by Mizery_Made » Tue Jan 04, 2011 4:51 am
Regarding the bug you point out, Rusty: I personally don't see anything wrong with the current implementation of "Shuffle." I also wonder why the Shuffle feature should be changed to function in a similar manner to that of a feature already available (Randomize). The current behavior of the Shuffle feature is pretty long standing, as I've been a user for around 5 years and from what I recall, it's always acted as it does today. I can only recall two (consistent) complaints regarding the Shuffle feature over the years, the most common having been that the "Back/Previous" button didn't go back to the track that was just played/skipped and the other one that comes up often being about the randomness of the feature.
When I turn the Shuffle feature on in MediaMonkey, I expect the player to jump it's way through the Now Playing list as it randomly plays tracks. Now it's been quite a while since I've used another player as I have been pretty loyal to MM over the past 5 years, but I seem to recall this being the way the other "big boys" of the media player game also handled the situation. So I expected it due in part to that, but also again, because that's how MM has worked for at least five years.
I can understand the need for other approaches... but...
they're (for the most part) already provided. You've already supplied the Randomize list feature. There's also the Auto-DJ function which also functions pretty similar to some of the proposals for Shuffle changes (the big difference being that the playlist/filter seeds the tracks and not the Now Playing list).
As for the point you raise, peke, regarding the fact that "those two mins [s]are[/s]
can be used to add/prepare next track," I honestly don't think "Stop after Current"+"Shuffle" would be the most ideal approach to this. As stated, Auto-DJ is there and provides similar functionality to that of Shuffle while also allowing you to easily "Play Next" a track. Even if you prefer the "Shuffle" feature, as I previously mentioned there is Zved's "Queue list" script which allows you to queue tracks to play after the current on finishes, again without the need to stop the track.
Even if you do stop the track after it plays, and then use the next two minutes to add the next track you want to play, what difference does it make whether it's added at position 301 (right after the track that just finished playing, which was 300), or if it went ahead to the next track and thus you dropped it at position 1,201 (right after track 1,200 which is where the player went after you "Stopped after Current")? I seem to recall this question being answered elsewhere on the forum at some point, but what happens to the "shuffle list" when the player is stopped? Doesn't it generate a fresh shuffle order when you begin playback again? If that is the case, then what would be the difference of clicking the Shuffle button off as opposed to enabling Stop after Current so that you may force a certain track to play next?
As I noted before, it really comes down to your interpretation of the word "after" in the feature's title. Currently, the song fully plays and then playback is stopped. This could be interpreted as "after," since it played the entire song. However again, hitting play would then play the song over which in my opinion, doesn't fall under the definition of "after." Whereas if it plays through entirely and then moves to the next track, then it definitely stopped playback "after" the "current" (at the time) track.
To me, the issues boils right down to the fact that if you "Stop after Current" and then hit play again (say you had to go to the bathroom, but wanted to wait until the track finished playing) or stopped playback for the night and then brought MM back up the next day... most people aren't going to expect to hear that track again when they hit play. I think that's obvious by the fact that it's often been asked why it doesn't move to the next track. I see this as a valid point regardless if shuffle is enabled or not.
It's all in the interpretation and personal opinion. I think it should work one way, Peke thinks it should work another and a third person is liable to suggest something entirely different. Perhaps it's due to perspective. I'm looking at it from that of someone who might need a bathroom break in the middle of an album, but don't like to pause in the middle of a track. Whereas Peke is looking at the issue from the standpoint of a DJ, someone who might want to stop playback to do... whatever.
Perhaps I need to just leave the issue alone, as after all, I've already stated my opinion on it. Stated it again for a second or third time (actually, what is this... the 12th for me?
) is unlikely to do anything that the first time didn't, you know?
PS -- Peke, you suggested I(?) try out your plug-in, but... the only thing I found was something from 6-7 years ago(?) and was labeled "beta," so I didn't know if it's suppose to still work or... whatever, so I didn't mess with it. Though honestly, I doubt it would change my perspective much on the matter.
