Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: MythTV: Users

A different perspective on the "user experience issue"

 

 

MythTV users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


doug.meredith at skyridge

Feb 26, 2008, 7:29 AM

Post #1 of 22 (675 views)
Permalink
A different perspective on the "user experience issue"

We've seen dozens of messages fly by about how good the MythTV user
experience is in the last few days, expressing many different opinions.
I think it is important to split MythTV into components when considering
this:



1. Setup and configuration
2. Recording scheduling.
3. Navigation and recorded TV playback.
4. Plugins



This is obviously an arbitrary breakdown, but I think it is a reasonable
one.



1. Setup and configuration isn't perfect, but it isn't horrible. I
followed some guide (Jarod Wilson I think) and had no trouble with the
initial setup. I think I would have had difficulty without a guide to
follow, and that's clearly a shortcoming. Another pet peeve of mine
about the setup is the mixing of backend and frontend configuration. I
think these should be clearly separated. But realistically, I don't do
this often, and I can live with it. Does it hold back MythTV adoption?
Hard to say, but I doubt there are many non-techies running MythTV.



2. Recording scheduling. In our house, I do all of this, so nobody
else has to worry about it. It was a little confusing to me at first,
but I learned. Could it be better? Sure. Would it be too complicated
for my wife and kids? Probably not, because they have the benefit of me
to tutor them.



3. The navigation and playback experience I think is quite good in
Myth. My wife and kids have no trouble watching TV shows. There are
some small inconsistencies and annoyances, but none significant enough
for me to even remember them. Overall it is quite intuitive.



4. The plugins are the weakest part of Myth, but that shouldn't be
surprising. There are some huge inconsistencies even in the "official"
plugins. I hope that some of these are fixed. But look at it this way:
the developers had three choices: 1. Fix a plugin to make it
consistent. 2. Make it an official plugin despite the issues. 3.
Refuse to make the plugin official. While the first option would have
been nice, it would take time and effort. That leaves two other
options. I would prefer them to pick option two. If it is too
inconsistent for me, I can chose not to run the plugin, but at least I
have the option. And the more people that use a plugin, the greater the
chance that someone will exert the effort to fix it.



So, there you have it. My view. Some will agree in whole or in part,
some won't. But I really hope that people will separate their plugin
criticism (in particular) from the rest of the system. View the plugins
as an optional component that you could choose to run or not. If you
want to criticize MythVideo, criticize that plugin, not MtyhTV as a
whole.



Doug


ben at firshman

Feb 26, 2008, 11:58 AM

Post #2 of 22 (627 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

On 26 Feb 2008, at 15:29, Doug Meredith wrote:

> We’ve seen dozens of messages fly by about how good the MythTV user
> experience is in the last few days, expressing many different
> opinions. I think it is important to split MythTV into components
> when considering this:
>
> • Setup and configuration
> • Recording scheduling.
> • Navigation and recorded TV playback.
> • Plugins
>
> This is obviously an arbitrary breakdown, but I think it is a
> reasonable one.
>
> 1. Setup and configuration isn’t perfect, but it isn’t horrible. I
> followed some guide (Jarod Wilson I think) and had no trouble with
> the initial setup. I think I would have had difficulty without a
> guide to follow, and that’s clearly a shortcoming. Another pet
> peeve of mine about the setup is the mixing of backend and frontend
> configuration. I think these should be clearly separated. But
> realistically, I don’t do this often, and I can live with it. Does
> it hold back MythTV adoption? Hard to say, but I doubt there are
> many non-techies running MythTV.
>

The frontend setup pages are for the frontend, mythtv-setup is for the
backend. I don't understand where the confusion is?

Ben

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


myth at dermanouelian

Feb 26, 2008, 12:06 PM

Post #3 of 22 (630 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

On Feb 26, 2008, at 11:58 AM, Ben Firshman wrote:

> On 26 Feb 2008, at 15:29, Doug Meredith wrote:
>>
> The frontend setup pages are for the frontend, mythtv-setup is for the
> backend. I don't understand where the confusion is?

