Print

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

[MrHaugen]

What's going on here? In which build did this change?

I remember that a menu was selected underneath Cover art, and you could enter the big view from there. Is it really better to be forced into the big view before you can even play a file? Most of the times I think users know what they want to play, and most other times they find the info they need in the smaller info panel. It just seems like an unnecessary view switch to play most files. The whole flow is kinda broken imo.

A big info view is good, but I think this should be an option for those few times when you really want to dig deeper.

[gappie]

you mean the roller, like in version 13 underneath the big thumb. i think it was changed 50 versions ago. 

there is also a playoption in the upperroller, an other option is to use the right mouse button, or the keyboard button that does the same (fcorgot how its called) or use this button via a remote. can be handy at more places.

 
gab

[MrHaugen]

Hmmm. I'm a bit behind on my HTPC, obviously. Just tested the new release on my laptop and noticed this.

This behavior is the same for all views right? IF the new way of viewing media is supposed to go through the large info view no mather what, I think it's a reasonable time to introduce a way of jumping through the media in the large view. A small navigation column or row for browsing would be great. XBMC have a row at the bottom of their detail view, to browse movies etc.

Jumping in and out of the large view to play different tracks might make me dizzy in the long run.

[rick.ca]

Isn't there a "play" button on your remote?

[park]

If I am following this conversation correctly, I find the big info view a bit weird too. I never know if clicking on play when in the big info view is just going to play that file, or the whole album.

[rick.ca]

I never know if clicking on play when in the big info view is just going to play that file, or the whole album.

With "Play" and "Play All" side-by-side on the roller, isn't that reasonably clear?

What took me a while to figure out was that "Play" on my remote is, in effect, "Play All." This is very handy, because it plays whatever is selected, even if not in the file view.

[MrHaugen]

Play button might work, but not if you have set it to "play playing now" I think. I'll check it out when I install MC14 on my new HTPC.

[gappie]

Play button might work, but not if you have set it to "play playing now" I think. I'll check it out when I install MC14 on my new HTPC.

nope. only when in standard view. in thv the play button plays what is in the view, or continues a pauzed track. i wish it would work as you suggest but it doesnt, never did.

 
gab

[MrHaugen]

Ok. Did not know that. I'd be saved if play button would play single files in view, but if it plays all items, that is out of the question for me. I play single files most of the time, and if needed I have the Play all option on the roller. I don't really understand why this play behavior is not the same in Standard and Theater View though.

Is there no one else that thinks it's a tad annoying to enter the big info view all the time? I mean, why not configure the behavior differently for Audio, Video and Images? It's much more likely that people want to dig down in the info for Videos and Series than for each music track. Actually I think that the info pane will suffice most of the times, for most users.

My suggestions:
- Make it configurable when to use Large View (or bring back early MC14/13 behavior )
- and make media browsable when in Large View
- or make media browsable when in Large View

[rick.ca]

Actually I think that the info pane will suffice most of the times, for most users.

True, the small view info would suffice for me most of the time. But I wouldn't want to give up the large view. Nor would making it configurable help for a "sometimes" use of the large view. But when a file is selected in the file list, both <right> and <enter> go to large view, so <enter> could be used for "Play" instead.

Since the Info Panel is configurable, it's not difficult to image some wanting to stay in large view while browsing. This could be accommodated by putting "Next" and "Previous" commands on the roller. Whichever one is used should retain focus for the next record—so repeated <enter> moves through the items in the file list.

[park]

Both good ideas rick.

A variation could be a button on the small info panel that you click on to see the bigger one.

[MrHaugen]

I like your ideas too. Both of you. Don't really know why J River decided to remove the roller under the thumbnail in the info pane though. It was not like it was that misplaced, and it opened up for some nice possibilities.

