Andy Grundman;194283 Wrote: > On Apr 11, 2007, at 6:28 PM, Hamlet wrote: > > > > > The way searches are handled by Rhapsody is poor almost to the > > point of > > being useless for users of Squeezebox who search through the remote. > > > > Since the results are not alphabetical (as when searching library > with > > ss), entering anything less than the complete artist or track name > > that > > you want shows results which might night have what you are looking > for > > in the first 10, 20, 50, or any results. This may be fine for a web > > console, but not when one must scroll through results one line at a > > time. > > All search engines order results by relevance, I'm not sure what > you'd like to see instead? Alphabetizing the search would ruin the > results. > > You should always search for a complete artist or track name anyway, > to get the best results.
I am lost as to what you mean by saying that alphabetizing the search would ruin the results. It seems that the results are already useless for anything less than entering every letter of text of every word of every song or artist that you are seeking. I am searching for artists or song titles from a limited database, not googling some topic across the WWW, why do I need some pre-determined sorting based on someone's idea of "relevance"? If you have to enter every letter of a song title to find the song it's not really a search is it? I'm not sure why anyone would want to have to do that anyway since it's so tedious with the remote not to mention that it seams utterly absurd to not have a partial word search given the technology. Also, why shouldn't the search functionality be consistant across the SB server clients? If I want to find "Joe Jackson" by entering "Joe Jack" I will get Joe Gajan, Little Joe Washington, Joe Higgs, Jesse "Monkey Joe" Coleman, Joe Kay, Joe Houck, Joe Howard, Joe Wos, Joe Wise, Joe Wee, Joe Gee, Joe Guy, Vick Dckenson & Joe Thomas, Joe Hogue, Joe Hesh,.... then a few more Joe's, a bunch of Jacks etc etc at that point I've given up scrolling. Where is the relevance to this search? The same search in SS will give me what I'm looking for probably on top. The bottom line I think is that it seems that "relevant" searches are useless through the remote while alphabetized searches make complete sense, rather than the reverse. -- Hamlet ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hamlet's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=10579 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=34386 _______________________________________________ squeezenetwork mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/squeezenetwork
