Author Topic: Wish List For MX Features (Read 6783 times)

Trestor · « **on:** June 11, 2008, 05:58:24 am »

I looked for a thread that already is about this, but I didn't find it; if there is, then a mod can delete this.

I thought it might be good to name any ideas we might come up with as a result of using mx that would make it better to use. It doesn't mean they would ever be developed; but, who knows, it's a big world and stranger things happen at sea.

- One feature I'd like to see would be a pop up window telling people they have already downloaded the file they are repeatedly trying for and wastes everyone time.
- Another would be a notice that opennap doesn't go any faster through queuing up every server, it just downloads multiple copies of the same thing.
- A third would be a pop up for those who have their Instant Message blocked, to tell them that so-and-so has a message for them, and do they want to receive it.
- A fourth would be the up and downloads page being marked with a time and date for when they happened.
- A fifth would be a save-able list of what a user has downloaded, so that when we reboot we can still have a record of what has been done before.

SamSeeSam · « **Reply #1 on:** June 11, 2008, 07:06:37 am »

well for most of the part, most of these have explainations or solutions :s

1.> yes it would be nice, but its not a "must have" feature... more of a conveinence. Its best to make a list of what you want to download and keep it. you can use find, etc to see if you already did it before. I make a huge list of the movies I have so I don't end up downloading doubles...

2.> opennap doesn't not support multi source downloading...
Its written in capitals in the opennap tab

3.> that would simply defeat the purpose of blocking messages. You have the option to receive messages from everyone in the options window. Some people simply don't want to chat or don't want to talk...

4.> Again more of a conveinence. Depends on the users,some like to analyz who was downloading what

5.> Same as point no 4..

But, there are 2 programmers working on 2 seperate clients for winmx, moonmx biy sirmoon and winpy buy another guy. But the thing is, they have not yet made solid replacements for winmx. Until they release a client that will support primary connections and secondary ones, everything else in terms of features will be minor in comparsion, I'm sure you'lll agree with this.

When they do release stable versions, I'm sure they will be willing a few extra features to make winmx more modern.

Lastly and leastly

, there are other threads and posts on this matter, frankly I'd say more than 50 requests would be there. But no probs, each guy has the right to have his say

Cheers

Joshua203 · « **Reply #2 on:** June 11, 2008, 09:08:49 am »

Hi there,

Some of these save list functions (if not all) are found in moni log if configured correctly

Greetings, ..Joshua203

sIrMoOn · « **Reply #3 on:** June 11, 2008, 01:40:09 pm »

Quote from: Trestor on June 11, 2008, 05:58:24 am

- One feature I'd like to see would be a pop up window telling people they have already downloaded the file they are repeatedly trying for and wastes everyone time.

How about a confirmation dialog. "You already have this file. Are you sure you want to download it again?" Maybe.

Quote from: Trestor on June 11, 2008, 05:58:24 am

- Another would be a notice that opennap doesn't go any faster through queuing up every server, it just downloads multiple copies of the same thing.

I'm not supporting OpenNap. Problem solved.

Quote from: Trestor on June 11, 2008, 05:58:24 am

- A third would be a pop up for those who have their Instant Message blocked, to tell them that so-and-so has a message for them, and do they want to receive it.

As Sam pointed out, this defeats the point of message blocking. I don't have message blocking at this time, but if and when I implement it it will certainly not produce any pop-ups.

Quote from: Trestor on June 11, 2008, 05:58:24 am

- A fourth would be the up and downloads page being marked with a time and date for when they happened.
- A fifth would be a save-able list of what a user has downloaded, so that when we reboot we can still have a record of what has been done before.

Maybe.

Lagerlout666 · « **Reply #4 on:** June 11, 2008, 03:36:14 pm »

Not major software changes but a few idea's from the not so technical part of the comunity are a welcome site, im sure you would agree sirmoon. I think this may be a good place discuss what the comunity would like to see in a winmx clone once your hardwork and dedication towards the back bone is complete. I personally would like to see better transfer options like the abilty to open extra slots of mp3 files. etc, i know i hate it when i see in my que 4 slots uploading movies and some poor soul wanting 5mb stuck at the bottom of a 80+ list. I always start these little folk but i cant be stuck in front of the computer all day. And well moni etc for me is just not a option.

Any others have any uptake on little features that would be nice to have?

reef · « **Reply #5 on:** June 11, 2008, 07:16:16 pm »

I would like to see customizable right click commands from the user list.Although in most servers these new commands would return the message "Unknown command or access denied" Metis can still read the command through opmsg and scripts can be made to respond to these commands.RoboMX and rabbit (not sure what other clients) have these capabilities, and is a nice feature for Hosting a room.In WCS you can also create these custom commands in the config file and no "Unknown command or access denied" message is returned.I just think it would be a nice new feature for channel hosts.

krb107 · « **Reply #6 on:** June 12, 2008, 01:59:53 am »

It would be nice to view more then 3000 files on secondary and 5000 on primary, for alot of people have alot more files to share.

Cobra · « **Reply #7 on:** June 12, 2008, 05:45:35 am »

Sam, who cares if the features aren't a "must have" or just conveniences? There are current features in WinMX that aren't "must have" either in my opinion (Hotlist, Chat, and Bandwidth Monitoring just to name three: WinMX still runs perfectly without them so they aren't a "must" at all... but you are thankful that they are there if you want them).

