What PVD is missing is...

[korbenPL]

Some of these would make my life easier and some would be a nice addition to my beloved application

1] Price field [the default one cause I've added my own field but this cannot work with statistics and I'd love to see the stats for all the movies I bought, divided by no of movies, and also divided by the no of discs to see how much I had paid on the average]

2] Menu-> filter -> Owned and where is the function that we can tick off meaning we own the title?

3] BoxOffice data - worldwide gross d/led from boxofficemojo perhaps...?

4]


more to come in this thread...

[rick.ca]

I've added my own field but this cannot work with statistics and I'd love to see the stats

I doubt we're going to see further development of the Statistics feature. It makes more sense to add summary statistics to Advanced Search (and perhaps filters) so we can generate whatever information we want. This, along with the ability to save Advanced Search queries, would effectively replace the functionality of Statistics with something completely flexible and configurable.

Menu-> filter -> Owned and where is the function that we can tick off meaning we own the title?

It's already there: Tick-off "Wish" to indicate the title is not owned. The difference between "wished for" and "not owned" is too subtle to warrant an additional filter. (Note the captions when Movies - Wish is selected.) If there is to be an additional filter, it should be for custom use. I don't know if it's feasible, but it would be nice if it could be configured to work with any standard or custom field.

BoxOffice data - worldwide gross d/led from boxofficemojo perhaps...?

+1.

[korbenPL]

2] Menu-> filter -> Owned

still not in accordance with my way of logic
I use PVD to keep track of the flicks I've seen AND [then] bought. And its usually in this order. So adding a title doesnt mean I own it and that's the reason I'm asking for a check box entitled IN COLLECTION that would work with stats.

Yes I still am somewhat influenced by the way movie collector worked for me but I think it's mostly positive

[rick.ca]

Use the "Movies on hard drives/removable drives" filter. Contrary to what the caption implies, this filter is simply triggered by something being in the file path field. So if you rip DVD's, those will automatically be "owned." If you don't, just enter whatever you like in the path field—so it will be recognized as owned. Using a custom language file, you can change these captions to "in collection" and "not in collection," and the Wish list captions (default "owned" and "not owned") to "not wished" and "wished."

[nostra]

2] Menu-> filter -> Owned

still not in accordance with my way of logic
I use PVD to keep track of the flicks I've seen AND [then] bought. And its usually in this order. So adding a title doesnt mean I own it and that's the reason I'm asking for a check box entitled IN COLLECTION that would work with stats.

Yes I still am somewhat influenced by the way movie collector worked for me but I think it's mostly positive

So what's the problem? When adding a movie you check the "Seen" checkbox and "Wish" checkbox. When you buy the movie, you uncheck the "Wish" checkbox.

[rick.ca]

So what's the problem? When adding a movie you check the "Seen" checkbox and "Wish" checkbox. When you buy the movie, you uncheck the "Wish" checkbox.

It depends on what meaning you want the Wish filter to have. Yes, "wish" could mean simply "not owned," but one might want it to mean "consider purchasing this." In other words, some will want to use it to maintain a short list of movies they would like to own, and use it to decide which ones they can afford to buy at any particular time. So "wish" would be a subset of "not owned."

To emphasize the more general point, there is flexibility in how the filters are used. One should decide what that is when setting up their database and workflow, and then stick to it.

[korbenPL]

sweet but....

dont you gentlemen think it would be easier and more convenient to consider implementing other check boxes like OWNED instead of debating about possible Workaround(s)?

cause i do

so plz make it happen before xmas 2009 and I will be on cloud no 9 hopefully with many other users who think alike

[rick.ca]

dont you gentlemen think it would be easier and more convenient to consider implementing other check boxes like OWNED instead of debating about possible Workaround(s)?

Obviously not, or we would have said so.

What I suggested was not a "workaround"—it was an explanation of the proper use of the program. I did mention if anything were added it should be an additional filter for custom use. I suppose you could use that for your "owned" filter, but then your media filter would go unused and you would have no additional filter available if any real need were to arise.

If you prefer a Xmas gift of substance, wish for the ability to save advanced searches to a search menu. You would then have full-blown, fully customizable "filtering" at your fingertips, instead of just one more wimpy girly filter.

[korbenPL]

lol
fine
seems we find LOGIC to be different at times

[nostra]

I will not add a new checkbox field (unless there is smth very important to solve with it). You use custom fields to add any number of checkboxes and achieve functionality you need. Advanced search can be used to filter by those fields.

[rick.ca]

seems we find LOGIC to be different at times

It's not my fault Aristotle is rolling in his grave.

[Anson]

I will not add a new checkbox field (unless there is smth very important to solve with it).

true and reasonable

at first, i had wished for several more fields myself, but always having a hundred different checkboxes and other fields which somebody would like to have, would be really bad for all other people who only get a screen full of unused fields.

