4 ms·

Perhaps Windows would be a problem, but I've been using a Mac Mini in this fashion for 3 years now, and have never once been interrupted by OSX. Would you at l

by tmuir 12y ago

Perhaps Windows would be a problem, but I've been using a Mac Mini in this fashion for 3 years now, and have never once been interrupted by OSX. Would you at least concede that everything else being equal, there is no faster input to start media than with a mouse? Every TV/Set Top remote interface I've ever used requires at least 3x the steps of the equivalent with a mouse, because you have a D-Pad. Maybe DVD players are even, but any menu based system is crippled by design, because you cant scroll or point.

freehunter 12y ago
But I don't want to point. That's far too interactive for any media player design. Even PC-based things like Winamp, iTunes, or Windows Media player, it's just a list or at best, a grid. I don't need to have more than eight directions of movement, and just four is sufficient. If I'm going through a list with a mouse cursor, there's a chance I can move the cursor off that list, necessitating that I have to then move the cursor back to the list before making my selection. That's just poor UX. A mouse is completely unnecessary when you just have a grid or a list, a directional pad is more than sufficient. You can scroll just by going to the bottom of the list and continuing to go past that, which is how all menus work. It's not about how many steps it takes with a remote vs a mouse, it's about the UX of that specific UI. I don't want a desk in front of my couch. That's what remotes solve. I have a computer in my office and a media player in my living room, and I don't want to trade that for anything. Can media player UIs be improved? Yep. With a mouse? Not in my opinion.
- tmuir 12y ago
  Too interactive? That's like saying a type of food is too healthy. Pointing is essentially random access. It's the difference between RAM and cassette tapes. Why punish me for having lots of content? It is _completely_ about how many steps it takes.
  - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
    Sure you can be too interactive. Consider paying by card, sliding the card thru the machine, then it prompts. 1 prompt, ok. 2, hm, 3 or more - get out of my face! It can go the other way too. UI is there to get out of your way. Lesser clicks is ok; but not at the expense of too many option, because I have to think about options. Like the gas pump that asks if I want a car wash. Wha? How did car washes get into the conversation?
  - freehunter 12y ago
    For certain definitions of healthy, food can certainly be too healthy. You wouldn't want to live off celery and iceberg lettuce, even though they are low fat, low carb, and high in fiber. Likewise, things can be too interactive. No one seriously looks at a car and says "if only I could turn my front wheels a complete 360 degrees." It's only safe to turn them a few degrees in each direction most of them time. Sure that might mean you need to put the car in reverse and try again, but at least you don't need to worry about getting yourself into unexpected situations like starting off with your wheels pointed straight (but straight behind you). However, I have seen some specialty vehicles (like some trucks, semi trucks, and forklifts) where these rules don't apply or only weakly apply. I'm happy you have the options you want. I also have the options I want. I don't want a mouse to navigate my media player, and I can't agree that the mouse is the best option for that use. A mouse is great for navigating a web page where the links are scattered everywhere or through a document where you might need to click at any point to begin editing, but for structured lists, even on a computer, I navigate with the arrow keys (and occasionally pgup/pgdn/home/endm giving me an 8-way d-pad). My list is straight up and down and straight side to side, I don't need to go 10 degrees up and to the right. I use an iPhone and iPad because I don't want to dick around with file structure and patching and rooting and rom'ing. I use a Roku because I don't want to organize my own content and make my own media player. I get enough of all of that when I'm working.
Fuzzwah 12y ago
I use XBMC running on an R-Pi and control it with a cheap "media center" remote control [1]. While it does include a "mouse function" via a kind of d-pad I've only ever had to use it a handful of times to do things which are so rare I haven't bothered to bind a button to them; ie: force a video to a certain aspect ratio because it was encoded badly. For the 99.9% of interactions with the system the remote is superior to a mouse. 1: http://www.amazon.com/Ortek-Windows-Infrared-Receiver-Ultimate/dp/B00224ZDFY http://www.amazon.com/Ortek-Windows-Infrared-Receiver-Ultima...

by tmuir 12y ago

freehunter 12y ago

But I don't want to point. That's far too interactive for any media player design. Even PC-based things like Winamp, iTunes, or Windows Media player, it's just a list or at best, a grid. I don't need to have more than eight directions of movement, and just four is sufficient. If I'm going through a list with a mouse cursor, there's a chance I can move the cursor off that list, necessitating that I have to then move the cursor back to the list before making my selection. That's just poor UX. A mouse is completely unnecessary when you just have a grid or a list, a directional pad is more than sufficient. You can scroll just by going to the bottom of the list and continuing to go past that, which is how all menus work. It's not about how many steps it takes with a remote vs a mouse, it's about the UX of that specific UI. I don't want a desk in front of my couch. That's what remotes solve. I have a computer in my office and a media player in my living room, and I don't want to trade that for anything. Can media player UIs be improved? Yep. With a mouse? Not in my opinion.

tmuir 12y ago
Too interactive? That's like saying a type of food is too healthy. Pointing is essentially random access. It's the difference between RAM and cassette tapes. Why punish me for having lots of content? It is _completely_ about how many steps it takes.
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  Sure you can be too interactive. Consider paying by card, sliding the card thru the machine, then it prompts. 1 prompt, ok. 2, hm, 3 or more - get out of my face! It can go the other way too. UI is there to get out of your way. Lesser clicks is ok; but not at the expense of too many option, because I have to think about options. Like the gas pump that asks if I want a car wash. Wha? How did car washes get into the conversation?
- freehunter 12y ago
  For certain definitions of healthy, food can certainly be too healthy. You wouldn't want to live off celery and iceberg lettuce, even though they are low fat, low carb, and high in fiber. Likewise, things can be too interactive. No one seriously looks at a car and says "if only I could turn my front wheels a complete 360 degrees." It's only safe to turn them a few degrees in each direction most of them time. Sure that might mean you need to put the car in reverse and try again, but at least you don't need to worry about getting yourself into unexpected situations like starting off with your wheels pointed straight (but straight behind you). However, I have seen some specialty vehicles (like some trucks, semi trucks, and forklifts) where these rules don't apply or only weakly apply. I'm happy you have the options you want. I also have the options I want. I don't want a mouse to navigate my media player, and I can't agree that the mouse is the best option for that use. A mouse is great for navigating a web page where the links are scattered everywhere or through a document where you might need to click at any point to begin editing, but for structured lists, even on a computer, I navigate with the arrow keys (and occasionally pgup/pgdn/home/endm giving me an 8-way d-pad). My list is straight up and down and straight side to side, I don't need to go 10 degrees up and to the right. I use an iPhone and iPad because I don't want to dick around with file structure and patching and rooting and rom'ing. I use a Roku because I don't want to organize my own content and make my own media player. I get enough of all of that when I'm working.

Fuzzwah 12y ago

I use XBMC running on an R-Pi and control it with a cheap "media center" remote control [1]. While it does include a "mouse function" via a kind of d-pad I've only ever had to use it a handful of times to do things which are so rare I haven't bothered to bind a button to them; ie: force a video to a certain aspect ratio because it was encoded badly. For the 99.9% of interactions with the system the remote is superior to a mouse. 1: http://www.amazon.com/Ortek-Windows-Infrared-Receiver-Ultimate/dp/B00224ZDFY http://www.amazon.com/Ortek-Windows-Infrared-Receiver-Ultima...