[gappie]

It was not like it was that misplaced

i disagree with that. i think it looks much better now, and the play roller is at the same distand, one mouse click.

i agree with the suggestion from rick about making a next and previous in the roller. suggested that when the roller came there. would really like it and would make going through some files much easier. 

 
gab

[rick.ca]

There is one problem with my suggestion. The navigation system (i.e., everything done with arrow and enter keys) works as well as it does because it's perfectly (almost?) consistent. The user intuitively knows what to do because the same action does the same or "equivalent" thing everywhere. <enter> normally goes to the next screen, and the "Play" command is normally found on the roller. If <enter> were used for play, would a new user ever find the large view?

Maybe a roller is necessary, if for no other reason than to illustrate the action that will occur if <enter> or <right> is pressed. I imagine [Play] being highlighted (as if it had focus) on a roller consisting of [Play] [Details]—whenever a file item has focus. It would then be evident <enter> will play the item, and <right> will go to large view. I probably shouldn't call this thing a "roller" because it wouldn't behave the same as existing rollers. I think it should look the same, but be placed at the head or the foot of the file list so it's function is clear.

[Daydream]

In my view the first problem lies with the fact that one can 'navigate' the rollers and also 'navigate' the items. And while moving from the rollers to the items (after making a choice) makes sense (the user is digging deeper), after you hit the bottom of all possible navigation between items, you have to go back to the rollers to play it - single, all, etc. It may be counter-intuitive.

The second problem I see is by reading what rick said (and I agree with the assessment): the small view info may suffice most of the time and that using <enter> for playing will deny logical access to the large view. Well one has to wonder: did we get that right the first time? Small info view, large info view... isn't that kind of overkill? To make it even more complex one can navigate even the metadata fields in large info view. Didn't we go for too much navigation so much so that now it's coming back to haunt us -> can't use <enter> cause it's already assigned, need buttons somewhere to trigger action.

[rick.ca]

...after you hit the bottom of all possible navigation between items, you have to go back to the rollers to play it - single, all, etc. It may be counter-intuitive.

That part doesn't concern me. When I've reached the "end" of the navigation, the focus is on "Play" in the roller. So it's reasonably clear I can do that and/or navigate into the information fields. The problem is at the screen before—the file list/small view—where I may simply want to play the selected list item without navigating large view. With the suggestion I've made, it's difficult to imagine anyone's intuition being violated. In situations where no additional information is wanted, it would clear the navigation is at "end" and it's logical another press of <enter> will play the selection. At the same time, it would also be clear how to go one step further to display more detailed information.

Didn't we go for too much navigation so much so that now it's coming back to haunt us

I have no sense of being "haunted." Personally, the "problem" I've raised is so minor, I wonder if the fix is really necessary. I find the small/large view scheme intuitive, useful and very flexible. Even if minimal information is wanted, there's the option to show information only in small view. Then the entire "problem" goes away.

[Daydream]

The large info view it's far from optimal (spacewise, no. of navigation steps, the gain in information returned, etc). Two steps metadata navigation (small / large view) it's not optimal. I could argue that they should be merged / changed / redesigned. The moment one tries to think like that, that's when the haunting begins because of the way things are anchored already.

Agreed the problem at hand it's minor and may warrant some tweaks at best when the devs have time. The problem at large though... can I have a smiley for "whistling innocently"?

[rick.ca]

This one would be more fitting:

[MrHaugen]

I think we lost a lot of possibilities with the small roller underneath the cover art in the info pane. Sure will miss it. Until we got something better

Have a hard time adjusting to the idea that every option now have to go through the first or second roller. One way of dealing with this might be:

- Hit enter on a movie will bring you to the second roller, without opening up the large view
- You get the options: Back, Play, Add (as next to play etc), Large View, select, Tag and Delete. OR put the Large View next to Playing Now on the first roller.
- Entering Large View, you could have a small row (1/10 of the hight) at the bottom with cover art. Sort of a touch flow thingie
- Navigate to the bottom of the screen to browse items left and right in current view. This would require focus to jump to the selected item in the browser, so you don't have to go through all the tags on the way down

[rick.ca]

I don't recall exactly, but the roller you so dearly miss must be very similar to what is now the second roller in large view. I do understand in many ways it seems the functionality provided by these commands should be available in the list view. Some of the commands pertain to the list rather than just the selected item. All of them result in a return to list view when used. But the problem is, as Daydream pointed out, the logical inconsistency of having to select files and commands at the same time. There has to be some clear way to separate the two selection modes (like putting the roller under the cover art and introducing a toggle between roller and list modes). This is fine, but it makes the whole thing more cumbersome and less fluid.

