Artist-Wikipedia

You are missing a feature or need an enhancement? Post your suggestion here!
Post Reply
grebda
Posts: 53
Joined: 21 Apr 2012 14:03
Artist-Wikipedia

Post by grebda »

Hi, do you plan to function when I click on that song in the playlist, so that I open a window where it will be a description on wikipedia. thank you
PS: Sorry for my bad english
SORRY FOR MY VERY BAD ENGLISH !! :-( :-(
User avatar
Adger
Posts: 122
Joined: 10 Apr 2012 20:09
Location: Germany
Re: Artist-Wikipedia

Post by Adger »

Although I consider this idea as a basically useful one, I have several issues with that:

- WHICH wikipedia? German? English? French?
- WHY wikipedia? Why no other source?
- What if Wikipedia (or any other source in use) changes the <form>-syntax in use to query the website's database?
- WHERE to open the page? Within the internal PFOA-browser? Within the default system browser? How to decide that? I bet half of the users would prefer the internal browser, the other half an external browser and some of both groups would like yet another way not mentioned here.
- WHY an external source? Wouldn't some kind of internal database be more useful? Something like the per song based moderator text that would be based on the artist or portions of the "artist field" in the song tag? On the other hand: Perhaps this "external solution" might be useful for a fallback...

I really like the idea. It is something to think about. On the other hand I doubt that there is "simple way" to make the artist-field a link to Wikipedia.
User avatar
Adger
Posts: 122
Joined: 10 Apr 2012 20:09
Location: Germany
Re: Artist-Wikipedia

Post by Adger »

Okay... great thing, really!


Alas: Features like these (and the way to invoke them) to me feel like being hidden away from the user. Too many SpaceCadetKeyboard'ish / emacs-like commands that make handling the software way too overly complicated where there is no need to - not just in my oppinion.

The other day I was over at the Radio/TV production house that is seriously interested in hiring me. They asked me about what software I am using for my little project. I told them about PFOA and how much I love the system and it's features and strongly suggested them to give it a try. They did. Today I was over at their place again and asked for a verdict. This is what THEY said.

The Crew (boss, the tech-guy and a moderator) who I was conferencing with said (verbatim quotes):
* "Who does the designer have in mind? Somebody with a masters degree in learning magic tricks?"
* "Installing the software for the first time was like 'WAT? Install and start, goddamnit!'"
* "I have to know HOW many keyboard commands?! Are you kidding me? Where are the pulldown menus for this? Where are the buttons for this?"
* "First thing i'd request the designer to integrate is a search engine to locate functions in the interface!"
* "This thing feels very powerful, but honestly, who has the time to study the basics of some tool for like two weeks to get things running?"

I was like... well... I honestly felt an urge to defend the software. I showed them around, demonstrated things I knew from the top of my head. They certainly were impressed by what PFOA could do. When it came to the more advanced stuff - that I agree to lack almost every knowledge about, like "containers" and "scheduler" - we had to consult the manual or take educated guesses. Some features we managed to get working, some 50/50, others we totally failed to get anywhere near we wanted them.

After about an hour those guys, who are no newbies by any means, were everything but convinced regarding PFOA.

The tech-guy (who really is a nerd) said: "We will never be able to teach our crew how to use this thing properly without a 50 page handout with detailed screenshots and comments. The software is able to do lots and lots of stuff, some of that is really outstanding. It just is not usable with an interface like this. Looking for functions makes you feel like an idiot and learning basic things is a matter of guesswork and simply off the established standards."

The boss said: "This software has some serious potential. I'd love to see it advancing. But to get this thingy off the ground the designing studio needs to look at the interface and it's use from the viewpoint of a user with NO basic knowledge about the software at all. The software must be operatable without a ton of printed documentation on your desk. Moderators can talk. They rarely understand concepts like "meta-keys". Asking them to code is off the chart. As long as they can't make the system basically load your songs and play them somewhere with a maximum of two clicks without reading 300 pages of documentation, they are doing things wrong. Think "Winamp" or "iTunes"."

The radio-crew-girl (who runs a daily show on FM) said: "If I come in at 5am in the morning, half awake, and would need to handle a software that makes me feel like doing open heart surgery, like this thingy, it would not help me, but add to my stress. I need assistance, not burden."

No idea if that helps you in any way, Bernd, but your reply to that tiny search-function to me sounds like "Oh, you just need to press some obscure control-key and click at some magic spot and then miracles will happen..." That is EXACTLY what those fine folks I met (today) totally drove away from PFOA.

Still: I believe in your product and will continue to use - and promote - it.
User avatar
radio42
Site Admin
Posts: 8295
Joined: 05 Apr 2012 16:26
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Contact:
Re: Artist-Wikipedia

Post by radio42 »

The request is already possible today!
Within the DJ PLayer, Playlist info panel etc. make a double-click on the Trackname (resp. Artist name) field while holding down the CTRL key.
This will invike a search within the integrated web-browser to search for that 'Artist'.

