[jude]

Return to civility, fellas.

 

[cel4145]

Quote:

 
VLC??    I guess that's because J. River may be a little to powerful for your average VLC user.  

 
I don't need the library management or the extra power. And I'm not claiming that VLC player is better. Just suits my needs well. That's the point. If you don't have the ability to argue that A is better than B by providing evidence (and understanding both), then all you have is a personal opinion about what suits your needs, not a definitive argument. 
 
Quote:

Also allowing full processing in setups with advanced speaker configs such as bi-amping and tri-amping. . . 
 
Hows that for facts..
 

 
We should be very impressed with your ability to copy information out of other's posts and poorly paraphrase it:  
 

[size=small]Allows full processing in setups with advanced speaker configurations (bi-amping, tri-amping, etc).[/size]

 
Makes me wonder if you really understand what you are saying since you had to go find what others say to express an opinion. Do you have a properly bi-amped setup that needs that? 

 

[preproman]

Quote:

You then posted how foobar2000 lacks any form of media network support, which it does. That is a wrong statement.
 

 
What's Foobar support on this? 

 

[Roller]

Quote:

 
What's Foobar support on this? 

 
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=69664
 
EDIT: Component page - http://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_upnp

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 
I don't need the library management or the extra power. And I'm not claiming that VLC player is better. Just suits my needs well. That's the point. If you don't have the ability to argue that A is better than B by providing evidence (and understanding both), then all you have is a personal opinion about what suits your needs, not a definitive argument. 
 
 
We should be very impressed with your ability to copy information out of other's posts and poorly paraphrase it:  
 
 
Makes me wonder if you really understand what you are saying since you had to go find what others say to express an opinion. Do you have a properly bi-amped setup that needs that? 

 
 
Really - No matter if I got it off the site.  I did say these are some features that I find useful - so yes I do. I have to get it from somewhere - that don't mean I haven't used it. 
 
No what - big shot.

 

[paradoxper]

Quote:

 
You posted JRMC having features foobar2000 doesn't, then don't indicate any feature at all. That is a blanket statement.

You then posted how foobar2000 lacks any form of media network support, which it does. That is a wrong statement.

And finally, you seemed to have become frustrated enough to have to resort to the lowest form of communication, cursing. Learn to be civil first.

Oh, and by all means do quote when I supposedly antagonized you. I'm curious.

The dude asked the question. I answered. In a opaque manner, sure. I then presented a fact. So there goes that defensive argument.
 
I never said anything about Foobar lacking ANY FROM OF MEDIA SUPPORT. I stated how J. River had x feature Foobar did not.
 
 
What I was referring to was on the side of the media network. It had the cool ZoneLink where you could play media content
in multiple locations such as DLNA devices and hardware zones.
 
Such a feature which was or is missing with Foobar. However that could have changed.
 
Your statement below after my post.
 
It took you that long to post a single feature that's available on foobar2000? Right.


 




Again, you misquote me. You continually mislead the conversation at hand. 

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=69664
 
EDIT: Component page - http://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_upnp

 
Foobar has grown from the last time I visited.  However, J.Rivers library management is still Top notch.

 

[elwappo99]

Quote:

Return to civility, fellas.

 
Yeah, this. I came back to this thread with 41 new posts and not much actually said. We all pick different players for our own reasons, no reason to have a personal argument over it. 

 

[Roller]

Quote:

The dude asked the question. I answered. In a opaque manner, sure. I then presented a fact. So there goes that defensive argument.
 
I never said anything about Foobar lacking ANY FROM OF MEDIA SUPPORT. I stated how J. River had x feature Foobar did not.
 
 
What I was referring to was on the side of the media network. It had the cool ZoneLink where you could play media content
in multiple locations such as DLNA devices and hardware zones.
 
Such a feature which was or is missing with Foobar. However that could have changed.
 
Your statement below after my post.
 
It took you that long to post a single feature that's available on foobar2000? Right.


 




Again, you misquote me. You continually mislead the conversation at hand. 

 
Media support? I'd advise you to go back and read again what was written. You talked about media network support, which was exactly was replied back.

You shouldn't have come to this thread with blanket claims of superiority of one player over the other if you didn't already know the facts in the first place. It's not that hard to understand.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 
I don't need the library management or the extra power. And I'm not claiming that VLC player is better. Just suits my needs well. That's the point. If you don't have the ability to argue that A is better than B by providing evidence (and understanding both), then all you have is a personal opinion about what suits your needs, not a definitive argument. 
 

 
 
Haha  - This is one point that makes it better.  IMO  haha.  VLC  hahaha  Man please...

 

[Roller]

Quote:

 
Foobar has grown from the last time I visited.  However, J.Rivers library management is still Top notch.

 
JRMC does have nice library management. A valid alternative regarding library management (that doesn't require tweaking) is MediaMonkey.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 
JRMC does have nice library management. A valid alternative regarding library management (that doesn't require tweaking) is MediaMonkey.

 
 
Now we're bringing "other" programs in to compensate?
 
But you see - that's what I'm talking about.  The "tweaking" part.  It's not a out the box work as is program.  It requires some tweaking to get it where you want it to be.  This is where I found Foobar, VLC and MediaMonkey to fail at.

 

[paradoxper]

Quote:

 
Media support? I'd advise you to go back and read again what was written. You talked about media network support, which was exactly was replied back.

You shouldn't have come to this thread with blanket claims of superiority of one player over the other if you didn't already know the facts in the first place. It's not that hard to understand.

Any form of media support. Meaning ANY as in, including NETWORK.
 
I never said it was superior. I said it offered x feature that Foobar does not. How are you misunderstanding this? Misleading, Misquoting

 

[Roller]

Quote:

 
Now we're bringing "other" programs in to compensate?

 
What? Is that an attempt at trolling? You said JRMC has good library management, I agreed and provided an also valid program. What exactly are you getting at?
 
Quote:

Any form of media support. Meaning ANY as in, including NETWORK.
 
I never said it was superior. I said it offered x feature that Foobar does not. How are you misunderstanding this? Misleading, Misquoting

 
Media support as in format support? Ok. Do name such support then.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 
What? Is that an attempt at trolling? You said JRMC has good library management, I agreed and provided an also valid program. What exactly are you getting at?
 

 
That we was talking about Foobar not MM.