fyi we expect to make some changes in this area for MM 4.1.

The specifics aren't specced out yet, but we're listening.

-Rusty

I vastly prefer the MM3 File Properties screen. I have not made the switch to MM4 as a result.

I actually tend to agree. I tried to nail down the reason why it's so and it seems to me that:

1. Labels on the left from edit lines are less intrusive then when they are above them.
2. Separating groups of fields by empty space makes orientation easier in MM3.

Thoughts?

Jiri

The Properties layout was discussed a bit a year ago, but developers have not really taken into account user feedback.
See: http://www.mediamonkey.com/forum/viewto ... 81#p288910

I still prefer MM3 Properties window layout. That's one of the reasons I still stick with version 3.


Compared to MM3 layout, MM4's Properties are just to difficult to read.

:~)

I wouldn't switch the Album field. It is in a logical place and, as Lowlander writes, Album titles can be very long. Isn't there room underneath the Type field for Genre?

Alternatively, switch it with Conductor, presumably, that field is rarely going to have more than one name in it?

My Album field tends to have longer values than Genre thus switching it would not work for me.

However what is the rationale of the current height/width of the Properties window? If it can be taller Genre and Lyricist can moved to the left hand side. If it can be wider the fields can remain on the right hand side and be made wider.

Users being able to change window size would also be a solution (and is often requested) as it would allow users to increase width which would increase field width. Height is less useful and would only increase text areas (like comment) heights.

Type needs to be at the top because changes to it affect the layout of all the other fields.

But what if we switch Genre and Album, and slightly increased the width of the right-hand column at the expense of the left?

Left Hand Column, Right Hand Column
Title, Rating
Genre(s), Album
Artist(s), Disc# Track #
Album Artists, Date
...

On the other hand, the Album field might not have enough space, and Album wouldn't be where most people expect it (next to the Artist/Title).

Other ideas?

-Rusty

I would agree that with the current MM4 the type field is taking up a lot of unnecessary screen real estate.
so +1 from me to get the genre field at least back to the size it was in MM3

uhmm, those are very important functionality for me and others. Instead of having to use multiple programs I can now do with one.

Type is not something that is an issue. You can create your own Collection any which way you see fit and don't need to use Type at all thus it doesn't need to get in the way. Also Type will be reviewed for MediaMonkey 4.1 including considering custom Types or custom rules on how Type is defined (in 4.0 it's merely an internal MM thing to help with default Collections).

I said functionality not gimmicks.

The reason people use Media Monkey is to manage large music collections. It's actually made that less easy, what with the introduction of Type - a field whose sole function seems to be to put random files in away from the main collection in bizarre categories like Classical Music and Podcast. At the same time rendering one of the few multi-item fields virtually unusable due to miniscule size.

declan wrote:has it added any functionality?

uhmm, video and DLNA are pretty big additions.

2nd that request.

Following the disastrous introduction MM4 (has it added any functionality?) is there any way that the box in file properties for inputting genres could be bigger?

Why is the useless Type field given three times the space that the genre field has?