Not always. Job queue stuff which runs on the backend is configured in
the frontend's setup screens. Same thing with mythfilldatabase auto-
run settings and logging events to the database. I can never remember
where I'm supposed to go to adjust stuff. I just poke around all the
setup screens until I stumble across what I'm trying to change. I'm
sure there are other backend-specific settings sitting in the
frontend's setup screens that I'm missing as well.

-Brad

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


jedi at mishnet

Feb 26, 2008, 12:15 PM

Post #4 of 22 (630 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

> On Feb 26, 2008, at 11:58 AM, Ben Firshman wrote:
>
>> On 26 Feb 2008, at 15:29, Doug Meredith wrote:
>>>
>> The frontend setup pages are for the frontend, mythtv-setup is for the
>> backend. I don't understand where the confusion is?
>
> Not always. Job queue stuff which runs on the backend is configured in
> the frontend's setup screens. Same thing with mythfilldatabase auto-
> run settings and logging events to the database. I can never remember
> where I'm supposed to go to adjust stuff. I just poke around all the
> setup screens until I stumble across what I'm trying to change. I'm
> sure there are other backend-specific settings sitting in the
> frontend's setup screens that I'm missing as well.

Everything should be in the frontend. Perhaps have a separate "tree"
with backend only stuff but have an entry point for everything. Also,
a "schedule to go into effect" would be a handy thing.

This way, the mythtv-setup changes could come into effect whenever you
tell the backend to restart itself.

Undoubtedly one of those low priority ideas that's way at the bottom
of the to do list...

As the lirc/ivtv stuff gets better and as the distros do better
packaging, there are bound to be less hard-core users installing
MythTV.

BTW... is anyone using appleir? It was setup out of the box on my
last mini install. I disabled it immediately because I use streamzaps.
I was curious if anyone else was using it.

[deletia]

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


scram69 at gmail

Feb 26, 2008, 1:35 PM

Post #5 of 22 (618 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

>
> BTW... is anyone using appleir? It was setup out of the box on my
> last mini install. I disabled it immediately because I use streamzaps.
> I was curious if anyone else was using it.
>
How do you disable appleir? I have wondered for a while now if it
interferes with Remote Buddy during playback; in order to get anything
to happen using my Remote Buddy-enabled remote during playback, I
either have to wait ~15 seconds for the action to occur, or perform
the action 2 or 3 times (i.e. pause-play-pause). Something is
blocking/delaying Remote Buddy events from having an effect during
playback - using the keyboard during playback produces an immediate
response. Do you think appleir could be the culprit?
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


peter.dash at gmail

Feb 26, 2008, 1:43 PM

Post #6 of 22 (618 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

> How do you disable appleir? I have wondered for a while now if it

Make sure the "appleir" module isn't loaded, or recompile the kernel
without it built in if it's been done that way.

Peter.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


ron at ronfrazier

Feb 26, 2008, 2:09 PM

Post #7 of 22 (616 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

> Everything should be in the frontend. Perhaps have a separate "tree"
> with backend only stuff but have an entry point for everything. Also,
> a "schedule to go into effect" would be a handy thing.

More specifically, it would help to also have the settings for the
master backend settings separated from the host-specific backend
settings.

--
Ron
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


jedi at mishnet

Feb 26, 2008, 2:42 PM

Post #8 of 22 (637 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

>> Everything should be in the frontend. Perhaps have a separate "tree"
>> with backend only stuff but have an entry point for everything. Also,
>> a "schedule to go into effect" would be a handy thing.
>
> More specifically, it would help to also have the settings for the
> master backend settings separated from the host-specific backend
> settings.

Even better... there could be a big banner that says

"MASTER BACKEND"

or "Slave Backend - Riffraff"

or "Frontend - Riffraff"

This way you could set everything from a single point.
Also, it would be nice if there were some way to easily
clone the frontend config to a new frontend or to sync
them.

