Print

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

Move audio and video to a new top-level Streaming section (same as Audio, Video, Images)

24 (49%)

Rename it Streaming but leave it under each media type

13 (26.5%)

Leave it as it is

1 (2%)

No opinion or don't care

11 (22.4%)

Total Members Voted: 49

Voting closed: April 26, 2018, 08:46:51 am

[JimH]

I think the current term for what we call "Connected Media" is definitely Streaming now, and should be changed.

We've recently added Radio Paradise as a choice.  It's under the File Menu.  I think it belongs somewhere else, but Matt says we can't put it under Connected Media, since those are web sites.

I'd like to group it all together in a slightly different form, to bring it up to date.

What do you think?  Do you care?  Ideas?

Thanks,

Jim

[Blu99Zoomer]

Hi Jim,

When I am listening to an online radio station, it is usually through it's website.  I am also usually listening to their recorded stream, not their live stream.  I have a couple of tuners that give me my live radio music.  One has HD Radio capabilities.  To my ears there is a difference in the sound between the two tuners.  I prefer the HD, but not by a lot.  If Streaming gave me a much higher bit rate...But that is pie in the sky right now. 

That station, WWUH, uses Streamrewind for their archived playback.  I have my access to that through JRiver's "Connected Media" not under the File Menu.  I have not tried listening to Radio Paradise, so maybe my two cents and nosy nose should be kept elsewhere.  But I don't see a pressing need.  If my corner of the playpen is neat and orderly, no worries.  I signed on years ago because I wanted the best, bitperfect, digital playback of my music.  I am still here because JRiver continues to give me that.

Some history might be good here.  Why?

Best Regards,

Blu99Zoomer

[Vocalpoint]

We've recently added Radio Paradise as a choice.  It's under the File Menu.  I think it belongs somewhere else, but Matt says we can't put it under Connected Media, since those are web sites.

A new top level item called Streaming is my vote. Be it Radio Paradise (awesome add BTW), website radio, podcast etc - if it is not a local file in my local on-prem library - it's being streamed in my mind.

Never liked Connected Media. "connections" are ubiquitous and implied to be there.

In 2018 you are either playing a audio/video file from a local drive or you are streaming it in from the Internet. It's one or the other.

VP

[RD James]

A new top level item called Streaming is my vote. Be it Radio Paradise (awesome add BTW), website radio, podcast etc - if it is not a local file in my local on-prem library - it's being streamed in my mind.
Never liked Connected Media. "connections" are ubiquitous and implied to be there.
In 2018 you are either playing a audio/video file from a local drive or you are streaming it in from the Internet. It's one or the other.

+1
 
I would maybe use "online media" rather than "streaming", and move podcasts into it.

[leezer3]

Needs another option-
In the dustbin :p

Seriously though, I'm not convinced adding another top-level item to the tree is the best of ideas.
If I was using this (and I don't, so this is a tad biased....) the place I-d want to.find a streaming radio station is under audio.
Same deal for a video channel too.

[RoderickGI]

I would maybe use "online media" rather than "streaming", and move podcasts into it.

+1

That was pretty much what I was going to say. The differentiation is between local (offline) media and online media.

I would want the "Online Media" sections to remain under "Audio" and "Video", rather having a new top-level menu though. Less clutter and more logical. But if someone wants to put their favourite online radio station at the top level of the menu, just make that possible, as it is now for almost any section of the menu system.

EDIT: Thinking further, maybe not move Podcasts, because you can download them and create a local library of them. So they are mixed Online and offline. Just leave that where it is I think. Everyone knows Podcasts are online, unless you download them, so they don't need to sit in an Online section.

[tyler69]

EDIT: Thinking further, maybe not move Podcasts, because you can download them and create a local library of them. So they are mixed Online and offline. Just leave that where it is I think. Everyone knows Podcasts are online, unless you download them, so they don't need to sit in an Online section.

I agree. Podcasts should not be part of "online media". Also, I think JRiver needs to be careful about naming this category. "online media" seems legit from my point of view. I like "streaming media" better but then again it might provide confusion with the DLNA/network functionality.

[JimH]

Concerning Streaming or Online Media as names, the services like Spotify, Pandora, or Tidal are called streaming services in the U.S.  Maybe it's different in other parts of the world.

Netflix and Amazon offer streaming video.

I'd like to follow the de facto standards for naming, if possible.

With respect to Audio vs. Video, does it matter where they are?  On televisions in the U.S., these services are lumped together, aren't they?  I think that the brand is more important than the media type.  The big sources, like Amazon and Google, offer both audio and video. 
I think of Youtube as a video service, but many young people use it mainly to listen to music.

Thanks for your thoughts.

[jmone]

I see that there are 2 groupings that may apply:
- On Line Services : eg netflix, youtube etc that you may want to group under a top level "Streaming Services), and
- Individual Clips : eg a song, video, etc that you may want to appear under the existing Audio, Video, Picture categories

As long as we can tag them to appear where we want then it is all good by me.

[Gl3nn]

A new top level item called Streaming is my vote. Be it Radio Paradise (awesome add BTW), website radio, podcast etc - if it is not a local file in my local on-prem library - it's being streamed in my mind.

Never liked Connected Media. "connections" are ubiquitous and implied to be there.

In 2018 you are either playing a audio/video file from a local drive or you are streaming it in from the Internet. It's one or the other.

VP

I couldn't have said it any better and I agree completely (especially the Radio Paradise part!  )

[RD James]

Concerning Streaming or Online Media as names, the services like Spotify, Pandora, or Tidal are called streaming services in the U.S.  Maybe it's different in other parts of the world.

