foobar,appearance and users

Topic: foobar,appearance and users (Read 24946 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

foobar,appearance and users

2006-09-08 01:27:03

Good night/morning everybody.

I'm not angry nor disappointed or whatever. I just want to express my point of vue. I don't want to change anything or complain.

Lately, Terrestrial published some plugins and marvelous foobar configurations have widespread. It seems that people complaining about the visual aspect of foobar2000 will have to go back to their home and cry. But it raises some problems about foobar2000 it's community and maybe it's future.

Unfortunately, humanity is stricken by foolishness and the first thing that people want to see is how looks a software and not it's abilities. Just consider the number of people saying 'I won't leave winamp, my skins and visualisations' while they have a poor database with a messy structure for their files and complain to know where is this f:!$^ù* track under a sub-sub-sub-sub-sub folder. (The number of softwares created to organize music files and topics to ask how to organize one's file are suggesting this)

Moreover, a lot of people are complaining about visual styles of a software minimized 99,9% of the time for the majority of users. (that's why I love foo_title: even if the software is minimized, I have only the more important things displayed in a lovely way and I know that I still have possibility to use the main software itself to satisfy my extra needs, what we could call the 'hidden face of the iceberg')

To sum it up, I'm sure that people are expecting to have a foobar like the ones displayed on the appearence topics of major forums (Hydrogenaudio,neowin,aquasoft,hardware.fr etc..) But the step is too high:
)[/size]

Imagine two seconds:
I'm a new user and see a foobar like this:
-"wow it looks great, I will try this software"
//Reading some topics or google links
-"and everybody says that it's an audiophile software, with good plugins and really useful to manage my files, yes, I've got THE ONE, my precious.."
//Going to the main website, downloading the software and install it
//I open and:
"huh, I didn't expected that, what the hell?"
=> First case : let's go back and try another software
=> Second case: I'm really interested and accept to share some efforts

Imagine that I'm interested by the sound aspect: (25%-30% of people)
Let's see what options are offered:
Replaygain ? huh, what is it ? (one or two hours later):
"it sounds nice, I will use this" (10 hours later: the DB is scanned)
The Media Lbrary is nice, I will add my file (15-30 minutes later)
Let's see what is Advanced limiter, crossfeed etc.. (1 hour)
Read some things about Kernel streaming and asio 15 min
=> It's OK, needed some efforts but I have something really nice. Time: 2-4 hours (replaygain scanner time to add)

Imagine that I'm interested by the visual aspect: (80% (people could be interested by different aspects) )
Let's see what could be done: UI columns, OK
(download, check for a nice .fcs, hope that it is published, go under the fifth tab on the right after the second corner to import the file) (1-2hour)
"Huh, I still do not have what I wanted"
=> First case : let's go back and try another software
=> Second case : Let's try to download the good plugins

(go to the wiki, my manual, HA forum, read the first pages of some topics with 40 pages, and then discover that the first posts are outdated, read the abilities of some plugins, test them, try to tweak some little things) 2-3 hours
(Choose the option corresponding to your case)
-I don't have any cover => 1-2 hours (understand how works coverdownloader,foo run and download the good covers)
-I want a trackinfo mod code=> 1hour
-I want a title bar=> 1 hour
-I want single column playlist => 1 hour
-I want nice buttons: 15 min
etc..
-I want to organize my layout : 15 hours (joking)

=> First case : let's go back and try another software
=> Second case : Well, not perfect, but it's not thatbad
=>Third case, I still don't understand a little thing to this software, too hard
==>fourth case: I'm a perfectionist and I spend 5-6 hours to learn the titleformat script fo UI columns, 2 hours to have a nice trackinfomod panel , 3 hours for a single playlist, 3 hours for pictures needed as layouts etc..

I'm interested by the database things (40%):
Read some things about the masstagger, download and see a tutorial, understand how it works: 1 hour
Try some scripts: 15 min-2 hours
Correct my f$^ù*! incorrect tags which where perfect for my old software but are crappy: 15minutes-5hours

Just be aware of the perseverance needed to create something decent with this software.
You can do these steps in several times (it's what I did), or .. uninstall this software. I think that I reduced a lot of these steps with my manual and I'm happy to see that it helped a lot of people:

I think that the difference between the foobar of an average user and the ones showed on the appearence threads is growing with an exponential curve. And when one knows that foobar had already a 'steep learning curve', growing steeper and steeper, the learning curve is becoming a wall. While a year ago it was feasible to learn how to have a foobar like the ones on the appearence threads, now, I try to understand how new users react. Will new users have to be real bearded geeks to use foobar?