I don't see how it's worth it when large view and the roller are just one key press away. If I'm not interested in the large view information and just want to use a command on the roller, it doesn't really matter. I'm going to ignore the information and focus on the roller anyway. If the problem is I want to see the small view file information while using the roller, I have the option of configuring large view so it shows the same information as small view. Because the two views are so closely associated (as two parts of the Info Panel), movement between them has to be as fluid as possible. Separating them by more than one key press is unacceptable. I even have reservations about my suggestion of re-tasking <enter> to play instead of select (but I think I can train my tired old brain to use <right> instead).

Considering Play (selected file) is surely the command most likely to be missed in list view, I think my suggestion is a worthwhile deviation from the navigation scheme. And if browsing were possible in large view, there would less of a need to switch back to the file view. If you wanted to apply a roller command to a file other than the current selection, there would be the possibility of "scrolling" to it without leaving the view. (If browsing is added, I assume the behaviour of returning to list view whenever a command is used would be changed.)

Maybe I'm overlooking something. But I don't recall you ever explaining exactly what it is that you miss (actual or potential functionality) that can't be handled reasonably well from large view.

[MrHaugen]

Maybe I'm overlooking something. But I don't recall you ever explaining exactly what it is that you miss (actual or potential functionality) that can't be handled reasonably well from large view.

It aint that that it can't be done. It's just very bad to loose the overview of the file list every time you want to play a track, or a video. To jump back and forth between the List view and the large view is also very annoying imo, even though the transition is pretty smooth. When you're in a list with tracks I believe most people would appreciate to stay in this view and be able to play tracks, select and plan the next thing  they want to listen to, whithout having to play everything in the whole view (play all).

I do not understand why the Large Info screen can't be more than one click away. As most of people have agreed on, the large info view is hardly something most users have to use all the time. And I think that more than makes up for a 2-3 clicks to enter it, if we move it to the rollers. It can be placed on a more convinient spot. But I do NOT think that Enter should automaticly enter Large info view.

If we get a way to browse back and forth while we are in the Large info view (with or without cover flow at the bottom), there would be even less important to have Large info view just one click away. People would then use the large info view and to browse videos or artist bios when they need to digg deep.

I can't really recall any media center apps or media players that forces you out of the list of media you are browsing, when you want to play something. It's just cumbersome and unnecessary imo.

[gappie]

not sure how 'joint stereo' mixed into this discussion.

 

I do not understand why the Large Info screen can't be more than one click away. As most of people have agreed on, the large info view is hardly something most users have to use all the time. And I think that more than makes up for a 2-3 clicks to enter it, if we move it to the rollers. It can be placed on a more convinient spot. But I do NOT think that Enter should automaticly enter Large info view.

i disagree. again. with moving the large view away from where it is now. when you choose a file at this moment click two times enter and you are back on where you are. its the same as with the roller underneath, and im sorry, but i dont see how you could loose the overview. its the most convient and logical spot for the large view imo. but im not most people.

 
gab

[MrHaugen]

You don't loose the overview? So you still see the media list when you enter Large info view? Amazing. What skin are you using?

Jokes aside... I'm wondering why people absolutely want to change the view and do the jumping in and out of Large info view, to be able to do a simple task as adding a few tracks to playing now. I know you enter directly and hit one left key to go back, but it still messes up the feeling of simply playing a file. It don't feel right to change views all the time either. The way this works today is great for times when you need to read that extra info of a movie or a artist. It should not be necessary to be forced through this extra view for simple play tasks imo. There have to be a better way.

