[onli]

I guess there now are two of you. I doubt there are many more.

Seriously: A completely different behaviour than normal which would lead to no one finding the music they want to listen to (but finding newly added music easily) should only be the default if you have enough usertests to confirm that they want that. At least if your aim is that many people use your software and not only you plus the two exceptions who like that too.

[lhnz]

Isn't it intuitive to you that music you have just been shared or have just bought is the music you are both (a) unfamiliar with and (b) most likely to want to listen to in the near future. My experience has been that being unfamiliar with music will make it difficult to search for, and that after being shared or buying something I go through a patch of listening to this music more frequently.

Either way, I don't think I am one of two people, and I think the tone of your last comment was very poor. As a rule: think first, then post.

[onli]

No, it is not intuitive. Or it is: Of course it can be helpful to have such a view available. But having that as default order for a music-library(!) is not intuitive at all. Especially not for people who don't even remember the last time they added music to their collection.

I'm sorry if one could interpret my writing as poor tone. I indeed think that only a very small minority of people would like that, but that is totally ok and it was not meant as an attack. The point was that you have to determine such things, find out wether your potential customers would like that, if you are targeting people at all. If not, it doesn't matter.

>As a rule: think first, then post.

Spare me the bullshit. To say I didn't think before writing is a totally unnecessary attack - I clearly made a legitimate point.

[lhnz]

>> I'm sorry if one could interpret my writing as poor tone.

Yeah, well, just because it's the internet and you can't see people's reactions, it doesn't mean that it suddenly becomes acceptable to imply that people are selfishly only thinking about their own user experience...

>> I indeed think that only a very small minority of people would like that [...] The point was that you have to determine such things, find out wether your potential customers would like that, if you are targeting people at all. If not, it doesn't matter.

Right, well the problem here is that you haven't heeded your own advice. You're sitting here telling me about "very small minorities" with no evidence to back up your claims. And I tend to think: absence of evidence, intuition should trounce mere opinion. (That said, I agree that if somebody hasn't added music to their collection for a long time, a time-ordered view would make less and less sense. I think that's intuitive, too.)

[albertzeyer]

In iTunes in the music view (which shows you the full library), you can just order by any key, also by the added-date. Isn't that what you want? Do other complex players not have similar support?

In this project, there is no such view yet so there is no way. But it is easily possible to add such criteria to the intelligent queuing algorithm which will have the effect that new songs gets selected more likely.

[onli]

Thanks for trying to make that constructive :)

Though you probably didn't want to answer my comment, but the one above: Sure think that this is the way to go, either being able to sort the library accordingly, or better by something like your intelligent queuing algorithm. But the suggestion i objected was to have this as the default-sort-setting of the library.