(for people wondering, it's me)

I don't have a marvelous foobar and I'm really satisfied, that's not the point, but as all other softwares are playing on the visual side, people are not accustomed to take care of the efficiency of media players, I think that the steep leraning curve is becoming too hard to learn to people to throw away the visual aspect of things and see what is beyond, foobar remains the best media player I have seen but users talking about 'bloated' softwares should consider their use of foobar before criticizing other softwares. foobar plugins are becoming bloated, modularity is still there, but uncounted options for particular plugins are making this software bloated and it's normal: modularity means a lot of options.

On top of that, developers and users are quite responsible of this, a good documentation is rarely available for plugins (foo_title has a very good documentation for example) and when you have to read 10 pages or more to discover a new function or changelog, it's quite annoying. If developers prefer using their time to develop their plugins, it's really understandable (a complete plugin without documentation could have more success than a overdocumented useless one..), but it's more amazing to see always the same people completing the wiki (Chronial, Eejadx,reglib,foosion,Pepoluan to name some (all?) of them) while other users are complaining when a newbie is asking an already asked question in a contemptuous way (hopefully other users are helping and giving hints about how to have the answer (nearly the same that those contributing to the wiki)). It's also amazing to see people grumbling when they do not find help while they could help other people with another part of their knowledge.

It's not a particularity of foobar users, but it seems that people are moaning when they have to learn without any documentation and when the have the knowledge and power to create a documentation, they do not consider that other people would need it. THEY succeeded consequently anyone could succeed without any documentation... The ability to import / export files in some plugins would really help new users.

On top of that, people using very nice strings should give more support with their files (especially for long formatting strings to enter), if entering all the little options is not necessary, uploading or posting (into the [ codebox] tags..) their code would smooth the learning curve. (topdownjimmy and Russell777 are very good examples with their numerous explained codes). Hopefully this vogue is spreading.

People posting marvelous configs are likely to be proud of their code, publishing it would make their code popular and add pride to their inventors.

That's how I see the foobar community, I just hope that foobar users be aware of how they are behaving and that this post won't be polluted with trolls or similar things (even if I have inserted controversial things to start constructive discussions) as I spent more than two hours to write it.

Sorry for my grammar and spelling, the hour and my english did not help

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #1 – 2006-09-08 05:06:50

Well-spoke. As a new user, I can verify that this program is, at times, a PAIN IN THE ASS to learn. I love it, so I kept at it, but I think the forum could definitely make the stickies more prominent. Too many users (somewhat including myself) spent far too much time searching through the forum, when the wiki was much better suited to answer the questions. Or, some might say worse, they create a thread that has been answered in the wiki or even already in the forum, making the forum even harder to weed through. Make the stickies a bigger font; make them annoyingly big. 'External foobar2000 resources'? Why don't you just say what it is, 'Link to VERY helpful foobar2000 wiki' I don't know, I'm just a newbie, but that's my two cents.

Also, I think this is as appropriate of a time as any to say thanks to you, Bachi-Bouzouk and Brother-John for making the great tutorials, and to all that had a part in creating foobar2000 and its wiki. best audio player software, bar none.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #2 – 2006-09-08 05:19:17

I guess this is all predicated on the idea that FB2K has, as a goal, attracting the mainstream computer user and music listener who wants an audio player.

Does it? I always figured the developers had nothing against keeping a small, dedicated, but niche community using it. Almost all the development decisions up to this point have not been aimed at user-friendliness:

- Major versions usually break old configuration settings and components.
- The player is totally reliant on third parties for visual appeal sort of plugins.
- The recent ID3v2 debacle (although I guess this compromise is conceded in the latest beta.)
- Lots of unpopular changes made due to overall vision, without approval or consultation of users.
- General refusal to compromise the player's minimalism and functionality for feature requests.
- No internationalization or translation.
- Etc, etc, etc.