Don't get me totally wrong. I can live with this... But if forced Large info view will stay, we should introduce a way of browsing media in Large Info view. I still think the best way of doing this is to get cover art browsing at the bottom of the screen. This would be amazing for Video, Images and Series I think. Add a simple Browse button on the second or first roller, and jump directly to the cover flow at the bottom?

[gappie]

Jokes aside... I'm wondering why people absolutely want to change the view and do the jumping in and out of Large info view, to be able to do a simple task as adding a few tracks to playing now. I know you enter directly and hit one left key to go back, but it still messes up the feeling of simply playing a file. It don't feel right to change views all the time either. The way this works today is great for times when you need to read that extra info of a movie or a artist. It should not be necessary to be forced through this extra view for simple play tasks imo. There have to be a better way.

not only the left button will bring you back to the list, also enter on play, or add etc. so when adding a list of files pick a file hit two times enter pick the next etc. i just tested it with 13, it does not feel very different, hit two times enter and you had the same result, with 13 the right side changed and gave all the details, with 14 the left side changed and gives all the details, but with two enters short after each other the result is the same.

 
gab

[rick.ca]

not sure how 'joint stereo' mixed into this discussion.

Oops. I started a message, but lost the connection. When I came back, a Firefox add-on I use restored my text—but for the wrong post. I didn't notice it replaced the subject as well.

but im not most people.

Perhaps not, but agreeing with me must count for something.

[gappie]

Perhaps not, but agreeing with me must count for something.

sure is.
but was not planning to make a habit of that. 

[rick.ca]

I know you enter directly and hit one left key to go back, but it still messes up the feeling of simply playing a file.

You seem to be ignoring the fact my suggestions would remove this objection for "simply playing a file." Are you suggesting that adding tracks to playing now and other functions are so common/important they too cannot tolerate the extra key press?

I still think the best way of doing this is to get cover art browsing at the bottom of the screen.

This doesn't make any sense to me. In the final view that presents a large cover and detailed information about one file, you want to also show cover art for other files?! Would it not be much more appropriate to add a browsing capability as I suggested? Then everything changes to the next/previous file anyway.

[MrHaugen]

You seem to be ignoring the fact my suggestions would remove this objection for "simply playing a file." Are you suggesting that adding tracks to playing now and other functions are so common/important they too cannot tolerate the extra key press?

I'm not ignoring any suggestions. I think they all are better than how it works today; if they are implemented right. If there was a way of using the play options before entering the Large info view it would solve it. And yes, I do believe that simple tasks like adding songs to a Playing now is a more common task than playing a movie, and therefor needs to be less annoying to do. If you listen to music and watch movies I think you'd add more tracks to PN than you would with movies.... I also think most people would like to read more about each movie or series than they would read info on every music track.

It's not so much if there's a extra key press or not (most of the times there ain't as Gappie points out), but it's the problem of bringing a new view each time you're doing this simple tasks that might happen a lot in a short amount of time. You'll also loose the overview of the media list for a short while, and that makes it a bit harder to focus on the same position on that list again. It's simply an interruption of the process we are used to.

This doesn't make any sense to me. In the final view that presents a large cover and detailed information about one file, you want to also show cover art for other files?! Would it not be much more appropriate to add a browsing capability as I suggested? Then everything changes to the next/previous file anyway.

Take a look at Large info view of the Mediastream XBMC skin with movies. It's just about perfect for browsing Movies (and Series), and would work well with pictures also I reckon. Your suggestion of just adding a way of going down and up in the current list would work, but you don't get any visualization of what is coming next. You'd have to watch closely every next item you jump to. The cover art would not only be used for viewing off-course. You'd have to be able to select the Cover art row and to skip titles to left and right. As I said this would work extremely well with movies, but would also help for series, images and even music tracks.

[rick.ca]

If there was a way of using the play options before entering the Large info view it would solve it.