>
> --
> Ron
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
>


_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


jedi at mishnet

Feb 26, 2008, 2:43 PM

Post #9 of 22 (606 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

>> How do you disable appleir? I have wondered for a while now if it
>
> Make sure the "appleir" module isn't loaded, or recompile the kernel
> without it built in if it's been done that way.

How I did it...

mv appleir.ko appleir.ko-DISABLED

[deletia]


_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


scram69 at gmail

Feb 26, 2008, 8:48 PM

Post #10 of 22 (597 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:43 PM, <jedi[at]mishnet.org> wrote:
> >> How do you disable appleir? I have wondered for a while now if it
> >
> > Make sure the "appleir" module isn't loaded, or recompile the kernel
> > without it built in if it's been done that way.
>
> How I did it...
>
> mv appleir.ko appleir.ko-DISABLED
>
> [deletia]
>
Oh. My mistake - I was assuming appleir was part of Myth, or
compiling Mythfrontend, not the linux kernel. I'm running the OSX
frontend (hence the Remote Buddy discussion) which has support for the
Apple remote "built-in" somehow. I'll have to keep looking for how to
disable it...
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


mikep at randomtraveller

Feb 27, 2008, 8:29 AM

Post #11 of 22 (584 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

jedi[at]mishnet.org wrote:
>> On Feb 26, 2008, at 11:58 AM, Ben Firshman wrote:
>>
>>> On 26 Feb 2008, at 15:29, Doug Meredith wrote:
>>> The frontend setup pages are for the frontend, mythtv-setup is for the
>>> backend. I don't understand where the confusion is?
>> Not always. Job queue stuff which runs on the backend is configured in
>> the frontend's setup screens. Same thing with mythfilldatabase auto-
>> run settings and logging events to the database. I can never remember
>> where I'm supposed to go to adjust stuff. I just poke around all the
>> setup screens until I stumble across what I'm trying to change. I'm
>> sure there are other backend-specific settings sitting in the
>> frontend's setup screens that I'm missing as well.
>
> Everything should be in the frontend. Perhaps have a separate "tree"
> with backend only stuff but have an entry point for everything. Also,
> a "schedule to go into effect" would be a handy thing.
>
Good luck with that. The first thing that any front end tries to do when it
starts up is to connect to the master backend. After, that is, you've set up
it's IP address, of course.

Each back end needs to have it's own setup where the tuner(s) it is responsible
for are defined, and where any attached storage is defined (I am assuming that
the developers only intend there to be one backend per box).

If you are saying, let's start up mythtv-setup (or similar) on any random front
end and then use that to set up (and tune!) some other backend somewhere else on
the network, I think you will end up with unneeded levels of complexity we can
all do without, thank you. It's difficult enough sometimes to get two mythboxes
to talk to one another as it is.

As an aside, I've never understood why the mythfilldatabase setup screens are in
the front end setup, since the *only* user/instigator of mythfilldatabase is the
master backend, and the setup for that function can quite easily be done there.