I would personally love to see almost everything mentioned so far, necessity is irrelevant.

There are three things I have wished for for a while now.

1) In the right-click options of a fils that I am sharing, a "Search for Alternates" option to see if anyone else is offering the same file that I am. Of the image files that I offer, two get downloaded far more (by 1000% at least) than any other and I don't really know why. It might help if I could do an instant hash search for the file. Easier than saving the hash somewhere, finding it, pasting it, etc.

2) Either read from one/multiple folder(s) on my hard drive or read from a text file if faster a collection of files' hashes of my choosing. Currently if I search, incomplete and queued files show up in the searches. That is basically pointless to me because if I am trying to complete a file, I just use "Find sources now" and/or "Search for Alternates". What I want is for searches of files that I have completed to come up *as read from the text file or folder) so that I don't download the same already-completed file a second time.

3) When browsing a collection, I would love the ability to pause or stop the loading of the file list. As a dail-up user, it takes over a minute or two for a 3000 file list to load. In the meantime, loading the list seems to suck up all or most of my bandwidth which causes queues to time out and downloading files to cancel.

Trestor · « **Reply #8 on:** June 12, 2008, 06:32:59 am »

Quote from: Cobra on June 12, 2008, 05:45:35 am

Sam, who cares if the features aren't a "must have" or just conveniences? .... I would personally love to see almost everything mentioned so far, necessity is irrelevant.

Thank you, Cobra; you are a champion!

White Stripes · « **Reply #9 on:** June 12, 2008, 07:30:23 pm »

id like a feature that can detect corrupt mp3s either as they download or before they even start (for instance when searching the file can be marked as 'corrupt' or 'glitchy')

im getting tired of downloading an mp3 only to find it having glurps or flurps or other underwater sounds (cant rewind by xx bits, stream corrupt: resyncing) in it and have to find another source and download again... (if there is another source)

thunderwinds · « **Reply #10 on:** June 13, 2008, 12:29:40 am »

The feature i have been wishing for for awhile now is the ability to sort a browse by file type. Quite a few people would find the ability to pause the browse usefull. Even on a cable connection everything that is already qued tends to drop while loading a long browse if the ports aren't set. Also it would be nice to be able to que something up as soon as you see it, rather than having to wait for the browse to finish first. As it stands now the dl either times out or you end up queing the wrong file.

Trestor · « **Reply #11 on:** June 13, 2008, 04:20:20 am »

As I understand it, Search currently only searches the file name, but searching mp3 ID tags would be useful, too.

White Stripes · « **Reply #12 on:** June 13, 2008, 05:42:47 am »

Quote

As I understand it, Search currently only searches the file name, but searching mp3 ID tags would be useful, too.

i dunno about that... ive gotten results that didnt seem to be what i searched for but were... only thing i could think was that it found the tag.... ... tho it could have been the folder it was in too...

btw, where did you get that avitar?

Cobra · « **Reply #13 on:** June 13, 2008, 06:15:21 am »

Search checks both the filename and the folder name that the file is in. It does not search for ID3 tags, unfortunately.

Trestor · « **Reply #14 on:** June 13, 2008, 08:07:36 am »

Quote from: Silver Stripes on June 13, 2008, 05:42:47 am

btw, where did you get that avitar?

I assume you mean the mobster and not the gorilla. I made it myself using this tool.
http://www.famousdefaces.com/

Cobra · « **Reply #15 on:** June 14, 2008, 10:21:58 pm »

Just for the fun of it, here is another idea:

The ability to set "low", "medium" and "high" ranges of your own choice (eg: 0-50, 51-1200, and 1201+). The range relates to the number of files shared by a person who is trying to upload from you and does several things.

1) The color of the person's username changes (red, yellow, green) depending on which range they fall into for quick viewing.
2) Ability for WinMX to auto-block anyone in the "low" range.
3) Ability to prioritize bandwidth based on what range a person falls into so that those who share more can get files faster.

GhostShip · « **Reply #16 on:** June 14, 2008, 10:55:08 pm »

Nice idea but when folks start uploading fake/ghost files to get downloads are we any better off ?

Bearded Blunder · « **Reply #17 on:** June 15, 2008, 06:02:52 am »

people already share dross from their system folders to dodge leechammer or mxm.. would we be any worse off?

Cobra · « **Reply #18 on:** June 15, 2008, 06:09:25 am »

Of course not when it comes to some people, but there will always be those who either don't know how, just won't bother, or are halfway trustworthy.

I had a guy trying to download from me today who wasn't sharing anything. Instead of ignoring at first, I just canceled his files and messaged him that I would like for him to share a few files if he is going to download from me. He restarted the downloads without a reply. So, I blocked him with a more direct message why (granted he might not have spoken English, but his username was English-like).

He changed his username two more times and tried resuming the same files each time. All it would have taken was adding a few random files he found anywhere and I would have let him download, but he wouldn't even go that far.

Bearded Blunder · « **Reply #19 on:** June 15, 2008, 06:23:22 am »

there are those who are paranoid about sharing files, especially as sharing most music puts them on dodgy ground in some places... many don't realise that they could always drop a few shareware apps in their shared.. after all (as the name implys) shareware is intended to be distributed by sharing it lol