In the Web-Browser itself you might select the 'search service' to use (by clicking on the magnifier icon). Available search service you can choose from are:
- Google
- Google-Images
- Discogs
- Wikipedia
- Music.Msn
- Music.Aol
User avatar
radio42
Site Admin
Posts: 8295
Joined: 05 Apr 2012 16:26
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Contact:
Re: Artist-Wikipedia

Post by radio42 »

Thanks for your comments, they are well appreciated.
But some of them are not rather fair and might just be a matter of 'how you are working with it".
Almost ALL functions and features do have a related button and context-menu entry - so there is typically no need to know special keyboard commands.
The 'search' feature we discussed here is may be the only exception.

And the presence of appropriate keyboard shortcuts are just there for convenience - as said, you can reach almost all functions via direct buttons or context-menus.
And to compare a radio automation software and its complexity with iTunes or Winamp (especially when talking with a FM station) really makes me wonder.
What system are they currently using?

It is also often a matter of arbitrary fear: users who have used a certain system for a long time are wondering, why a new system doesn't use the exact same buttons, layout or shortcuts their old system is using - meaning, they are affraid to learn something new.

Of course, when it comes to the more advanced things, like setting up complex mixer settings and routings, complex program, scheduler or script setups etc. you need some knowledge. But these things are typically one-off initial setup issues (which no moderator would/should ever care about) - and yes, I agree, that the user manual is still lacking several chapters!
In adidition is a FM station typically using extra hardware controllers to operate their most typical tasks - this is also just an initial setup issue no ordenary moderator would ever be doing.

General comments like: "learning magic tricks" or "HOW many keyboard commands" etc. doesn't help out much.
If you need certain extra 'Buttons' or 'Wizards' - just let me know what EXACTLY is missing or what EXACTLY you think can be achieved more easy!
If I know precisely what 'day-to-day tasks' you feel are to complicated to operate, what shortcut button or menu is missing - just let me know - I guess adding them should be almost no work.

So lets take this as an opportunity and tell me what is too complicated for you to work with.
User avatar
Adger
Posts: 122
Joined: 10 Apr 2012 20:09
Location: Germany
Re: Artist-Wikipedia

Post by Adger »

I really love PFOA and to me "finding out how things work" is not time critical mission. If it takes me a week or two to find out how something works - that's fine to me. I am not earning money by using PFOA. But it is not only said "search"-feature that feels like being "hidden away". It's many many seemingly small things that are not obvious.

I could write pages and pages about my user experience and how the learning curve felt like and still feels sometimes. I doubt that this would lead anywhere but to a pointless discussion that in the end makes both of us feel bad. If PFOA was my "baby" and I wanted to make it THE system to be used everywhere around the world, I would try to get hold on... don't know... three users or four that don't know anything about PFOA but something about streaming or running a radio-system. I would confront them with the software from installation to running it. I wouldn't help them, but watch them what they are doing and where and why they get stuck. I would ask them what they expected when they did something. Local university would be my place to ask for such volunteers. I would survey my existing userbase about usability feedback, learning curves, difficulties and whatever. And I would contact somebody professional in human interface design and ask her for detailed feedback. Yes, this might cost some money. Yes, this would take time. Yes, it would seriously help you advancing the software.

As I said: I love PFOA. Period.
I consider it superior to anything else I have seen so far, and I have seen a lot. But it took me half a year to get to the point of half way knowing my way around and there still are large white areas on the map of "how to make PFOA do this or that". I seriously doubt that any studio / radio station would invest this time and that is in the end what I was told in other words the other day by the people who are making a living from "making radio".
Farbo
Posts: 349
Joined: 11 Apr 2012 15:04
Re: Artist-Wikipedia

Post by Farbo »

I have to agree in some things with Adger. Besides fact some things are kind of "hidden away" I also forget how to set some things after a while when not using it or changing. PF has many many possibilities and I get lost sometimes in them. But everybody can choose which settings to use and which setting suite mostly to his needs.
Peter
User avatar
radio42
Site Admin
Posts: 8295
Joined: 05 Apr 2012 16:26
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Contact:
Re: Artist-Wikipedia

Post by radio42 »

I would survey my existing userbase about usability feedback, learning curves, difficulties and whatever...
That was exactly the intention with my previous post!
And that is what I am trying to do.
And that's why I would like to get more details, as general 'things are sometimes hidden' or 'I can not rember certain things' doesn't help me at all.
I'd like to listen and optimize things, but I need some concrete details....things you do very often, but find complex.
Things which would ease your work...but as said, concrete examples are needed.
User avatar
Adger
Posts: 122
Joined: 10 Apr 2012 20:09
Location: Germany
Re: Artist-Wikipedia

Post by Adger »

I prommise to try to compile some useful text for you.

Post Reply