New vs Old in Windows skin mode [F3999 RC3]

[DryBones]

Hi,

Somehow I no longer like the new player panel (when arranged the same way as I used to before:

NEW (not as nice)


OLD (nicer)

[MarineBrat]

I concur 100%. Otherwise I'd be using "skinless" mode in v-3.

[rusty]

Improved somewhat in RC-3.

-Rusty

[DryBones]

Improved somewhat in RC-3.

-Rusty

Thanks for taking a look Rusty !

This is the new (RC-3):


I am not sure what has changed though
(The colored start-stop buttons were an option in RC2, so they are not new)

[rusty]

The empty space around the player is gone.

-Rusty

[DryBones]

The empty space around the player is gone.

-Rusty

... but the good thing about the old player was that its size was nice (not too short as it is now). Due to that size then (of the old player), the album art (when docked next to it) was also nice size and the now playing list could show more than one entries.

With the new player, we can't dock it with anything else, except on its own somewhere.

By the way, the old player was fine. Why was it changed ?

[rovingcowboy]

changed for better skinning engine.

and more options. now there are the main player you see in your screen shots. a micro player for the hort. task bar or a vert task bar. and a floating player that can be any image you want.

more options to use monkey with also in moving the player around to what ever docking location you want.

added more features to the list view area. added a track browser, made the player stretchable,

most important is customizable skins

[DryBones]

Well, that is subjective. no ?

Some people (me included) never use skins, or anything that is different than Windows standard UI.

Skins, might look cool, but it is not good practice, from ergonomics standpoint.

In this case, the standard, non-skinned, version of MediaMonkey deteriorated. Now, if it stayed as is, while improving the skinning engine, then all would be fine ... but when you take away from the standard UI and give to the custom crowd then someone is going to notice the shortchanging.

[nohitter151]

Well, that is subjective. no ?

...

Skins, might look cool, but it is not good practice, from ergonomics standpoint.

Not good practice? I am not too sure what this exactly means, but if you are for being subjective, perhaps you should evaluate your own statements more carefully.

[DryBones]

Not good practice? I am not too sure what this exactly means, but if you are for being subjective, perhaps you should evaluate your own statements more carefully.

It does not really matter to me if you skin it or not, neither do I care to make people change their ways.

However, the statements were careful and correct. It is standard ergonomics theory. Windows sets a theme and method (placement of buttons, consistency of look and feel, conventions of populating the menus, etc). It does not matter if the windows conventions are good or bad (they are conventions nonetheless). On the hand the practice of skinning (talking in general) is like a rebellion, often going against the Windows look and feel.

Essentially, it is skinning that "deviates" from the Windows norm. As such, I should not even have to defend the unskinned version. I am actually surprised I am treated as a minority, or as if I am an alien of some sort.

Again, it doesn't matter to me if there is skinning or not, as long as the standard unskinned version does not suffer.

[nohitter151]

I'm sorry that you took offense to my post, but I took exception to you saying that skinning is not a good practice, and I have a problem with what you say about "ergonomics" on many levels. I'm not sure what the "Windows norm" is, considering that Windows itself can be customized/skinned, and that many elements of that customization would have no effect on the appearance of Mediamonkey. This is also not to mention the fact that the included unskinned version of Mediamonkey bears little semblance to Windows Vista or XP and could be skinned to have much more of a 'Windows look and feel.'

I do apologize as I know this is off topic and I hope that you don't take offense to anything being said. Think of it as friendly debate

[DryBones]

I'm not sure what the "Windows norm" is, considering that Windows itself can be customized/skinned

The thing is that part of ergonomics is "uniformity", that is, all elements of the interface should look the same everywhere. Applications should not deviate too much either in colors or behaviors within one system. So, when developing, it is best to try and use standard MS controls, such as listviews, flexgrids, treeviews, close buttons, etc ... and try to emulate the microsoft interface functionality. For example, MsWord or Excel, have docking customizable toolbars (and so on and so forth), so it is good to follow the MS lead and carry those features over while developing on a windows platform.

In this case the player itself in the original screenshot may have some unique graphic elements for displaying the track volume, start, stop, suffle buttons etc, but at least it borrows the main windows colors, it is easily dockable, it has a titlebar with a standard close button on the upper right corner, and it seems to be using standard windows sliders, text boxes, or image boxes.

