Well, any logically consistent datra can be represented in a relational model. Most “noSQL” stuff, which doesn’t have any serious theory behind it, works just fine only up to the moment when it does not.
This is just fantastic news! Faith restored.
What does lead you to this conclusion?
Im really pleased. Over the last year I have built my system with Roon Ready products (including building a ROCK) and that was a major factor in choosing the products I have.
Its great to see this commitment being supported. I have never been happier with music set up and Roon is a big part of that.
Sure, but I still think RoonLabs had concerns in mind and didn’t just refuse it out or spite.
I don’t think it’s about that at all, but about library management UI concepts. I can’t think of any concrete example right now, but that doesn’t mean there are none.
That still wouldn’t have helped if your internet had been cut off. But it doesn’t matter anymore if it’s not for very long
Hey, I think I remember you😁… you helped once, right?
And, of course, no power, no internet. But, that’s how I roll😁. I’m not gonna let a power outage change how I feel, and enjoy Roon.
This is an encouraging announcement.
I am one of the users who has become increasingly unhappy about Roons performance since 2.0 was released, and have even taken steps to stop using Roon. So this message gives me hope…but that old saying comes to mind. Action speaks louder than words.
I’m so glad to hear that Roon will revisit folder browsing. Many times I want to actually browse through my music through the folders that I created for organizing my collection.
Sometimes I can’t remember the name of a song or album that I’m looking for, but know what decade/genre folder that I placed the song/album in. Also, for me, it’s easier to browse for albums, for which I created separate folders. Plex Amp allows me to do all of the above. I’m looking forward to see how Roon progresses.
This is definitely great news indeed. Sure Harman / Samsung is having a influence, but it seems that they truly understand what Roon is about and what Roon can be.
After all they have kept what appears to be the Roon team in tact. This is definitely a very good approach.
We don’t know what the future holds but for now it looks good for us Roonies.
I for one is glad to see these new changes in their mindset.
–MD
I think the response from Harman / Roon is very promising. It seems they understand that this is a premium product and needs to be treated as such.
It should perform better than any other app out there, people are paying a higher premium for that. It should be robust and provide first rate support. I get the distinct impression that the support team are very stretched and this can result in a less than premium feel from a customer point of view. It’s not that each member of staff isn’t good enough… it’s a case of only being able to do so much with an ever increasing user base.
Overall I love Roon and the thought of having to return to other manufacture apps fills me with dread. It was certainly something I was considering with the Auralic App and even considering adding an Innuos server so as to be able to use their sense app. Hopefully this change in direction can lay those thoughts to rest and Roon can go from strength to strength!!
@Kopftelefon
I use the extension rooUPnP on a Raspberry Pi, so now I also can stream Roon to UPnP-devices that are not Roon Ready. Works perfectly for me.
Kind regards, Frank.
I’m really encouraged by yesterday’s announcement. I was hoping that the switch back to eliminate the internet dependency might improve some of the performance issues I’ve mentioned in many other threads. But unfortunately search performance is about the same. But looking forward to improvements soon!
Good news, but it does beggar the question as to what Roon’s ‘agenda’ is/was… It’s interesting that it took the pursestrings feedback (and not us, the users) to right course and go back to dealing with some of the fundamentals. Here’s hoping we can also get some basic UI improvements so that one can navigate quicker and easier from screen to screen in a way that makes more sense, with icons that don’t seem arbitrary, and taking three or more clicks to perform basic functions.
It almost seems to me that the Harman people were using Roon (as originally intended) and the Roon team weren’t. I do understand how that goes from a recent experience of making a big mistake on a project because one has been with something for so long one just stops seeing the whole vs the parts. And since 2.0, Roon, to me, does seem more and more as if parts (Valence for example, and the twenty different ways to discover music, all of which are somewhat flawed - just give us a good one or two) keep getting welded on vs considering if those parts have function within the whole. The Qobuz/Tidal landing pages are also an example of something that desperately needs reworking. So here’s hoping things keep moving forward.
I agree.
An important byproduct of joining Harman is the potential for new staff through investment from the new parent company.
No horsetrailer?
Danny at one point said that implementing folder browsing would be trivial. Not being a developer I have nothing to add to this part of the debate other than referencing what Danny said. I suppose it can be implemented in multiple ways, some simpler than others.
(I would have little need to use it, but I still think it needs to be in any product on a computer that uses files on a computer, period. It’s gotta be really frustrating to those whose libraries aren’t amenable to metadata organization alone. I didn’t get upset when ARC was released even though I wouldn’t use it, and I’m not going to get all upset if folder browsing is implemented even if I won’t really use it. Plus it will make boxed sets more accessible until Roon is able to address that issue specifically.)
Just in general, I am happy to see that Roon is at least now paying lip service (and hopefully more) to going back to GUI and server functionality and reliability. The product needs that TLC and the current release is a good start. And nice to see reversion on some of their missteps, whether forced by Harman or not.
Yes, implementing it would be trivial. Foreseeing all the ways it might end up limiting more advanced library management in the future is the difficult part and the other half of what Danny said IIRC. (Edit: not quite - my interpretation of the rather terse reasoning)
Edit: The post in question: