Moderator: Gurus
Thanksdtsig wrote:good points ... something off the track ... your Byrds album has the wrong title i believe. Maybe it should be (untitled) as found here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untitled_ ... rds_album)
The best technology for this is WPF (XAML) for Windows in .NET. Has native High DPI Compatibility.stax76 wrote:I don't mind any loss! Since I never worked with Delphi I have little idea why the old GUI had to go, a explanation for this decision would be very welcomed. MusicBee is also based on a legacy widget toolkit and looks significantly better on High DPI then MM. The legacy widget toolkit MusicBee is based on is called Win Forms which is for the most part a wrapper around the legacy WinAPI, I have 15 years experience in this technology, scaling Win Forms for High DPI pretty much sucks, on a 4K display it might not even be possible to use the form designer, down scaling might not be supported by the Win Forms designer, it did not work for me and I'm probably not going to spend time trying to figure out a workaround but rather learn the new Windows Universal Platform or something else like HTML.
I would prefer stability and compatibility over features, especially High DPI compatibility, a good extension development experience is also crucial for me.
I agree completely. It passed 15 years when MMW was widely recognized and 16 when I firstly recognized as an app for me as a DJ at the time. MM needs to withstand another 15 years at least and what you wrote was exactly accurate and very well put. More and better changes are yet to come, some even in next few versions. Also some old things will come back better than ever.TIV73 wrote: Mediamonkey seems like it was originally developed with maximum compatibility to a third party media player in mind (which is now all but dead) in mind
You can compensate a lot by custom-developing those features, but at some point you should probably take a step back and evaluate if starting from scratch might save you time in the long run.
Well said. I agree with all this.TIV73 wrote:Nevertheless, building and updating an application only gets you so far if several of its core technologies are outdated. If anything, at some point you will stop being relevant for your users (especially new ones), simply because you can't keep up with their expectations in terms to features and functionality. For Mediamonkey I imagine a lot of this being related to online/cloud related stuff.
You can compensate a lot by custom-developing those features, but at some point you should probably take a step back and evaluate if starting from scratch might save you time in the long run.
To me it seems like the developers of Mediamonkey did just that, and the result looks extremely promising so far. I can't wait for the final version.
But not this. There is a lot I like about the new MM, but the current capabilities don't currently carry forward all capabilities. I can accept a changed route, but MM5 removes some destinations IMO.TIV73 wrote:... looking at some of the feedback regarding MM5, people seem to love Mediamonkey exactly the way it is. That's absolutely fine, they found something that works for them and they want to stick with it.
Maybe I worded that part poorly. I didn't mean that people want to (or should) keep using MM4, but rather that they found some way of organizing themselves, some workflow they like, a layout they prefer or some feature they used on daily basis - and that's what they want to keep. The more detailed and fleshed out this process is, the more it hurts if the new version of MM removed a specific feature needed for the process. This especially hurts longtime users since they, literally, had a decade to get used the old mediamonkey.Barry4679 wrote:[...]But not this. There is a lot I like about the new MM, but the current capabilities don't currently carry forward all capabilities. I can accept a changed route, but MM5 removes some destinations IMO.
The idea there is that only lists to the right are filtered, i.e. that the most generic field is listed field. I think that other apps work the very same way (iTunes, etc.).It continues one weirdness from MM4: setup two browser columns; genre & BPM ... initially each column contains all values, ie. all genres and all BPM's ... select a Genre, and the BPM is filtered to contain just the BPMs for that genre ... but this does not work in reverse, ie. select a BPM, and the genre values are not filtered .. add another column, ie AlbumArtist: select a BPM, and AlbumArtist is filtered, but not Genre .... reset all columns so that all are selected ... now select an albumartist ... neither genre or BPM are filtered.
Got it. Thanks.jiri wrote:The idea there is that only lists to the right are filtered, i.e. that the most generic field is listed field. I think that other apps work the very same way (iTunes, etc.)