Mike Perkins

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


jedi at mishnet

Feb 27, 2008, 8:44 AM

Post #12 of 22 (583 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

> jedi[at]mishnet.org wrote:
>>> On Feb 26, 2008, at 11:58 AM, Ben Firshman wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 26 Feb 2008, at 15:29, Doug Meredith wrote:
>>>> The frontend setup pages are for the frontend, mythtv-setup is for the
>>>> backend. I don't understand where the confusion is?
>>> Not always. Job queue stuff which runs on the backend is configured in
>>> the frontend's setup screens. Same thing with mythfilldatabase auto-
>>> run settings and logging events to the database. I can never remember
>>> where I'm supposed to go to adjust stuff. I just poke around all the
>>> setup screens until I stumble across what I'm trying to change. I'm
>>> sure there are other backend-specific settings sitting in the
>>> frontend's setup screens that I'm missing as well.
>>
>> Everything should be in the frontend. Perhaps have a separate "tree"
>> with backend only stuff but have an entry point for everything. Also,
>> a "schedule to go into effect" would be a handy thing.
>>
> Good luck with that. The first thing that any front end tries to do when
> it
> starts up is to connect to the master backend. After, that is, you've set
> up
> it's IP address, of course.
>
> Each back end needs to have it's own setup where the tuner(s) it is
> responsible
> for are defined, and where any attached storage is defined (I am assuming
> that
> the developers only intend there to be one backend per box).
>
> If you are saying, let's start up mythtv-setup (or similar) on any random
> front
> end and then use that to set up (and tune!) some other backend somewhere
> else on
> the network, I think you will end up with unneeded levels of complexity we
> can
> all do without, thank you. It's difficult enough sometimes to get two

Too late. The complexity already seems to be there.

Connecting directly to a box that should be headless just so that
you can run the GUI to configure that box is silly and contrary to much
of what's being done generally as well as a lot of what's already being
done already in MythTV. Getting a remote X session setup is also possible
but a bit on the geeky side.

If I want to alter a tuner, I am only interested in what the tuner
id is. I don't care which box it is connected to. I don't really need to.

A lot of stuff should be defined more globally anyways. It doesn't
really make any sense for the frontend to default to something different
from what the other frontends have when it's already setup sufficiently
enough to get connected to the master backend.

> mythboxes
> to talk to one another as it is.

It's actually pretty trivial.

MySQL is the problem. (something else for the ubuntu boys to
automate better if they haven't already done so) It's network
access mechanisms are very novice unfriendly.

>
> As an aside, I've never understood why the mythfilldatabase setup screens
> are in
> the front end setup, since the *only* user/instigator of mythfilldatabase
> is the
> master backend, and the setup for that function can quite easily be done
> there.
>
> Mike Perkins
>
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
>


_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


ron at ronfrazier

Feb 27, 2008, 8:54 AM

Post #13 of 22 (582 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

> > mythboxes
> > to talk to one another as it is.
>
> It's actually pretty trivial.
>
> MySQL is the problem. (something else for the ubuntu boys to
> automate better if they haven't already done so) It's network
> access mechanisms are very novice unfriendly.

What exactly do you mean? Are you talking about difficulty connecting
to a remote database if there is also a local database? I can't
comment on that, but I never had any trouble connecting to a remote
database on boxes that aren't running a local one.

--
Ron
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


gareth.glaccum at btopenworld

Feb 27, 2008, 9:41 AM

Post #14 of 22 (584 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

If I want to change a setting on the backend I have in the loft, I use a
front-end (or even my desktop), and ssh to it. No need for a remote XDM
session or anything like that, if I am feeling frivolous, I suppose I could
use VNC. X forwarding is set up by default on most major distributions
(Redhat, Suse, Fedora and many others), not geeky at all.
If you want to reboot a machine, do you go to it and press the button, I
just log into it and use reboot/shutdown? Changing tuner setups in my
opinion is a hardware function in much the same way as rebooting, and thus
accessing the hardware doesn't seem such an onerous task.
Possibly running:
mythtv-setup <hostname>
could make life easier for some, but personally I would rather know that
'dangerous' tasks (for a production environment where if casualty didn't
record for the wife, I would be going there instead) I am definitely modding
the machine I want.
Gareth

----- Original Message -----
From: <jedi[at]mishnet.org>
> Connecting directly to a box that should be headless just so that
>you can run the GUI to configure that box is silly and contrary to much
>of what's being done generally as well as a lot of what's already being
>done already in MythTV. Getting a remote X session setup is also possible
>but a bit on the geeky side.