I think we've already established there are good reasons why a full selected-item context menu functionality in the list view is not feasible. You seem to be saying you would want the ability to play a selected item directly (i.e., my suggestion), but you also want the same thing for everything else as well. I don't see a way of doing that that's worth the cost. But here's and idea: Instead of using <enter> for play (i.e., my suggestion), how about making <right> configurable to do whatever command you want it to do? Or better yet, have it do the MRU item on the menu. That is, if you use the menu to add an item to Playing Now, <right> will return you directly to the play options dialog the next time you use it, and will continue to do so until you return to the menu and select a different command. So in list view, <enter> goes to large view with the focus on the second roller (i.e., as it does now); <right> selects the last-used item on that menu.

Take a look at Large info view of the Mediastream XBMC skin with movies.

I'm not going to do this unless you provide us with screen shots. But I believe I'm reasonably familiar with the sort of thing you're referring to anyway. I think the train's left the station on the single cover flow-like info panel. The MC equivalent of that is now list view. If you want some sort of cover flow presentation in addition to the existing list styles, I would support that. But large view is just not the place for it.

And it seems I need to reiterate a point already made. The list/small view - large view scheme is a very flexible way to accommodate a variety of different metadata display needs. That doesn't mean there aren't situations where there isn't much information to display, or it's just not needed for the intended purpose of the view. In that situation, it may be appropriate to configure a view where no fields are selected for large view—then there is no large view, and the menu will be available directly from list view. You can even create templates so you automatically get this treatment for some specific type or category of file.

[Daydream]

The list/small view - large view scheme is a very flexible way to accommodate a variety of different metadata display needs. That doesn't mean there aren't situations where there isn't much information to display, or it's just not needed for the intended purpose of the view. In that situation, it may be appropriate to configure a view where no fields are selected for large view—then there is no large view, and the menu will be available directly from list view. You can even create templates so you automatically get this treatment for some specific type or category of file.

I have a funny question, at the concept level. Isn't the description above something like "versatility from within"? As opposed to versatility from the outside?

We're discussing the behavior of the keys for Play, the options on the rollers, what is or could be available from Simple of Large view... Hey, tomorrow I'll come and say that I want a floating layer on top of the items that will pop up with all the metadata of the item that is the active selection, if I press "I" on keyboard or a designated button on the remote. And do away with any small view/large view/any other kind of zig-zag view. Theater View is D3D... the layer should appear with transparency and subtle glowing lights! And so on...

As the users become more accustomed with their collection Theater View style, and realize how things can be, it will be increasingly difficult (and frustrating) to find solutions within a closed set of parameters. A limited no. of options, even if used in combination will never satisfy. But if the one can change the layout to be anything he would like it to be - all these discussions won't happen anymore. We'll just look back and wonder why did we spent so much time on them.

[MrHaugen]

Instead of using <enter> for play (i.e., my suggestion), how about making <right> configurable to do whatever command you want it to do? Or better yet, have it do the MRU item on the menu. That is, if you use the menu to add an item to Playing Now, <right> will return you directly to the play options dialog the next time you use it, and will continue to do so until you return to the menu and select a different command. So in list view, <enter> goes to large view with the focus on the second roller (i.e., as it does now); <right> selects the last-used item on that menu.

I like this idea. Only problem is that this will not work if thumbnails is used, which I often have on movies and series. But I do like where you're heading. A simple way of configuring something to do the last play/add command without entering the Large View would be perfect.

And it seems I need to reiterate a point already made. The list/small view - large view scheme is a very flexible way to accommodate a variety of different metadata display needs. That doesn't mean there aren't situations where there isn't much information to display, or it's just not needed for the intended purpose of the view. In that situation, it may be appropriate to configure a view where no fields are selected for large view—then there is no large view, and the menu will be available directly from list view. You can even create templates so you automatically get this treatment for some specific type or category of file.

I know that there are probably more than one way to tweak this for my need. It almost always is with MC. The only problem is the time I have to spend to make it work like I want to, and the possibility it will wanish with a new build. Another problem is that most of the times I don't want the Large view, and other times I would really like to have it to view an artists bios when I have the time. So this static changes is not that great.