Looking at this list, I don't think that the developers are stupid, and don't know what new users would like and what would attract more people to the player. I think they just want to be able to write what they see as a very good quality audio player without worrying about whether or not it happens to be user-friendly. I suspect they could give two shits if ten million or ten thousand people use FB2K, and so I doubt many suggestions here will be paid much heed.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #3 – 2006-09-08 05:23:59

Just read your posting hastily, sorry, I didn't see what your point exactly is... Few thoughts.
In the real world, I have understood foobar2000 is a very geekish software if you see a) the computer knowledge on the one hand and otoh b) what the people want. "Hey, how can I change the color of element x/y easily" "Erm, easily?" Those moments are eye openers for me, then I realise fb2k is not as easy as I expected...
All people I know are too far away from this player... I'm not recommending fb2k to anybody, my opinion is, if someone wants a toolbox like fb2k and if someone is interested in such technical details like rg, mp3 rebuilding, the tagging, support of millions of formats etc... Then he'll find fb2k by himself. And we all know "it's the best player, best sound" is all childish fan boy crap. Probably the same people who claim they could abx cinch audio cables. So I give friends and relatives winamp, as this fits their needs and as better understandable for them.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #4 – 2006-09-08 05:44:50

Its true this program is complex and has a steep learning curve, however I think its safe to just refer everyone new to this particular website (not even Wiki!) which was made by an HA/Foobar user Foobar: A QuickStart. Really, if someone new started out and went thru that guide instead, I think you'd be up and running in like 2-3 hours. (first time), [took me about 6-7 hours without documentation]

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #5 – 2006-09-08 13:42:56

Quote from: mquander on 2006-09-08 05:19:17

I guess this is all predicated on the idea that FB2K has, as a goal, attracting the mainstream computer user and music listener who wants an audio player.

No, foobar is very likely to remain a "difficult" software not for the average user. But the problem is that even for interested people, it becomes quite hard to get interested in foobar2000 because of it's growing complexity (with 3rd party plugins, the core hasn't changed that much for basic users). I took the boat with 0.8.3 version, but now, I don't know how new users know where to start to learn something with this program. Until recently, you could have something efficient in some hours with few steps, now I'm perplex.

What made me love this program was to learn how it works progressively, I didn't have to know anything about titleformatting until I decided to write some code and didn't have to see a single lign of code. That's not the case anymore.

Quote

I suspect they could give two shits if ten million or ten thousand people use FB2K, and so I doubt many suggestions here will be paid much heed.

And if there is only one thousand people using it? The interest of foobar is its community producting plugins. But if there is no new users, there won't be new developers to be interested anymore in developing plugins. foobar still have to maintain a community with new users and people leaving this community, what we could call a turnover.

Quote from: iOsiris on 2006-09-08 05:44:50

(not even Wiki!) which was made by an HA/Foobar user Foobar: A QuickStart.

I wrote it and I'm happy to see that it helped.. The new version is here: http://eolindel.free.fr/foobar0.9/index.shtml

For the wiki, Really interesting pages have grown there and could only be there such as the plugin list, the titleformat reference and it seems that with 0.9, people got a little more interested in it. For example, I just add to suggest to write a wiki page for the trackinfomod page and Fofr, swing and few others wrote it

@ Squeller The problem is that it would be better to suggest winamp and foobar, give hints to your/our friends and know that if people are interested in it, they could search and learn progressivily how to use foobar and be happy with it .. or see that winamp is a good program for their needs and that they don't need to spend efforts in foobar2000.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #6 – 2006-09-08 15:13:37

Well I personaly think that it's quite essential to help the beginers,b/c every one has been one himself
(maybe a long time ago or maybe not).I myself started using foobar b/c of it's superior sound and it's
abilities,i didn't care about the looks at all.But hey,i think it's a human nature to try to make things that are
already good even better it's an evolution process,so i thought why not make it more more comfortable
to use?That's where i got my "?" sign.And i must say that without help from this forum's users i wouldn't
been able to put the puzzle pieces together .The wiki and guides had grown very well over the last time,
but it will never be able to cover all the issues and questions of a beginner (unless it will be issued
as encyclopedia).So i believe that it's a duty of every experienced foobar user to help the ones who've
only started.I personaly get alots of PM's in which people keep asking the same questions (that had been
answered 1000 times before in recent posts) all over again and i can assure you that i've answered
every single one of them,even though it sometimes start to drive me mad.
Sure it's very hard to navigate in todays foobar's configs and secrets,but i believe that people looking
for "shortcuts" just don't use that kind of software.Bottom line:if you want something badly you can get it,
it's only a question of your determination.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #7 – 2006-09-08 15:45:27

I'm quite happy with foobar being made for the technical elite - otherwise we dumb it down, thus destroying why I use foobar in the first place. Here's my hint to people: When reccomending software to a non-geek, show them Winamp, guide them through it quickly. They'll be able to run it easily and happily. If they want something more, and are more technically-minded, step them through getting a nice foobar. That's what I do.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #8 – 2006-09-08 16:31:01

One thing I would recommend is that a new user be patient enough to spend 2 weeks or a month getting to know the program before adding the complexity of an alternate UI. This will also prevent the new user from confusing the features of the program with those of the alt UI.

An alternate UI can reduce the functionality of foobar2000, until the user learns to replicate the features in the alt UI (drag & drop for instance). A new user would not know this & would assume the feature is not available, especially if they spend the first few weeks of using the program configuring album art or lyrics rather than getting to know, say, the context menu preferences or the masstagger.

As a new-ish user (~6 months now), one thing that I initially found very frustrating was the foo_uie_feature vs. foo_feature situation. Yet it did not take very long at all to learn to make the distinction, certainly not hours. Perhaps I was a slightly more advanced beginner than the potential users the OP describes. Finding information was no more difficult than any other use of a search engine.

In my experience, those users also find winamp too difficult to use because they are not interested in preferences (the "just works" crowd), in which case they gravitate towards a player whose default settings most resemble what they think they need. If a feature is not indicated by a large button, they will say the feature does not exist. I don't wish to be unfair or judgemental, but this is something I've noticed even when trying to direct people to use features of "just works" software.

edit:typo

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #9 – 2006-09-08 17:17:56

Quote from: Bachi-Bouzouk on 2006-09-08 13:42:56

the problem is that even for interested people, it becomes quite hard to get interested in foobar2000 because of it's growing complexity (with 3rd party plugins, the core hasn't changed that much for basic users). I took the boat with 0.8.3 version, but now, I don't know how new users know where to start to learn something with this program. Until recently, you could have something efficient in some hours with few steps, now I'm perplex.

I also started using Foobar on version 0.7 (iirc), but I am still using 0.8.3 because I don't want to spend the same amount of time adapting it to my tastes (maybe I am getting older).

The solution I'd like to see is that some clever foobar user packed *his* customized foobar2000 with another nsis installer and I could install his version without learning its expertise.

btw Russell777, there's no need to press 'enter' at the end of each line

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #10 – 2006-09-08 17:56:17

Two comments on foobar:

1. I love music and find it much more suitable for my listening tastes.

2. The organization of foobar is lacking, almost to the point of making it unusable, unless the user has the time and skill to delve into it. The disorganization is most glaring in the simultaneous existence and discussion of multiple versions along with their sometimes different components. This is very confusing.

It would help greatly if the Forum simply created a Foobar version 8 section, and a Foobar version 9 section with postings that relate to each product/version.

Without some structure you will lose those like me first, and eventually more as it becomes more cumbersome. That would be a shame because it's great.

Tom

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #11 – 2006-09-08 18:29:12

This is a reply to Bachi. I agree, the hoops that we have to jump through is just daunting, but for me and many others, it was worth it. If we could have information in the wiki or in the manual instead of having to search forums, it would be a lot easier. Your manual goes a long way in making the newcomers familiar to foobar. i appreciate your effort.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #12 – 2006-09-08 18:43:55

slightly off-topic

well..

I'm a bearded geek and i love using foobar

nice to see my buttons in that photo too

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #13 – 2006-09-08 18:45:46

@mai9: Problem is, just what kind of customizations do you want? It may be too customized, not enough customized, or customized differently.

Or... start a foobar customization service! Have people send you what they want their foobar to look like... and after they pay the consultation fee, send them the Zipper/RARed/7Zed directory of foobar to them

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #14 – 2006-09-08 19:39:43

I could not agree more with the starter of this thread's point of view. The difficulty for a new user to get started with foobar is a serious problem which really should be addressed because it ultimatley causes substantial harm to the popularity of foobar, which thereby limits third party development and advancement of foobar.

It is a real shame because this issue could be rather easily resolved. What I suggest is somone create an archive of a new user package, which can include several popular .fcs files for the the default and columns UI, corresponding popular optional components, several alternative buttons, and instructions on how to use and install the same. Everthing that is needed has already been created. It only needs to be packaged in a convenient and easy to use form.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #15 – 2006-09-08 19:46:41

I'm totlay agree with Stuart:I would go even further and create a section of this forum called "custom configs"
where people could upload their whole foobar 2000 directories including plugins, .CFG file and evrything else
as ready for use configs that could be easily pasted over a fresh foobar 2000 installation,and from where the
begining users could start,till they learn all the stuff and are able to create their own configs.
Like a "kindergarden" if you want.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #16 – 2006-09-08 19:57:43

It's true that a special "custom forum" could have some use , but as the development of plugins is linked to the appearence of foobar thanks to these plugins it's quite problematic.