You use custom fields to add any number of checkboxes and achieve functionality you need. Advanced search can be used to filter by those fields.

yes, that is exactly what i do now, but the more custom fields and corresponding different advanced searches i use, the more important it will be in the future to store and recall (or whatever other method you might have for such a functionality) those searches for quick access and filtering.

I use PVD to keep track of the flicks I've seen AND [then] bought.

So what's the problem? When adding a movie you check the "Seen" checkbox and "Wish" checkbox. When you buy the movie, you uncheck the "Wish" checkbox.

this ignores cases where i have seen a movie, don't own the DVD, but also don't want to buy it.
Since there are lots of other ideas about what "wish" means, I use a custom multiselect list to store info like "wish to buy collector's edition immediately", "wish to buy original DVD immediately", "wish to buy original DVD only at discount", "wish to record from TV", etc, and maybe even "wish to see in cinema" :-)

Some time ago, i read a suggestion/question whether "computed fields" would be nice. Maybe this would be another use for a computed field, if i could automatically set the standard "wish" field to true if the multiselect was not empty (but modifying standard fields probably would be too difficult and cause too many problems).
Another better use of computed fields might be to combine several other fields into one new field and then be able to sort on that field. This would solve many problems which currently exist when someone wants to sort a list eg according to year and title, or eg rating and seendate.

If you prefer a Xmas gift of substance, wish for the ability to save advanced searches to a search menu. You would then have full-blown, fully customizable "filtering" at your fingertips, instead of just one more wimpy girly filter.

sounds nice, maybe even having all the userdefined searches (which really are filters, aren't they?) as an additional item in the filters menu, with two buttons on the "advanced search" dialog to "store this search as new filter" and to "overwrite an existing filter with this search" (for editing a search)

Use the "Movies on hard drives/removable drives" filter. Contrary to what the caption implies, this filter is simply triggered by something being in the file path field.

It must be a bit more complicated since there are two different options for harddrives and removable drives. Or does PVD assume all movies to be on any drive, and thus all movies which are not on a harddrive are automatically on a removable drive ?

All other filters have options to filter for "on" and "off", and for "all" which is effectively a "either on or off" ("don't care"). Since "on" and "off" are exclusive, those three options take care of every meaningful combination. But one filter is different: how can i look for movies on "harddrives OR removable media", and how can i look for "movies on NO drives"? To me it looks as if those two additional options should be easy to add to the drives-filter menu ...

[rick.ca]

this ignores cases where i have seen a movie, don't own the DVD, but also don't want to buy it.

No, it doesn't. Those are "seen" and "not on HDD." It seems your misunderstanding is connected with...

Or does PVD assume all movies to be on any drive, and thus all movies which are not on a harddrive are automatically on a removable drive ?

As you quoted me...

Contrary to what the caption implies, this filter is simply triggered by something being in the file path field.

All of the filters are of the form true/false/ignore one particular attribute. In this case, the attribute is the existence of a file path, not specifically a HDD or removable media path.

[Anson]

No, it doesn't. Those are "seen" and "not on HDD."

you deleted the quote from nostra which i was referring to (where he only spoke of the "seen" and "wish" fields and not a "not on HDD" field). since nostra named the checkbox "wish" and named the corresponding filters "owned", i think he intended to use only that field and not also look at other fields like file path, and thus my original comment still stands.

your suggestion for a workaround (see below why i don't call it a solution) to use the file path and corresponding filters is very enlightening and shows another method to use because of exactly that problem that the "wish=notowned" field is not good enough for that pupose. it even caused to show up and clarify several of the misunderstandings related to these fields. thanks!

btw: when searching, I found a few partial lists from old versions in connection with plugins and referring to fields as numbers etc. is there some current list of all standard fieldnames and their types? (maybe even with a short info about restrictions like size of short text and long text, etc. or does PVD only use some default field types which i should look up at the firebird site)

It seems your misunderstanding is connected with...

Or does PVD assume all movies to be on any drive, and thus all movies which are not on a harddrive are automatically on a removable drive ?

As you quoted me...

Contrary to what the caption implies, this filter is simply triggered by something being in the file path field.