I'm not going to do this unless you provide us with screen shots. But I believe I'm reasonably familiar with the sort of thing you're referring to anyway. I think the train's left the station on the single cover flow-like info panel. The MC equivalent of that is now list view. If you want some sort of cover flow presentation in addition to the existing list styles, I would support that. But large view is just not the place for it.

I don't understand why you can refuse such an idea. It is very much the place for a cover flow. The reason I did not want to provide screenshots is that I'm probably violating some rules by linking directly to competitors. Instead I'we taken some screenshots and uploaded them to web my self. I hope that can pass this time. Look at this examples and tell me it's not practical or stunning. I dear you

[img width= height=]http://lh3.ggpht.com/_SHUN9X7Nuzk/Ss7hhpFqeXI/AAAAAAAAAB4/WjzUMxnzOLk/s800/Large_view_example1.JPG[/img]

Here we have something very much like our MC large view, with a cover flow of movies at the bottom. Users can flick or use arrow keys to move up and down in their collection from this view. This would solve most of the problems that have been brought upon us with the forced Large View imo.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[img width= height=]http://lh3.ggpht.com/_SHUN9X7Nuzk/Ss7hht5CdUI/AAAAAAAAAB0/eeYhJ_d7h4k/s800/InfoPanel_view_example1.JPG[/img]

Here's an example of a list view of series, with something that looks very much like our Info Pane. Remember that this is probably different "views" in this examples, but I do not think it would not be any problem at all to combine this and add cover flow at the Large view. And the backgrounds... Well... We already got them. Let's just hope we can add local images and video as well in one of the new builds


The thing is that MC Theater View is starting to shape up really good, but there is still a lot of stuff that can be done to improve functionality and looks.

Here's what I think is essential in a super Theater View
- Easy Play/add function without entering large view
- Cover art flow in large view to browse and select titles
- Possibly different templates/views for Video, Series, Music and Images at the Large view level
- Using Info pane, both at list level and Large view, for actions to filter the current media content and sort the content. Filter Out seen titles, choose a few genres, sorting on rating etc.

[rick.ca]

I like this idea. Only problem is that this will not work if thumbnails is used, which I often have on movies and series.

There are only two columns of thumbnails! Scrolling through them will be much easier with movement controlled by <up> and <down> only, leaving <right> available for something useful.

Look at this examples and tell me it's not practical or stunning. I dare you

If that's all there is, it does nothing for me. There's not enough room for information. I wouldn't even be able to read the little text that is there. As I said before, I might have supported the cover flow idea for list view, but it's completely out of place in large view. Even if it were added to list view, I wouldn't want to lose the list part of list view. I suppose it could be implemented as a list style, but it would have to radically change the screen layout (so the covers could be at the bottom, rather than on the left where the list usually is).

Here's what I think is essential in a super Theater View
1. Easy Play/add function without entering large view
2. Cover art flow in large view to browse and select titles
3. Possibly different templates/views for Video, Series, Music and Images at the Large view level
4. Using Info pane, both at list level and Large view, for actions to filter the current media content and sort the content. Filter Out seen titles, choose a few genres, sorting on rating etc.

1. Hopefully the developers will consider my suggestions for resolving this issue.

2. NO!!!

3. What do you mean? While the basic layout is the same, there's no limit to the variation possible in the presentation of the information. We've already been told something will be provided for series. I'd rather wait and see what that is before commenting.

4. We've already beaten this one to death. We have a system whereby categories can be provided for narrowing what appears in the file list. Having that, and some sort of filtering mechanism to do the pretty much the same thing is silly.

[MrHaugen]

There are only two columns of thumbnails! Scrolling through them will be much easier with movement controlled by <up> and <down> only, leaving <right> available for something useful.

The number of thumbnails depends heavily on  the Appearance Size you set. You have 2 columns, I have about 5-6. I have mine at about 60%, because I use a projector (1080P) and a 88 inch screen. So, it would be very troublesome to use only up and down arrows.