It was more that Podcasts and YouTube videos are downloaded in Media Center rather than streamed, and I'd like to see them all under the same heading.
 

EDIT: Thinking further, maybe not move Podcasts, because you can download them and create a local library of them. So they are mixed Online and offline. Just leave that where it is I think. Everyone knows Podcasts are online, unless you download them, so they don't need to sit in an Online section.

I don't want the clutter of having podcasts being treated separately from other online media sources.
If you have too many categories it becomes difficult for people to find what they are looking for, and wastes too much space in the sidebar.
I'd rather see them under a "Streaming" heading than kept separately as "Podcasts" just to be technically correct, if Jim doesn't want to go with something like "Online Media".
 
It's already starting to get overwhelming with the way that search functions in Media Center - but that discussion belongs in another topic.
Edit: Posted some thoughts on that here: https://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php/topic,115086.0.html

[AndyU]

To me “streaming” implies that I have control over what is streamed, so I would be expecting Netflix, Tidal, Spotify, Qobuz etc.. and perhaps to differentiate them from my own media I would categorise them as “Internet Streaming”.   I’d class Radio Paradise as “Internet Radio”.  If there was an “Internet Radio” section I’d like the ability to browse and search stations, much as my Pure and Roberts portable radios allow me to do.

[jachin99]

I agree with RD James, and Jim.  When I'm browsing for content, I don't want to have to stop and think about what "Category" of content I want to view, or where I put a file.  The interface should sort this out for me, and I shouldn't have to go too far beyond Audio or Video to find what I am looking for.  If I want to browse media by folder structure, I can do that in OS itself or in MC's browser.  You have already categorized everything as Audio or Video rather than TV, recorded TV, etc.  on your top level views so you might as well stick with that.  Don't make me back out of the menu I'm in, move over, and then dig into another menu just to find a stream that belongs in another "Category".  Just my thoughts.

[jachin99]

I'll try to elaborate on this another way.  Very few people care more about where the content came from more than accessing content itself.  lets say a family member or a friend comes over, and i want to show them JRiver they are very likely not care either But if the interface looks attractive, and easy to navigate, then they are more likely to want to learn about it or try it.  For managing content, there is standard view anyway

[imugli]

I voted a new top level tree item, but here's my thing... The big thing missing from the connected media section IMO isn't where each site is listed, it's the fact that we can't watch that media, on the web, in full screen, in MC. In both Std View and Theatre View.

[JimH]

The big thing missing from the connected media section IMO isn't where each site is listed, it's the fact that we can't watch that media, on the web, in full screen, in MC. In both Std View and Theatre View.

We're planning to address this.

[MusicHawk]

Placement in the tree should be under the TYPE of media, for two benefits:

-- Allow MC's complex UX to be simplified when only one media type is being used, same as the current Audio Only. This is a huge help to "normal" users (AKA family and friends). There should also be Video Only and Images Only modes, with all irrelevant menus and actions hidden.

Further, it would be helpful if a Playlist could (optionally) specify the proper "Only" mode for that particular list, or, "All" mode when the list (rarely) is a mixed bag. This Playlist setting would trigger MC to transform itself. For most users, the ideal MC UI would be just Playlists to choose from, properly named, perhaps with media-type icons and/or colors. Select the desired Music playlist, or Vacation Photos playlist, and MC would immediately optimize for that, hiding other stuff.

-- Organize by Consumption Mode, which is tied to Media Type, implicitly indicating how that media will be consumed (there are exceptions, sure, but how do must users do it?). Keeping actions beneath/within the media type because that  is what most users think of first -- Audio, Video, Images. Notice I'm suggesting that "consumption mode" is a more important than "acquisition/source mode" for users. Line up each media type with how that media from MC is routed to the final output device to the user. Audio usually goes to amp+speaker (so the user turns it on), video to monitor or TV (so the user turns it on and has a seat), Images to monitor or TV but different context than Video (users steps up and looks closely).

[imugli]

We're planning to address this.

This is great news. If we can use full screen, a lack of proper Netflix, Spotify etc integration may not be so bad.

[robt]

This is great news. If we can use full screen, a lack of proper Netflix, Spotify etc integration may not be so bad.

Agree wholeheartedly!

[JimH]

For most users, the ideal MC UI would be just Playlists to choose from, properly named, perhaps with media-type icons and/or colors. Select the desired Music playlist, or Vacation Photos playlist, and MC would immediately optimize for that, hiding other stuff.

You're not too far from Panel with this description.

[jachin99]

With fullscreen video, how well would remote control navigation work?  Is that something that is dependent on controls built into the browser engine, or is it up to web sites to implement it?

[JimH]

With fullscreen video, how well would remote control navigation work?  Is that something that is dependent on controls built into the browser engine, or is it up to web sites to implement it?

It would depend on the browser.  Any keyboard commands could be supported.

[jachin99]

Any chance your implementation of CEF would support this.  I'm assuming you use CEF?  I don't expect too much from IE anymore.

[JimH]

What is CEF?

[mattkhan]

What is CEF?

Chromium embedded framework - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromium_Embedded_Framework

[Facel]

Any chance your implementation of CEF would support this.  I'm assuming you use CEF?  I don't expect too much from IE anymore.

I am definitively not using Chrome anymore ...my choice is Firefox .. I really hope that JRiver will follow me (and many of us) on that point
because there is so many good reasons for that

[Awesome Donkey]

It uses Chromium, not Chrome. Chromium is the open-source web browser that Chrome is based on (with additional proprietary stuff added like codecs, Google tracking stuff, etc.).