ja, aber sie kennen diese Filestruktur nicht, wenn sie diese Daten nutzen:
Beim Radio hören
Beim Streamen ovn Musik
Beim Einkauf bei Amazon
bei Ebay
kurz - wenn immer sie Das Internet benutzen, finden sie immer die Daten ohne zu wissen, wie sie organiert und in welchen Ordner sie gespeichert sind. 
yes, but you do not know this file structure if you use this data:
While listening to the radio
When streaming music
When shopping at Amazon
at Ebay
in short - whenever you use the Internet, you always find the data without knowing how it is organized and in which folder it is stored.
1 Like
The iPod is actually a good counter-example IMO. It may have held files and folders on its internal storage (they were not really human readable though) but that is not how it was presented to the user. A indexed database was created from the metadata in the files, not the folder structure. Much like Roon…
1 Like
Nope. Its hierarchical menu approach was key to its success, and its underlying content structure was fully transparent and customizable by users depending on how they organized their libraries - and I believe this is exactly what the OP and others are looking for.
Based on the above, the main question is: how much flexibility do users have in terms of adjusting and displaying metadata in Roon?
With respect, the iPod didnt show the user a file/folder structure of any sort. It showed an artist/album/track hierarchy built from metadata. I thought the issue here was that some people dont use a album/artist/track structure for the their files and folders and that why the lack of folder browsing is so contentious in Roon?
So either the iPod is an example of the same methodology as Roon, or its a complete red herring. Your choice.
Agreed you have no clue how the iPod stores files it simply provides views on whatever db it has internally, just like Roon
It is immaterial to this discussion how Roon deals with the database internally - the OP was asking for FOLDER BROWSING, just like everyone and their dog did with iPod and other similar devices. As far as I understand, they are not asking for the possibility to manipulate Roon’s database, but simply for a way to browse content as folders.
All the music folders on my internal and external SSDs are sorted by artist name and album name. In my Roon library (-> more than 6,000 albums) it’s exactly the same. If I need to find something, I always find it within seconds. I never browse through hundreds or thousands of pictures/folders/lists or whatever…
1 Like
Imagine if Google was a folder browser.
2 Likes
And that is precisely what @danny and Roon say is outside of the design philosophy of Roon and will never happen .
Frankly I don’t know why threads like this keep coming and going, Roon are adamant they simply won’t do it , every thread finishes up in the same way a slanging match of those who want it and won’t accept the Roon will never provide it !!
I doubt any number of insistent users will change their mind , hence my quip about DLNA the other absolute NO in Roon’s design thoughts
Maybe @danny should chirp in here and make the same statement all over again again !!
ENOUGH …
1 Like
Mine too , I even differentiate between Rock and Classical as the needs are different. I like to think I am a logical filer BUT …
The last thing I want is to plough through the hard drive to pick a tune , I have had 10 years of much easier methods
Because there are people who would very much like this feature. That’s not to say anyone is right or wrong, it’s all just people’s opinions. I don’t think bashing anyone for it is helpful. This is a feature request forum and people post feature requests. It’s up to the Roon team to review these and add things to their blueprint as required. If you’re not interested in a particular feature, don’t contribute to the thread. Seems quite straightforward to me.
My future silence is assured
Good Night
I’ve always assumed that means whipping a dead horse trying to bring it to life. Here, I think we all realize and understand Roon’s stance.
So what we are doing here is discussing why the horse died, what killed it, and should it have died.
The difference between your metaphor and this situation, however, is also that a zombie horse, raised from the dead by being flogged, would be just as good as the live one.
The real flogging of the dead horse that is going on here is actually people telling others not to discuss something that is perfectly worthy of discussion, Roon’s stance or not.
And, to be direct, I was discussing Roon’s tone in taking its stance, which in some instances has been unwelcoming.
I wonder how many people are requesting folder browsing to Spotify.
Not sure we are talking about the same thing here:
-
Spotify is a streaming service with a subscription model fully justified by the provision of regularly licensed content; its app is free of charge;
-
Roon costs USD 700 and provides no content of its own - its main goal is to organize one’s own/licensed content. “Roon cleans up your music library, upgrades the metadata associated with your music, and provides a user interface that is far richer than anything else out there. Roon makes music exploration and discovery both informative and fun.”
It is perfectly legitimate for paying customers to request, in this forum category, features that, in their view, may “clean up their music library” and make “discovery both informative and fun”. Whether you agree with the usefulness of folder browsing is a subjective matter.
2 Likes
In the beginning. IMicrosoft, Apple, et. al. could just as easily had people envision their data as being in sets rather than a tree. The physical placement of the data wouldn’t be any different.
The file/folder structure that people are so invested in isn’t a real thing. It’s only a metaphor.
Repeating it does not make it any more true I’m afraid.
That’s pretty deep Slim! It is in the sense that it is a parallel with storage room, file cabinet, file drawer, file folder, document.
I agree that you don’t have to go through that formalism to access digital media because it does not have to physically reside in a given draw, cabinet, or room - it can be recalled in any manner based on relevance to a query. That’s great.
But that relies on functional metadata. If there’s anything that is super clear from this forum, it is that functional metadata is hit or miss in music files, whether downloaded or ripped from CD. So why not have a backup method, that actually helps troubleshoot. This idea that something in a product that people don’t have to access or use is an intrusion into a person’s specific vision is just a bit off kilter to me.
Roon is (or at least was at various points before others caught up) a revolutionary product. It’s like someone found a way to include a cell phone in a swiss army knife and made the whole combination that much more magically useful. But then let’s say that Roon decides that Phillips head screwdrivers are dumb and refuses to include a Phillips driver in their product. OK, now, that’s dumb, because while including a cell phone was revolutionary and amazing, drove adoption, now I have to carry around a second product for the common usage of a Phillips screwdriver. Just because the manufacturer has a bug up its you-know-what about Phillips screws and doesn’t think they should be in use. Makes no sense…self-defeating.
If you do not wish to understand the fundamental fact that the success of the iPod was based on its browsable, hierarchical folder menus, I definitely do not need to extend myself here.