If that's all there is, it does nothing for me. There's not enough room for information. I wouldn't even be able to read the little text that is there. As I said before, I might have supported the cover flow idea for list view, but it's completely out of place in large view. Even if it were added to list view, I wouldn't want to lose the list part of list view. I suppose it could be implemented as a list style, but it would have to radically change the screen layout (so the covers could be at the bottom, rather than on the left where the list usually is).

Again, this boils down to your Theater View size. Some people have large screens, other have small ones. I'm not saying that there HAVE to be a cover flow in Large View as default. That's also why I'm talking about different views or templates. To fill the need of most people. If you had the space for your info, as well as a cover flow to easily brows the titles, I do not believe you would so quick to dismiss such an idea. A simple option, as in the example under, to add or remove the cover flow strip would be enough for everyone. It is stunning and gives you great browsing capabilities for movies. Remember that this is just an example. The space have not been used that well, and the cover flow part might be a bit to big. But it's a nice example.

3. What do you mean? While the basic layout is the same, there's no limit to the variation possible in the presentation of the information. We've already been told something will be provided for series. I'd rather wait and see what that is before commenting.

I'm not talking about the representation of media details. That can be pretty much the same as the options we have today to include or exclude based on different criteria. I'm talking about the different needs for Music, Video and Images. As the example above shows, it might suite some people to use Large View with cover flow for Movies. People using lower resolutions or smaller screens might prefer Large View without cover flow. For Series it might be better to use a list style with info pane giving details about episodes, for instance what is watched and what is not.

What I'm saying is that the best approach to a truly amazing Theater view would be to treat media differently, and have skins/views to support many needs. Or the ability to add or remove elements in the skins. Preferably within Theater View. It might be a big job, but it will be very rewarding.

4. We've already beaten this one to death. We have a system whereby categories can be provided for narrowing what appears in the file list. Having that, and some sort of filtering mechanism to do the pretty much the same thing is silly.

You have beaten it to death. I'm still know that this is a great idea. Categories and filtering and sorting is far from the same things. Info panel could also be used for SO much more! Take a look at this example:
[img width= height=]http://lh3.ggpht.com/_SHUN9X7Nuzk/Ss8oaPbTJ2I/AAAAAAAAACY/PEyVTuJPWHE/s800/Theater_View_InfoPanel_Setup.JPG[/img]

Filters.
Most people will do with a few views. I have all my movies in one view. It's starting to get up to 200 titles there, so it's a mess to find what I want when I don't know the title. I could make views or categories for genre, but you'd also often have multiple genres, and it's a lot of genres. What if you want to watch just movies not previously watched? Sure, you can make a view or category for this as well. What about Actors? As we add this different variations, there will just be to many views or category combinations for it to be usable at all.

A filter will filter out all the titles that do not meet that criteria, on the fly. You can have ONE view with movies and select action genre, not watched and rating and you'd end up with few titles that you want to see that evening. That is a MAJOR difference from 100 views or categories. If you can't see these then please drop the comments and let's hear others thoughts.

Sorting:
You can sort today in each view, but as I stated earlier there is much more effective to be ale to sort these titles on the fly with the criteria you need that moment. If you know the title you want to sort by title, if you wan tthe highest rated first to pick a hit, then you do that in a few clicks.

Other options:
As I also have mentioned before I think it would be smashing to use the info pane for Options within Theater View. It would remove many of the less used functions from the rollers, and simplifying the overall experience, as well as giving us a unified option window at the right side of the screen for every TV tweaks. I'm NOT suggesting to replace info pane with an option window. The options can be activated and deactivated, and would just be placed the same time as options is selected. Is I think more about it, this might be THE best function if implemented. It would clean up so much in the rollers, and making further implementations so much easier imo.

[rick.ca]

You started off with some reasonably specific issues, and I assumed you wanted to address them in the context of the a Theater View that is a work-in-progress. We painfully arrived at some possible solutions. But it seems none of them are worthy of consideration because, for you, Theater View (in the direction it has taken) is just not good enough. There's nothing wrong with that position, but what are we talking about here?  Obviously no tinkering with key mappings and roller behaviour is going to do anything for you when what you really want is XBMC (or whatever). So why am I wasting my time presenting possible solutions?

