) capabilities to handle photos, documents, etc.  I want a program that is 100% sleekly designed to handle my music in the most efficient, powerful way.

Folks have said that MC, as a broad do-everything-with-media program, is still in its infancy, so it's unfair to bring up Jasc, Adobe, etc.  No, it's not unfair, IMHO.  Trying to aspire to these companies' efforts in the photo space is likely to backfire for a few reasons:

1) With a split focus (music / images), JR will be unable to effectively hone in on the big guys and capture substantial market share.

2) In order to offer superior music AND superior imaging capabilities, MC -- by default -- will become either inefficient / confusing, with irrelevant options, or it will essentially become two separate programs with two different option/view emphases; why not just make two different programs?

3) I just don't think there's a market for it, and losing the music focus on MC will confuse or scare away potential customers.  Can anyone point to ANY successful software package that integrates music and photo management?  If you took a survey today amongst power users (clearly the target of MC), how many would really want to have both their images and music managed in the same place?  Album art, maybe.  But photos of their recent Heidelberg trip?  Their kids?  I just don't see it.

[Matt]

It would be much more helpful to provide specific things you'd like implemented or improved in MC.

I'm closing this now.

[JimH]

It's just that in my many, many years of computing, I have *NEVER* seen a swiss-army-knife program actually have consistently top-notch components.

I actually am really fond of my Swiss Army Knife.  I carry it everywhere I go.