Re: WMP11 on XP - Library tags for Videos: Actors, Studio, Directo


"Dale" <dale0973@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:DB5214A3-CED7-470E-811C-ACCA7F718246@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"zachd [MSFT]" wrote:
"Dale" <dale0973@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:00204158-7F66-47F2-86EF-06AC987F3CF4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Feel free to name one of those other arenas. I would be happy to consider
moving my efforts to those arenas.

If you're not able to work well with me, why would I want to send you to
anyone else's outpost? That doesn't seem fair to them. =)

To be clear, I wouldn't do that regardless - I would consider it selling
someone out - but I don't know if there's any rationale for pointing people
elsewhere. Most of the interesting stuff isn't online, anyways. As regards
people that are online, I've never ratted anyone out, and I never will.
They're happy in the communities they're involved with, and it's of
extremely higher value for those communities to organically grow than to
find their presence an irritant, as mine is here *to you*.

So, while the rest of Microsoft pushes newsgroups as community, you're
saying that the Windows Media Player product team has no regard for the
community that Microsoft has promoted?

I'm pretty unaware of the WMP team pushing the newsgroups in any notable
fashion. I may have missed that.

Newsgroups are cool. Getting value in them for time invested is difficult.
Simplifying that process is really necessary. Community involvement is a
huge and interesting field with tons of different answers.

Apparently you need to talk to the Internet Explorer team, the Windows XP
team, the Windows Vista team, and the Microsoft Office team. All of those
teams participate in the newsgroups and take suggestions from their
users/communities via the newsgroups.

Different teams, different priorites.

so your parent org
disagrees with you. All of these much bigger communities find newsgroups
a
useful tool for their communities. Do you know more than all of them?

I don't speak for anyone. Get used to that. =)

But I have asked repeatedly for interesting pieces of information, like
quantification and repro steps. That's where things get to be of value.
There's really very little interesting that's happening here. I mean,
really now... =)

I have stated this many times. You, as usual, choose to ignore the facts
and respond by rambling meaninglessly.

That's only because I'm scared inside. My pet tiger Hobbes protects me,
though.

That's more a factor of finite resources for infinite possibilities, as
opposed to anything else. If you shirk off playback pipeline issues in
favor of what boils down to Pretty (if awesome), that will impair you
more
further down the line than vice versa.

You should listen to yourself sometimes, Zach.

I do, actually - I've put out 2 albums, and there's actually a remix album,
"zachotron".


It's a bug fix to make it 200 x 200 like it's supposed to be. Making it all
magically work at every size is a great and interesting project. The code
expects 200 x 200. Changing a few entry points that accidentally allowed
non-200x200 is the far simpler task.

You ignored the point that this work has to come from somewhere else that
gets shafted in turn. If you don't address that, you just lose. There's
not even an argument. The call was clearly made during the development
process: album art handling loses to other priorities. *shrug* You have
the player in front of you. Clearly that was the case.

All of that said, last week's answer was that there was a technical
limitation based on compatibility with some unidentified and possibly
antiquated portable device. Now, this week, the answer is lack of
resources.

I'm sure if you gave it a second you could reconcile both answers as being
the specific answers for "Why It Didn't Happen" and "Why It Works This
Particular Way", but:

It's a great idea for a future version. That's what it's all going to boil
down to anyways.

Have you come up with next week's answer? As I have shown, neither reply
is
defensible:

*laugh* It's a great idea for a future version.

You're right, it does deserve revisiting. First, it deserves an honest
response from the Windows Media Player product group as to why it is what
it
is. Then it deserves honest consideration for what I, and several others,
have asked for. And if, finally, all of our wants are rejected then that
is
ok. Just give an honest answer as to why and quit making up the excuses
on
the fly.

1: There wasn't time.
2: Great idea for a future version.

That's just me speaking as me. Those are the answers you'd get, though.

Cheers,
-Zach
--
Speaking for myself only.
See http://zachd.com/pss/pss.html for some helpful WMP info.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What -I - expect from a GUITAR NEWSGROUP POST
    ... I think many newsgroups are little communities and thus do bring about an ... amount of off-topicness that that is brought about by familiarity and ... from the people on the group or exchange knowledge ideas and opinions ...
    (alt.guitar.beginner)
  • Re: posting to group
    ... You and thomas are right about OE and newsgroups. ... It's worlds away from ... Please take a look at my compatibility post on 9/13 at 8:26am that you ... > In my opinion the Microsoft Communities pages are difficult to use. ...
    (microsoft.public.frontpage.client)
  • Re: Quality of Ubuntu List
    ... The Microsoft AND the Linux communities are emulate ... a Microsoft newsgroup is from june 1996, but the newsgroups must have ...
    (Ubuntu)
  • Re: Help and Support Page ( To: Carey)
    ... > It isn't necessary to be signed in to Communities to search for posts, ... > read posts, expand threads, or show specific threads in discussion groups. ... > Windows XP Newsgroups ... > For a better Microsoft newsgroup experience: ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.general)
Quantcast