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


jra at baylink

Feb 27, 2008, 9:57 AM

Post #15 of 22 (585 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 07:58:55PM +0000, Ben Firshman wrote:
> The frontend setup pages are for the frontend, mythtv-setup is for the
> backend. I don't understand where the confusion is?

The confusion comes from a place that's common to geeks:

End-users don't know, nor do they care, nor should they be required to
care -- by and large -- what part of a system which is segmented
largely for the convenience of the developers (and power users)
supplies a specific piece of functionality.

Indeed, even people who do care don't always know whether a specific
piece of functionality is supplied by front-end or back-end --
especially if they only have one machine -- and it's therefore not
obvious where to go looking for a certain setup item.

For more on this, you can ask my sister, who is not a geek, but is
pretty sharp, and has been (mostly) managing her own Mythbox since I
built it at 0.18, 3 years ago.

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra[at]baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274

Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
Those who count the vote decide everything.
-- (Joseph Stalin)

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


jra at baylink

Feb 27, 2008, 9:59 AM

Post #16 of 22 (583 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 11:54:58AM -0500, Ronald Frazier wrote:
> > MySQL is the problem. (something else for the ubuntu boys to
> > automate better if they haven't already done so) It's network
> > access mechanisms are very novice unfriendly.
>
> What exactly do you mean? Are you talking about difficulty connecting
> to a remote database if there is also a local database? I can't
> comment on that, but I never had any trouble connecting to a remote
> database on boxes that aren't running a local one.

I believe he's commenting on how difficult it is to configure MySQL
concerning where you want it to be accessible *from*; the config file
for that is indeed somewhat arcane.

Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra[at]baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates http://baylink.pitas.com '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://photo.imageinc.us +1 727 647 1274

Those who cast the vote decide nothing.
Those who count the vote decide everything.
-- (Joseph Stalin)

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


ron at ronfrazier

Feb 27, 2008, 10:09 AM

Post #17 of 22 (584 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

> I believe he's commenting on how difficult it is to configure MySQL
> concerning where you want it to be accessible *from*; the config file
> for that is indeed somewhat arcane.

Oh, OK. I can't really comment on that. I have everything firewalled
off on a private network, and I let the database be open to the whole
network. I've just followed some of the myth setup guides on that
matter, so the most I've ever spent in the config file was a whole 5
seconds to comment out the necessary line and then restart the mysql
service.

--
Ron
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


gareth.glaccum at btopenworld

Feb 27, 2008, 10:40 AM

Post #18 of 22 (558 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experienceissue" [In reply to]

--- This is a tad longer than I expected, if you don't read the whole thing,
please at least read the last paragraph. 'What I find confusing'

I don't know about this argument about a single machine. An end user that
has only 1 machine, I can't see the problem with asking them to run a
'power-setup' program for modifying low level settings that they will
probably only touch once, whilst reading the walkthroughs of how to install
myth on their OS. (if they are not capable of determining that mythtv-setup
[remember they only have 1 machine] is a power setup program for setting up
their capture cards, then it is quite possible that they will not be adding
an extra 3 capture cards 4 months after initial installation).
Secondly, who are we talking about 'end-users'? If we are to split users
into system installers, and end-users, but have all the configuration in a
single area, do we then need to consider adding pin-codes to any setup page
that could stop the system from working? My wife ain't dumb, far from it and
very computer literate for her job, but not giving her access to a program
which can stop the whole system from being able to record, is a relief. She
doesn't know any of the access details for the backend machine I have apart
from an auto-mounted SMB share.

From the manual (I am sure someone watered this down since I last read it):
---MythTV isn't (yet) for everyone. While it's likely that at some point
you'll be able to treat it as an appliance, requiring no special care or
maintenance, that day hasn't entirely arrived yet. There are companies
selling pre-configured MythTV boxes and those units likely are stable enough
to toss on the living room shelf and hand the remote to your kids. But if
you're building one yourself (or having someone build one for you), then the
process may be more complicated - this is the price you pay for power and
flexibility.