About prepackaged installators, it has been discussed already if I remember.
The problem is with the main program: does the license allow this? moderation: no, it does not and last but not least, is there someone with the will and skills to create such a complex installator ? (as knowing which plugins to put, what will happen with updates, how to create a nice text, both short and understandable about the process to install plugins etc..)

But someone already did something like that here with some success:
moderation: TOS #9 violation - link removed (french link)

edit: edit about the custom section

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #17 – 2006-09-08 20:18:08

Quote from: Bachi-Bouzouk on 2006-09-08 19:57:43

The problem is with the main program: does the license allow this?

It doesn't. To quote the relevant part of the license:

Quote

Redistribution of modified binaries or modified setup packages allowed only with prior written permission of the author.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #18 – 2006-09-08 21:01:48

Quote from: Bachi-Bouzouk on 2006-09-08 19:57:43

It's true that a special "custom forum" could have some use , but as the development of plugins is linked to the appearence of foobar thanks to these plugins it's quite problematic.

About prepackaged installators, it has been discussed already if I remember.
The problem is with the main program: does the license allow this? and last but not least, is there someone with the will and skills to create such a complex installator ? (as knowing which plugins to put, what will happen with updates, how to create a nice text, both short and understandable about the process to install plugins etc..)

But someone already did something like that here with some success:
link removed by moderation (french link)

edit: edit about the custom section

I'm not talking about custom installer,but about thw whole "foobar2000" directory,that will do the work of
installer while not violating the license agreement (only the cfg file +the plugins)

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #19 – 2006-09-08 21:23:04

Quote

I'm not talking about custom installer,but about thw whole "foobar2000" directory,that will do the work of
installer while not violating the license agreement (only the cfg file +the plugins)

Sorry this off-topic from the main thread, but the CFG file contains the users Audioscrobbler login name and password. I can foresee people forgetting to remove their AS info before giving someone their CFG; It happened to me, luckily I didn't send it to a malicious person. Otherwise, you have a good idea.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #20 – 2006-09-08 21:34:25

Yes,sure it's a part of a person who's sharing to take care of these things and it can be discussed on and on,i'm just saying that the beginners deserve some starting point

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #21 – 2006-09-08 22:51:11

Quote from: pepoluan on 2006-09-08 18:45:46

@mai9: Problem is, just what kind of customizations do you want? It may be too customized, not enough customized, or customized differently.

Or... start a foobar customization service! Have people send you what they want their foobar to look like... and after they pay the consultation fee, send them the Zipper/RARed/7Zed directory of foobar to them

The point is not what customizations I or others want. The point is to have a nsis file that compiles the installation. If I don't like one customization I can try another one. posting the installed foobar folder zipped could be a good start

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #22 – 2006-09-09 00:54:33

Quote from: mai9 on 2006-09-08 22:51:11

The point is not what customizations I or others want. The point is to have a nsis file that compiles the installation. If I don't like one customization I can try another one. posting the installed foobar folder zipped could be a good start

That's waaaaay to big. Better to just post one's (cleaned-up) .cfg file, and a list of plugins he/she uses (with URLs).

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #23 – 2006-09-09 02:16:54

I think the titleformatting is the most difficult part for new users to grasp if they don't have some kind of programming experience. I've always thought a sub-forum dedicated to all things involving titleformatting would be a good idea. I don't need it so much myself, but adding another degree of organization to this forum might help others that do need it. While keeping the other sub-forums less obfuscated.

I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. Maybe that's what the Support sub-forum is already for.

Just my two cents.

foobar,appearance and users

Reply #24 – 2006-09-09 02:38:45

IMO, title formatting is dead simple. Yeah, there are some really complex tricks you can do, but "%artist% - %title%" is easily intuitively understood, especially when you can see the output. I might not be the average user, but I liked it when I first came across it in in_vorbis back when it was new. Within an hour of the first version of foobar2000 I used, I had my title formatting just the way I liked it.

As for .cfg files, it would be so nice if they were externally parsable. .ini would be nice, but Peter doesn't seem to agree. He seems to like to keep the .cfg closed. If it was externally parsable, you'd be able to do neat tricks like export parts of it, import parts, etc. It would make things much more elegant.

If .cfg files were able to be manipulated directly by third-party programs, this whole configuration issue becomes moot. Even I have the skill to write a simple program to manipulate .ini files. It would be dead simple to swap complex foobar configurations without running into security issues like foosic/last.fm passwords, system-specific configuration, and the like.

The best way to solve this problem is simple: Keep bugging Peter to open the .cfg file format.

Notice