@cayars said:
…
What I’m referring to is little things that to many are half done. One example is negative filtering of libraries. The code needed to add this to what is already there (positive filtering) is minimal by any standard and would greatly expand the use of the software. Sure 80%+ of the users can get by with the way it is, but is achieving 80% something you are proud of when for a smudge more work it could be very powerful?
Thank you!! I knew there was something else that I brought up during that first video conference but my old brain could not recall what it was. It was that as well as multiple filters in the clients.
I want and would use that and I also have several friends that have asked for it. It is NOT a fringe request although there could well be many users that are not aware that there is that possibility. People not versed in math often do not think in terms of filters within filters within filters. My experience is that people will use and understand those kind of tools if they are available in the system they are using but they will not be aware of what they are missing unless they are exposed to it.
To put in simply: I want, in the clients, to be able to say "show me all my movies that are (action or adventure) but not (science fiction or horror). That would include “The African Queen” but exclude “Aliens.”
Another example is that I might want all movies that are (Science fiction) but not ( action or adventure). That would get “Silent Running” but not “Forbidden Planet.”
That kind of thing is most valuable for larger libraries but it would have value for most any sized library.
That has neither been discussed nor implemented.
I also brought up how hard it is (how many keystrokes it takes as well as how much time is wasted in reloads between selections) to select a genera and the sort by something other than the default. Again there has been zero progress in that direction.
Statements like “We are working on it” or “It is on our road map” only have meaning if something is actually seen to be happening.
As near as my old brain can recall not one (none) of the features discussed in that first conference has come to fruition. That in spite of the promises and assurances.
That is why I (and I think a more inclusive we) are quite skeptical of any promises that Plex makes. There is and old saying that goes, “Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.” Plex has fooled me several times into believing that something was coming or something was being worked on. They will no longer get that “benefit of a doubt.”
It is their product not mine and it is their right to develop it in any way they please and they can throw all the cotton candy (features that lack use or substance) at their user base as much as they please. BUT I will continue to harp on what I think is important. At least I have the satisfaction of knowing I am being ignored by the makers of, what is for now, the best too for my media there is.
But Plex needs to be aware that there are a LOT of neophyte programmers out there and it is not unlikely that one or more of them could decide that neither Plex or EMBY are meeting what the users need and there could be, rather suddenly, a new system out there and it might actually be more appealing rather quickly.
Plex, if you continue to address problems that don’t exist and continue to introduce features that are of VERY limited use to most and mislead your customers into think that a feature is ready when it is not even close then you can expect, in the future, to have your user base decline suddenly and dramatically when that, or those, hotshot programmer(s) enter the market. It will not take even a superior product just a product that does the basics mostly as well as you do and has the extras people here have been asking for.
The problem with an effective monopoly like Plex has (EMBY is not real competition) is that it is so easy to fall into the abyss and if Plex looks they could find that the edge is very near.