Currently myth is not an appliance. Ok, so we should be aiming to make it
more user friendly, but currently this rant is causing a lot of discussion
without much answer. Having the setup and the frontend programs seperate for
the moment allows the developers to develop more easily. My understanding of
the way that the systems have been programmed, it should be relatively easy
at a later stage for some poor Dev to merge the two programs. However, I am
sure that someone in this thread has already said that the config screens in
mythfrontend are already too complex. Some streamlining needs to be done,
features hidden from the normal user. No, wait, that is the Microsoft way of
thinking, hiding complexity so that what should be simple tasks require
access to the command prompt to complete. I do find the setup screens in
mythfrontend a tad confusing myself, but I don't think I have gone into them
more than 6 times in the last 2 years for the 4 frontends and 1 backend that
I am running.
When I look at the appliance boxes that I have used in the past,,, my
set-top-box, didn't allow any configuration, I could search for channels
that was it. My DVD player, I can select the aspect ratio that is all, apart
from a 48 button remote control that is too blooming difficult to use (10
digit keypad, 3D setting that no DVD I have seen supports etc.etc.).
Switches I have used in the past that are based on linux, basically
appliances, they have one interface for 'Managers' and another backdoor that
gives you a root console to actually configure the darn things. Apart from
the setup to mysql, I don't think I needed to really run any command line
tools to set up myth, considering its complexity I think that is brilliant,
well done.


What I find confusing, is that mytharchive settings are not where I would
expect them. Perhaps,,,, maybe what should be done, IF a complete re-write
is done, and this would break all of the themes I am sure, maybe on the
front screen to myth, we should be able to press a menu button, then from
this menu, select 'expert' or 'configuration' mode. This could optionally be
pin coded for the paranoid like me. When I view the main screen now there
will be a new setup option, allowing me to configure how things look
(appearance)
When I go into 'Watch TV' there would be an extra setup option that allows
me to configure tuners. When I enter 'Media Library' I would have a setup
option which allows me to specify things like storage, and auto-expire
settings. When I go to archive files, there will be an extra setup option
allowing me to specify commands for archiving, and where the temporary files
are stored.

Gareth

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay R. Ashworth"
End-users don't know, nor do they care, nor should they be required to
care -- by and large -- what part of a system which is segmented
largely for the convenience of the developers (and power users)
supplies a specific piece of functionality.

Indeed, even people who do care don't always know whether a specific
piece of functionality is supplied by front-end or back-end --
especially if they only have one machine -- and it's therefore not
obvious where to go looking for a certain setup item.

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


sarah at sarahhayes

Feb 27, 2008, 8:44 PM

Post #19 of 22 (532 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experienceissue" [In reply to]

>
> Secondly, who are we talking about 'end-users'? If we are to split users
> into system installers, and end-users, but have all the configuration in a
> single area, do we then need to consider adding pin-codes to any setup page
> that could stop the system from working? My wife ain't dumb, far from it and
> very computer literate for her job, but not giving her access to a program
> which can stop the whole system from being able to record, is a relief. She
> doesn't know any of the access details for the backend machine I have apart
> from an auto-mounted SMB share.
>
I would define an 'end-user' as a none technical person, willing of mind
but devoid of technical knowledge. i.e. they won't nor want to
understand that not all of the content available is playable by THAT
frontend (i.e. HD on an SD only machine). Just because they've told it
to record East Enders... doesn't mean to say they won't remember it did
without prompting, or that their RSS feeds have updated, or some kind
soul's added more stuff to the archive/mythvideo section. Or, as
actually happened, the sort of person who receives an automated "mail
box is full" message from their ISP... and goes nuts deleting stuff off
the laptop... and all the network drives they could find.

Yes, that's how I define an 'end-user'. Intelligent, but capable of
being dumber than a bag of hammers and twice as destructive.