All of the filters are of the form true/false/ignore one particular attribute. In this case, the attribute is the existence of a file path, not specifically a HDD or removable media path.

too bad that the menu options don't use the proper words to describe what is filtered and we needed your explanation what really would be meant.
When i get to reading DVD and file info for my collection, i would have to filter "files on harddisk" to find scanned files on my removable USB drives or DVDR, and filter "files on removable media" to find which files from my harddisk i didn't scan yet and/or which movies i don't own ? ... what a confusion :-(

is this translation of the filters correct now ?
- not owned = wished
- owned = not wished (including movies i hate and never will own)
- files on harddisk = files exist and have been scanned
- files on removable media = movie not owned or not scanned yet

As the wording currently is, i had thought it to be some help for playing movies: movies on harddisk are always available, while you need to get and insert/mount removable media first to watch movies on them, but i assumed for both types that they already had been scanned. A functionality like this would be a real nice feature suggestion for future versions.


since you (almost? only?) have movies on harddisk and probably even with proper original titles, it is easy for you to scan them, but when i am forced to scan all DVDs i buy or have bought it costs a lot of time and has very "mixed" results since PVD is no DVD management software but only movie management software which doesn't handle the original DVD's filenames too well when i shall associate them with specific movies, especially when having a multi-disc set with several DVD for a single movie and/or having additional movies on the same DVD (eg makingof, documentaries, additional short films, etc which even have entries in the IMDB, or trailers etc which have no such entries). Also scanning files will not be easy for me since i mostly have used the titles as they appeared on TV, thus being localized (in the best case maybe AKA titles) instead of original titles, and always are missing the year.
feature suggestion (many other people already suggested this too): the ability of PVD to rename files according to some pattern from the database, eg "otitle (year) [title]" so that i can better scan the files if i move them etc.

I now would be able to write any dummy text (like "DVD" or "DVDR") in that filepath field to use the filter without scanning the media, but instead rather will use my own custom fields for remembering what parts i still have to see and what kind of wishes i have. it is the same amount of work to edit each record, gives me more info, and also will save me from future problems when standard fields like the filepath might be overwritten with new info.

ps: while searching for something and not finding it, i found some other random info.
since the other post is old, i am saying my thanks for that hint here :-)

URL's can point anywhere, including your hard drive. The program allows you to put URL in the description and comment fields by right-clicking and choosing Create Hyperlink (and link type = URL). All that does is enter <link url="[value]">[text]</link>. If you enter [value] = file:\\\c:\path to trailers\title trailer.avi and [text] = Trailer, you'll have a link that will play the trailer in your associated media player.

the idea of rightclicking fields didn't occur to me before, but now i will be able to do lots of useful, stupid and crazy things with those links which can not only be used in comments and description, but also in the tagline and most of all generally can be generated in any memo fields, including custom fields !
- linking to other websites which specialize in (localized) TV series info
- linking to my own txt files where i stored additional info on series
- links inside the database, eg when one movie is released on a disk together with another
- much much more

and while i started rightclicking fields, i discovered that there is LOTS more to discover in PVD, eg the ability to modify movie connections, and while doing so, the "add new movie" ("select a movie") dialog starts to make much more sense :-)

[rick.ca]

This has nothing to do with my "suggestion for a workaround" (I made no such suggestion), or even nostra's intent in providing the filters. They are what they are—simple, consistent, mathematical realities. Their menu captions have absolutely no influence over what the program does. If you don't like a default caption, change it. Since you're obsessed with the need for precision, I suggest something like:

[Attribute] Ignored
[Attribute] False
[Attribute] True

where [Attribute] is, for example (to use the one you insist on being confused about), Pathname IS EMPTY.

[Rant on] With them named this way, maybe you can then focus on adapting them to their best purpose according to your personal circumstances and preferences. And before you suggest there is a deficiency in the program design, or that that you need an additional feature, I would hope you would fully explore the possibilities for adapting your circumstances or preferences to the program. To be honest, I'm getting rather pissed with the attitude (not just your's) reflected by, "I want to do it my way. Please change the program." I'm sorry—I just don't get it. Nostra seems like a sane fellow. Why would he invest more time in some aspect of the program to appease users who don't even respect the work he's already done? And on a more personal note, why should I bother helping someone adapt to the program when they dismiss anything I suggest as a mere "workaround" in defence of a flawed program?[/rant off]

You can argue there should be more or different attributes supported. But we've had that discussion before, and I believe the conclusion was there is no compelling need. If you have some difficulty applying or adapting the program's design to your particular circumstances, it doesn't necessarily mean there's any deficiency in the program design. The deficiency can just as easily be said to be in your personal database management/workflow design.

In case you should think otherwise, I'm not joking or being dismissive about your confusion over the filter menu names. There's no requirement the fields those attributes are based on be used for exactly the same purpose the default menu captions and field names suggest. "Wish" is just a flag—it can be used for whatever you like. "Loaned" has a specific loan/return functionality associated with it, but it doesn't have to be used for that purpose. I use it to apply a sort of categorized flag (where "borrower" is the category). So the default captions are not necessarily meaningful, and judging the program behaviour based on them is pointless.