Also, it does not matter if the Windows interface can be skinned itself, as long as the theme is applied anywhere and everywhere transparently. If we change the theme to blue, then all applications should look blue. If the menu background color is beige, then all menu background colors in all applications should be beige. In short, anything you do in the desktop-->properties-->Appearance should propagate to every corner of the Windows environment to create uniformity.

Now, when you skin an application, then it deviates from the ideal of uniformity (against the Windows environment) and some people (many people actually) do not like the idea, while others think it is fun ad hip. So, when you skin MediaMonkey it no longer listens to the global appearance settings from Windows, which is technically not quite kosher. Again, some people have a taste for skinning, which is fine and many developers offer skinned apps these days. On the other hand if we were to allow every application with its own unique, yet different skins, then the PC starts looking like a circus in a way. (which is fine if that is what you want really. I mean we all like to be unique in a way. It is cool), but it should be done as long as we do not neglect the standard practice too (the ability of having the application get its colors from the main Windows theme).

Windows itself can be customized/skinned, and that many elements of that customization would have no effect on the appearance of Mediamonkey

Exactly.
Such rigidity, is non standard. It is cool to have, but it is still not standard practice. An application should always listen to (or have an option to make it able to listen to) the Windows main theme; whichever that theme might be at the moment.

This is also not to mention the fact that the included unskinned version of Mediamonkey bears little semblance to Windows Vista or XP

It is windows XP. The screen shot is using the colors of the current XP theme on this system ... and that color theme is consistent throughout. All applications on this PC look and feel the same (since I tend to avoid the ones that come pre-skinned and rigid; or with no way to remove their custom skinning) This is one reason I chose MediaMonkey in the first place, over other players like Win-Amp, etc.

Unskinned, may be boring, ... but it has its merits; at least for some

[DryBones]

We got a little off-track, though, discussing the boons and banes of skinning. Now to get back on track ... the main point of the original post was that the original unskinned version was a little more useful (with more information) than the newer unskinned version. So, the comparison is meant between old unskinned and new unskinned. (When I asked the question "Why was it changed", It was not meant as an attack on skinning, but simply thinking out loud why the unskinned version took a step backwards).

[rovingcowboy]

We got a little off-track, though, discussing the boons and banes of skinning. Now to get back on track ... the main point of the original post was that the original unskinned version was a little more useful (with more information) than the newer unskinned version. So, the comparison is meant between old unskinned and new unskinned. (When I asked the question "Why was it changed", It was not meant as an attack on skinning, but simply thinking out loud why the unskinned version took a step backwards).

and that is just how i took it and how i answered you.
no jab's thrown from me. i get hurt when any i throw come back at me.

but the non skinned error you showed is the one i been getting with the skinned version. so something is up, with both versions.?

i only get that error when i switch from a skin with more height, then the one i am going too.. but if i switch from a skin with the default height to one of more height then the new skin's player also gives me that same error you show.
which makes it strange.? but this error only happens on my main player skins..

i never use the non skin mode. so i don't know what the older version did.?

[DryBones]

and that is just how i took it and how i answered you.

ok, then , but I am not sure how. Did you mean that the code from the unskinned version had to be scrapped, or simplified, before the skinned version could become more advanced ? As in, there was no way to keep the old behavior (and look) of the little dockable player ?

but the non skinned error you showed is the one i been getting with the skinned version. so something is up, with both versions.?

Well, it is not solely about the dock-ability, or the overall height, of the player widget. It is the look of the whole player altogether

So basically going back to the original images:
This player (bellow) was nice and cozy, and had all necessary information in a nicely presented layout, and it had a titlebar that we could grab to undock, and it had a little cute close button too.


So, the above nice little player .... became simplified.
-Lost the title bar,
-Lost realtime volume bars,
-Lost the large and bold time display,
-Lost the kbps and Khz display,
-Lost the left/right speaker bias slider,
-Lost the cute little monkey icon
-Lost its height. Now it is so short that nothing can be usefully docked next to it.
... and now it looks like this:


It looks unfinished to me