+- XBMC Community Forum (http://forum.xbmc.org)
+-- Forum: Help and Support (/forumdisplay.php?fid=33)
+--- Forum: XBMC General Help and Support (/forumdisplay.php?fid=111)
+---- Forum: Windows support (/forumdisplay.php?fid=59)
+---- Thread: User experiences so far with the dx builds of xbmc - share them here.. (/showthread.php?tid=57681)
- azido - 2009-10-31 04:41
hmmm...
the ongoing removal of more and more settings makes it more hard for the experienced user to keep track of what has to go into advancedsettings.xml than it saves novice users from too much options to handle.
i never saw an application so far where the more expert settings have to go in an extra file to be enabled - except xbmc.
i understand the wish to have a clean settings interface - but i think you aready crossed the (good) boundaries of less used options to outsource.
now i don't even see any upscaling options in settings anymore. what's the deal?
in my opinon you really should more likely go for a switch in settings between a standard and an expert mode, but keep options inside the settings gui instead of making the user deal with more and more settings he has to enter manually in advancedsettings.xml and therefore look for the correct syntax in the online manual again and again..
at least that's the behaviour of almost all the software i ever used to handle the switch between standard and advanced settings..
- jmarshall - 2009-10-31 05:50
The only upscaling options that have gone are the "software upscaling" ones, which the vast majority of people don't understand ("High quality - it MUST be what I want... WTF does everything go so slow now
") and more importantly don't need.We'd welcome a UI built up around that file, but I see very little point for it existing within XBMC itself, for a very simple reason: If it's there, people WILL muck around with them, and then complain when stuff stops working. Given that it's not there, people generally DON'T bother with it, and thus things keep working nicely.
Remember: There is only a very small minority of users that come to these forums. Of those users, only a small minority actually want or need any of the features available via advancedsettings.
Cheers,
Jonathan
- LyndonW - 2009-10-31 06:56
Some things I think could be thrown into the actual GUI. A good example being:
<videolibrary>
<hideemptyseries>true</hideemptyseries>
</videolibrary>
Im sure alot of people dont know about this one but it sure does make my tv shows look alot nicer.
On a side note, the dx builds have taken over as my main xbmc for the last couple weeks. Havent had any complaints! Im on Windows 7, 64 bit. Nvidia 6600. Athlon Dual Core 2.2 ghz.
- Kyusaku - 2009-10-31 07:28
Disc playback hasn't worked for more for serveral revisions now. The last one that worked was r24064. Last tested build was r24148.
- neil.j1983 - 2009-10-31 11:26
Kyusaku Wrote:Disc playback hasn't worked for more for serveral revisions now. The last one that worked was r24064. Last tested build was r24148.
same here.
jmarshall Wrote:The only upscaling options that have gone are the "software upscaling" ones, which the vast majority of people don't understand ("High quality - it MUST be what I want... WTF does everything go so slow nowis it possible to enable sinc/lanczos etc upscaling in DX builds then (through advancedsettings.xml)?
I looked on the wiki but can't find a reference to it.
Perhaps "high quality upscaling" should have been renamed to "Software Upscaling" and when you eneable it a popup says "this requires a very fast cpu, if your video does not display smooth, you should turn this option off, Are you sure you want to enable this option? [yes][no]", just my 2 pennies (if its even worth that!)
- dj_gerbil - 2009-10-31 12:52
Ok, here's something I noticed the other day. My Tv won't allow me to adjust the picture properly so the edges disappear off the screen. So I've used the calibration settings in XBMC to get the UI to fit the screen. Now it appears that videos play correctly however, here's the weird part, Milkdrop seems to be working to the desktop settings, i.e. slightly to big for the screen.
- azido - 2009-10-31 13:13
jmarshall Wrote:Remember: There is only a very small minority of users that come to these forums. Of those users, only a small minority actually want or need any of the features available via advancedsettings.
Cheers,
Jonathan
in general, most of the time i'm with you, but not here.
there are a lot of options in as.xml even a novice user would understand and find useful. for example the hideallitems settings for video and audio. furthermore the new standard of keeping windowed mode settings from guisettings.xml makes a lot of users never imagine they could fix the windowed mode to a wanted resolution size now, and for that either stick with the little window that defaults or with a resized one by hand that messes up the aspect ratio.
given that there are not many users read the forum as you said, how many users in your opinion then read the online manual? how many of them don't know xbmc is very flexible with it's options, and could serve almost all of their needs, but as they never see this flexibility they drop usage again?
as i said, i see your point in keeping xbmc as easy as possible - but it should ALSO be easy to see it's full potential - don't you agree?
i don't think the main target should be to keep users from settings they don't understand - it should be easy to gather informations and knowlegde of/about xbmc's possible features and what comes with them instead. and in that case the policy "what the user doesn't see, he can't mess up" is bad.
of course, that's just my opinion. i would call myself being an advanced user in most cases, but these days i have more trouble to get xbmc working the way it should for me than before. friends of mine/ users of our mod keep asking "how did you do this how did you do that" and have to deal with as.xml which is more complicated than trying a setting in the gui.
one other thing i don't understand is that you also go the other way around - talking about the <navigatevirtualkeyboard> setting that was in as.xml. now it is removed, and settings has a "remote sends keyboard presses" option now. but this doesn't work like the as.xml setting did before. if i enable it, i cannot type in any letters with my standard keyboard any longer (for example when adding a source and giving it a name), and as i did not set my number keys to send letters, i'm stuck. if i disable it, i can type in with my standard keyboard again, but i cannot navigate in the virtual keyboard with my remote. so either setting is missing a feature now and i need to switch based on what i want every time. the setting in as.xml was perfect; it enabled both, navigating with the remote and typing letters with my standard keyboard.
don't misunderstand me, this is no ranting. it's just like i feel xbmc's new policies are going in a direction that isn't the best choice to keep users satisfied with it.
- ashlar - 2009-10-31 16:29
Azido, your last message got me really worried. Still standing at 21930 I wonder when upgrading will be safe...
jmarshall, is there a unified "place" where one can see all the changes you are bringing to the settings? Excluding trac which I think you'll agree it's not so easy for this specific purpose.
- azido - 2009-10-31 19:33
ashlar Wrote:Azido, your last message got me really worried. Still standing at 21930 I wonder when upgrading will be safe...
sorry to hear that. i don't wanna worry ppl.. just want to tell jonathan how i feel about all that changes from a user's point of view.
- RDHoworth - 2009-10-31 21:25
I don't often post, but I can say, from a long time users POV, that I fully agree with the comments from azido. XBMC should never be a tools for novices only. An 'expert' or 'advanced' mode would be much better.
Having said that, XBMC is still a great environement, and thanks for all the work.
Regards, Richard