[CAD]

To be honest, I'm getting rather pissed with the attitude (not just your's) reflected by, "I want to do it my way. Please change the program." I'm sorry—I just don't get it. Nostra seems like a sane fellow. Why would he invest more time in some aspect of the program to appease users who don't even respect the work he's already done?

i dont see these (and other suggestions) this way. nostra has super kindly made his program available for us free of charge, but it is the users suggestions helps to make this program great. (btw - nostra seem more than capable to say yes or no to requests.)

these guys are making suggestions, the initial suggestion may not ideal, but it may trigger an idea in someone else to do it another/ better way. it may trigger something in nostra to implement something he hasn't thought of, or even just be something really popular, that others havent thought of. stomping on peoples ideas (whether good or bad) stifles debate and leads to people not participating.

at the end of the day, if nostra wants to implement an idea, he will, otherwise he wont. buts asking for a feature does not hurt anyone and in fact enhances the program as it encourages participation. if it can be implemented without affecting anything else - why not? That will only make the program better and suitable to a wider audience.

like mum says. if you cant say anything nice - dont say anything at all 

[patch]

like mum says. if you cant say anything nice - dont say anything at all 

I agree most discussions are best advanced by positive suggestions rather than criticism of others' ideas.

[rick.ca]

stomping on peoples ideas (whether good or bad) stifles debate and leads to people not participating

Thanks, CAD. I do appreciate you comments. I did indicate I was ranting, but I assume you felt there is good reason to say this even if I wasn't. Diplomacy is not one of my strengths. While I always try, it doesn't hurt to be reminded I need to try harder. But since the things that drive me to "stomp" aren't gong to change, I'll attempt to elaborate on them...

I enjoy problem solving and finding creative ways to make processes work better. I choose to see this forum as a community where people with a particular interest in collecting and managing video information can engage that interest collaboratively. In that context, software development is just one aspect of what goes on here. Equally valid and important are users exchanging ideas and assisting one another on how to use the program to manage their video collection—without necessarily a view to making any improvements to the software. Another is users developing methods to facilitate interaction with other software. Your participation in efforts to do so for XBMC is a good example. People work together to solve a problem. Out of that come some good ideas for improvements to the program. Notice how that engaged nostra's interest, and he did what he could to help.

Given the nature of my interest, I tend to see little difference between, or reason to favour, solutions involving program changes over those involving user adaptation to the program. I may even get some perverse satisfaction from devising a workaround to what might be considered an obvious program bug or design flaw. So if someone identifies a problem and seeks a program change as a solution, I'm likely to suggest an "adaptation" if I see one. Obviously, some see this as being stomped on. This is unfortunate, but I'm not moved to curtail my own contribution because of this sort of sensitivity. I normally present my ideas with the genuine hope they may be of assistance to the poster. Even if their suggestion is a good one, it may be some time before it can be implemented. More importantly (and I think this is lost on some), there are other users reading the exchange—maybe out of specific interest in the issue at hand, maybe out of general interest about how the program works and how they might best use it. With that in mind, I usually like to put an issue in context by explaining how the program can still be used effectively despite the issue. Without this, some posts are potentially misleading (i.e., readers who don't know what I know may think the program is broken and unusable—at least in some aspect), while others create the general impression the program is buggy.

Yes, the tone of my post was harsh, and I'm sorry for that. But the subject matter is a good illustration of what I'm talking about. There's nothing wrong with the program's filter feature. There's lots of room for adaptation—a good thing, considering all the different kinds of user-specific situations they might need to handle. There may be room for improvement, but anything that breaks this already desirable design aspect is not helpful. And, believe it or not, I felt I was being forced into debate at the expense of sharing a number of positive ideas around the subject... First, simply a correct explanation of how filters work and how to use them. Then: creative adaptation of existing filters to different situations, the ability to customize menu captions, integration of the filtering concept with Advance Search and saved searches for an infinitely customizable "filtering" mechanism.

[CAD]

I did indicate I was ranting, but I assume you felt there is good reason to say this even if I wasn't

noted - it is just something i have noticed while reading various posts. you are the moderator and seen as an expert, but it seems to me that the way you respond (tone experise etc) stops discussion rather than encourages. also it seems that you sometimes "stomp" on ideas that you disagree with because it is not teh way you do it.

it is ok to disagree with ideas, but given your standing in forum it seems to stop participation rather than encourage. you dont have to respond to every post

however people word requests, they are just requests. it is good to point out different ways of doing something as users may not know all the features etc but requests should be allowed to stand on their merit good or bad. perhaps people will be more encourged to comment if the "expert" hasnt already done it.

giving work arounds /showing how to use program is great - it teaches users the features they may not know about and gets their brains working in different ways to approach solving their particular problem. but equally true is just because the program has a feature that will do a function does not mean it is the best way doing it. allowing open discussion can only make the program better.

[rick.ca]

it is ok to disagree with ideas, but given your standing in forum it seems to stop participation rather than encourage. you dont have to respond to every post

Point well taken. I often consider encouraging discussion by keeping my mouth shut, but it seems I can seldom quite bring myself to do it. Or the deafening silence that results overwhelms me.