Why don't you and Daydream collaborate on a design specification for the next Theater View? It's not that I'm against all your ideas. It's just that they're not sufficiently clear to be of much use in the context of the current development.

[Daydream]

You started off with some reasonably specific issues, and I assumed you wanted to address them in the context of the a Theater View that is a work-in-progress. We painfully arrived at some possible solutions. But it seems none of them are worthy of consideration because, for you, Theater View (in the direction it has taken) is just not good enough. There's nothing wrong with that position, but what are we talking about here?  Obviously no tinkering with key mappings and roller behaviour is going to do anything for you when what you really want is XBMC (or whatever). So why am I wasting my time presenting possible solutions?

Rick, hat's off to you, as far as I'm concerned you nailed it on more than one account. And saved me a lot of careful talk around certain ideas.
In the interest of all honesty - yes, I'm a hardcore XBMC user. But that allowed me to know both its strengths and its weaknesses. That allowed me to see what other ideas are out there, to discover new concepts and structures when it comes to designing (HTPC) interfaces. There are things that they've done or things that I've imagined (by being exposed to variety) that have no counterpart in TheaterView.

Why don't you and Daydream collaborate on a design specification for the next Theater View? It's not that I'm against all your ideas. It's just that they're not sufficiently clear to be of much use in the context of the current development.

If there was any humor in that I appreciate it . I'm just the guy with the Photoshop copy and the graphic tablet. And maybe some wicked vision. If it ever helping with design becomes an option, I'll help as best as I can. The big problem is that, beyond agreeing or disagreeing with the current development - I don't understand it. Its mechanics, its time frames, its focus are unknown to me. Theater View in its Obsidian incarnation is almost 1 year old. Was any other skin developed in this interval that wasn't touched by the devs?

[MrHaugen]

Well. Rick, you do have a point. I started out pretty modest, and then more ideas came. I'm just way to much in love in a super functional and good looking TV experience to leave it alone. Yes, the "ideas" I've brought to the table is heavily based upon XBMC, but it's also a to darn good product, for movies and series, to not take into consideration.

I know I'm asking for much, but when you see what Theater View starts to become, I can't help but trying to push it even further. It's easy to get the impression that I don't like what we got, but that is far from correct. I simply love MC above all apps, and will probably support it for life. The things I mention is only meant as a way of improving the product even further, to make it better for all users and in that way attract new customers for J River.

If I was a better Photoshopper I'd throw my self into the task of designing some concepts, but' I'm afraid it would look to bad to impress anyone. The examples I've added should be enough to see the potential of even better views and options in TV, but I'll try to make some muck ups in a week or two when I get the time and have played more with MC14 on my new HTPC.

[JimH]

Mr. Haugen,
Your thoughts (and others') are welcome.  My own reaction is that it would be easy to make the interface cluttered.  Not everyone wants all data present when they put one arm around their girl and use their Media Center Remote to launch a movie.

We've come a long way in the last year.  It isn't over.

Jim

[rick.ca]

If there was any humor in that I appreciate it .

I wasn't trying to be humorous or humourless. I don't see any reason why we can't have positive discussions on vision as well as nuts & bolts. But mixing the two, especially when it's one person talking about vision and another about implementation, causes problems. While developing new vision is always important, it's pointless to do so at the expense of current development. Even if the current development isn't ideal vision-wise, the best way forward is still to take it to it's natural conclusion. Failure to do so just develops the ability to give up on continuous development for the promise of a new vision, and then not follow-through. Finishing what was started gives us all a sense of "this is about as good as it gets—for this vision." Then it's more likely to either evolve in some significant way, or die a graceful death in favour of something completely new.

And the fact the Jim actually has the patience to read this far suggests we might be hopeful of things to come, no matter what our preferred visions.

[Griff]

Not everyone wants all data present when they put one arm around their girl and use their Media Center Remote to launch a movie.

 

Ditto

Thanks for a great product.