erland;600395 Wrote: 
> Just to make sure I understand this, what would the easily available
> alternative be ?

its in that thread.  i can repeat it here, but lets break down the
detail there.  suffice it to say...

...think of it this way, the scanner already gets pretty much all the
important tags into the DB.  all that has to be done, is change the
manipulation of the presentation of the DB info, via straightforward
filtering and sorting.  let the user decide what criteria should be in
a given library view, (and allow more than one view!)  let the user
decide when and where to toggle artwork on/off.  let the user decide,
via as many drop down boxes as they want, how to sort the contents of a
given view:

albumartist, year, album
album, year
genre, artist

whatever, put the power in the users hands!  don't have restrictive,
unintuitive, ridiculous, silly methods of entry (home>albums,
home>artists, etc...) that operate on a single set of data that you
can't even change without rescans and prayers.

Jim made it very clear, he LIKES being able to change INSTANTLY,
between browsing Artist and browsing Album Artists on his device.  i
love that ability on winamp, and i can do lots more than that.

if the power of SBS is the DB, lets leverage it.  right now, all it is
in its current implementation is a Boa Constrictor.  i'm not trying to
be ude, but in order to get the message across i apparently need to be
blunt, and the blunt truth is it currently sucks.

erland;600395 Wrote: 
> Most of us want flexible browsing instead of new options, so we don't
> have to argue about that. Unfortunately this have never been a priority
> for Logitech and I haven't seen any indication that it's about to
> change.

hey, they are adding DLNA/upnp support.  thats a nice, unexpected, out
of the blue turn in the right direction.  there is no way anyone who
uses the SBS browsing can say "this is how it should be, this is good,
this is intuitive."

it FLAT OUT SUCKS.

so my hope is that if they can eventually see the light on DLNA, they
can see the light on revamping a broken, ridiculous methodology that
only Phil loves.

erland;600395 Wrote: 
> I don't want to add ALBUMARTIST tags to my normal albums.

so don't.  its a cannard, a ruse, to say you would have to or need to.

SBS already basically interprets single ARTIST CDs as having that
artist for the AA.  (and if it doesn't, an option could be added to
just make it explicitly so)

erland;600395 Wrote: 
> I do have it on most since I've tagged most of my music with
> musicbrainz, but I think people that haven't tagged their music with
> musicbrainz probably only have an ARTIST tag for a normal album. So we
> need a solution that handles that case, preferably without the need to
> re-tag your whole library. The information is there since the music
> have an ARTIST tag, so it's just a matter of using it correctly.

actually, as i pointed out earlier, most people have AA tags (or comp
tags) on their stuff.  its a VERY small minority who have neither. 
(comp tags are de facto AA tags meaning VA to SBS and itunes)

erland;600395 Wrote: 
> As Jim indicates earlier in the thread, I completely agree that it would
> be preferred to have multiple browse menus that made it possible to
> browse music by main artists or browse music by all artists.
> 
> To me, it makes more sense to separate:
> - Main artists
> - All artists
> 
> Instead of the current solution where we separate:
> - Artists on normal albums
> - Artists on compilation albums

to me, it isn't about any of that above.  the whole "comp, not a comp"
game is a ridiculous rubric.  to me its about browsing whats in your
tags.  do you want to browse the "big list" of all artists, or do you
want to browse the "small[er] list" of album artists.  K.I.S.S.  thats
how most people think of it, one or the other, (or both together), b/c
that reflects what they have in their tags.  its just that simple.

erland;600395 Wrote: 
> Logitech has always preferred consistency between the different user
> interfaces in front of optimizing each interface for the devices used
> to view it. So instead of making the web interface optimized for usage
> from a computer, it's more or less limited to what's possible in the
> IR/Controller interface. The situation is the same on the Touch where
> the touch interface isn't really optimized for usage on a touch screen,
> it's limited by the fact that the interface also has to work on a Radio
> or Controller without a touch screen. From a maintenance perspective, I
> can definitely understand why Logitech want to keep the different
> interfaces as similar as possible but from a user perspective it just
> limits the possibilities.

i don't see that what i suggested would be a problem for implementing
in the webui, or the SP ui, which apparently are the only two UIs
getting any more new development.


-- 
MrSinatra

www.lion-radio.org
using:
sb2 & sbc (my home) / sbrec & ipeng (parents' home) - sbs 7.5.3b - win
xp pro sp3 ie8 - p4(ht) 3.2ghz, 2gig ram - 1tb wd usb2 raid1 - d-link
dir-655 - 45k+ mp3
::VOTE FOR 'BUG 15604'
(http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=15604)!!!::
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MrSinatra's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2336
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=84475

_______________________________________________
beta mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/beta

Reply via email to