Regarding the bug you point out, Rusty: I personally don't see anything wrong with the current implementation of "Shuffle." I also wonder why the Shuffle feature should be changed to function in a similar manner to that of a feature already available (Randomize). The current behavior of the Shuffle feature is pretty long standing, as I've been a user for around 5 years and from what I recall, it's always acted as it does today. I can only recall two (consistent) complaints regarding the Shuffle feature over the years, the most common having been that the "Back/Previous" button didn't go back to the track that was just played/skipped and the other one that comes up often being about the randomness of the feature.
When I turn the Shuffle feature on in MediaMonkey, I expect the player to jump it's way through the Now Playing list as it randomly plays tracks. Now it's been quite a while since I've used another player as I have been pretty loyal to MM over the past 5 years, but I seem to recall this being the way the other "big boys" of the media player game also handled the situation. So I expected it due in part to that, but also again, because that's how MM has worked for at least five years.
I can understand the need for other approaches... but... [i]they're (for the most part) already provided[/i]. You've already supplied the Randomize list feature. There's also the Auto-DJ function which also functions pretty similar to some of the proposals for Shuffle changes (the big difference being that the playlist/filter seeds the tracks and not the Now Playing list).
As for the point you raise, peke, regarding the fact that "those two mins [s]are[/s] [i]can be[/i] used to add/prepare next track," I honestly don't think "Stop after Current"+"Shuffle" would be the most ideal approach to this. As stated, Auto-DJ is there and provides similar functionality to that of Shuffle while also allowing you to easily "Play Next" a track. Even if you prefer the "Shuffle" feature, as I previously mentioned there is Zved's "Queue list" script which allows you to queue tracks to play after the current on finishes, again without the need to stop the track.
Even if you do stop the track after it plays, and then use the next two minutes to add the next track you want to play, what difference does it make whether it's added at position 301 (right after the track that just finished playing, which was 300), or if it went ahead to the next track and thus you dropped it at position 1,201 (right after track 1,200 which is where the player went after you "Stopped after Current")? I seem to recall this question being answered elsewhere on the forum at some point, but what happens to the "shuffle list" when the player is stopped? Doesn't it generate a fresh shuffle order when you begin playback again? If that is the case, then what would be the difference of clicking the Shuffle button off as opposed to enabling Stop after Current so that you may force a certain track to play next?
As I noted before, it really comes down to your interpretation of the word "after" in the feature's title. Currently, the song fully plays and then playback is stopped. This could be interpreted as "after," since it played the entire song. However again, hitting play would then play the song over which in my opinion, doesn't fall under the definition of "after." Whereas if it plays through entirely and then moves to the next track, then it definitely stopped playback "after" the "current" (at the time) track.
To me, the issues boils right down to the fact that if you "Stop after Current" and then hit play again (say you had to go to the bathroom, but wanted to wait until the track finished playing) or stopped playback for the night and then brought MM back up the next day... most people aren't going to expect to hear that track again when they hit play. I think that's obvious by the fact that it's often been asked why it doesn't move to the next track. I see this as a valid point regardless if shuffle is enabled or not.
It's all in the interpretation and personal opinion. I think it should work one way, Peke thinks it should work another and a third person is liable to suggest something entirely different. Perhaps it's due to perspective. I'm looking at it from that of someone who might need a bathroom break in the middle of an album, but don't like to pause in the middle of a track. Whereas Peke is looking at the issue from the standpoint of a DJ, someone who might want to stop playback to do... whatever.
Perhaps I need to just leave the issue alone, as after all, I've already stated my opinion on it. Stated it again for a second or third time (actually, what is this... the 12th for me? :oops: ) is unlikely to do anything that the first time didn't, you know?
PS -- Peke, you suggested I(?) try out your plug-in, but... the only thing I found was something from 6-7 years ago(?) and was labeled "beta," so I didn't know if it's suppose to still work or... whatever, so I didn't mess with it. Though honestly, I doubt it would change my perspective much on the matter.