For my sins and I keep harping on about it, I'd like to see tighter
integration between 'mythtv' (defined here as the main menu) and the
plugins, so that the plugins can announce "hey, new stuff... Charlie
Jade (15 shows) added, Battlestar Galactive Razor added" as a
ticker/image animation playing until your out of new stuff. Same with
recordings a "East Enders 28/02/2008 recorded". Yes, you can get to
that via system information, but parts of that should appear when the
system is idle.

In an A/V network, the ability to manage frontends, not all FE's are
created equal and the Core 2 Duo can play back stuff the MII10K can't.
So being able to make content appear/disappear for the less capable
elements would be 'nice'. This is just my irk I suspect and resultant
from a rather organic growth of the system.

Completely separate out the backend & frontend configs. Frontends are,
to my mind, interfaces, transcode/mythcommflag/mythfilldb and such are
backend jobs and should be setup in the backend setup screen. Secondly,
backend configuration should be 'somewhere' in the frontend's config
menu and it shouldn't necessitate /etc/init.d/mythbackend restart for
charges to take effect.

MythVideo could do with some different methods of sifting through a
large media store. "Favorites" would be good, as would "series" views.

The MythVideo -> Internal player handover could do with some 'tweaking'
I can see in the logs it's precaching, but all I get is a big black
nothing for several seconds (WiFi... ain't it grand?) a loading bar,
countdown or something to give an idea that the machine is doing
"something" (yes, even a spinning animation would do) EU's get panicy
and push buttons when they get a big black nothing and some of them are
quick off the mark.

_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


jon.the.wise.gdrive at gmail

Mar 6, 2008, 9:30 PM

Post #20 of 22 (383 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

On Feb 26, 2008, at 2:42 PM, jedi[at]mishnet.org wrote:

>>> Everything should be in the frontend. Perhaps have a separate
>>> "tree"
>>> with backend only stuff but have an entry point for everything.
>>> Also,
>>> a "schedule to go into effect" would be a handy thing.
>>
>> More specifically, it would help to also have the settings for the
>> master backend settings separated from the host-specific backend
>> settings.
>
> Even better... there could be a big banner that says
>
> "MASTER BACKEND"
>
> or "Slave Backend - Riffraff"
>
> or "Frontend - Riffraff"
>
> This way you could set everything from a single point.
> Also, it would be nice if there were some way to easily
> clone the frontend config to a new frontend or to sync
> them.
>

And then you could configure the entire setup from any frontend you
had access to.
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


ron at ronfrazier

Mar 7, 2008, 7:04 AM

Post #21 of 22 (372 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

> > This way you could set everything from a single point.
>
> And then you could configure the entire setup from any frontend you
> had access to.

I couldn't tell if your tone was that it would be a good or bad thing,
but if you were thinking bad (because someone could screw up the
entire setup) there's no reason you couldn't have separate passwords
for each system and require people to know the password for a system
before configuring that systems settings.

--
Ron
_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users


jon.the.wise.gdrive at gmail

Mar 9, 2008, 5:13 AM

Post #22 of 22 (353 views)
Permalink
Re: A different perspective on the "user experience issue" [In reply to]

On Mar 7, 2008, at 7:04 AM, Ronald Frazier wrote:

>>> This way you could set everything from a single point.
>>
>> And then you could configure the entire setup from any frontend you
>> had access to.
>
> I couldn't tell if your tone was that it would be a good or bad thing,
> but if you were thinking bad (because someone could screw up the
> entire setup) there's no reason you couldn't have separate passwords
> for each system and require people to know the password for a system
> before configuring that systems settings.

No, I'd say good... thinking of the innumerable amount of times I
needed to make some configuration changes that had to wait until
someone was done watching tv (I made the mistake of putting the MBE
in the living room... it was the sole FE/BE initially, and has never
gotten moved out)


_______________________________________________
mythtv-users mailing list
mythtv-users[at]mythtv.org
http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users

MythTV users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact lists@gossamer-threads.com
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.