[jjd-uk]

Have tried changing the delay? on my systems with 250ms I don't notice the delay compared with the old behaviour while allowing multiple skip step sizes.

I've written a wiki page at Skip_Steps (wiki) which contains some examples.

Note - the big step and chapter step behaviour mapped by default to the up & down buttons is completely unchanged.

Please everyone read the wiki and try testing with various settings, if then you still don't like it then fair enough, but don't object to the behaviour having not tried it.

[piipes]

Have tried changing the delay? on my systems with 250ms I don't notice the delay compared with the old behaviour while allowing multiple skip step sizes.

I've written a wiki page at Skip_Steps (wiki) which contains some examples.

Note - the big step and chapter step behaviour mapped by default to the up & down buttons is completely unchanged.

Please everyone read the wiki and try testing with various settings, if then you still don't like it then fair enough, but don't object to the behaviour having not tried it.

Yes, i notice that big step works normal way.
Can't use that 250ms delay, but now i am happy.
I chage big step to 30s jump and second remote button pair use additive seekin 3,10,30min, last button pair use forwards.
Old fast jumping works and i have extra 3min and 30min jumps too.

[bossanova808]

@jjd-uk

Have read it, have tried it, still want just one extra thing restored - smallstepback.

Then, we can have precisely v14 behaviour, OR additive seeking, easily.

At the moment, if one doesn't want additive, then one is stuck with 7 second back steps for all small back steps if you want a small step, which sucks. I want both a 7 second and a 30 second instant back. That currently can't be achieved.

That's to me the biggest flaw of additive seeking actually, you have to kinda push your way through the smaller steps to get to the bigger ones...

Isn't that a pretty reasonable compromise - you can have either new or old behaviour that way, easily, and no one loses anything? And the only maintenance burden is an existing simple feature that has been in place for years and years already...

[furii]

bossanova808 hits the nail on the head from my perspective as well. i actually had a similar write up going but decided not to post because of the whole "don't upgrade" response. so, bossanova808 thanks for posting what i was to discouraged to.

[Ned Scott]

Any thoughts about changing the default values? I feel like the delay of 750ms is too long. I'm also wondering if we have too many step values enabled. Personally, I tighten the delay to 250ms, and only about 4 or 5 steps back and another 4 or 5 steps forward. I don't feel too strongly about how many steps there are, but I really think the delay value needs to be shorter.

[snuupi]

I think the 750ms is not a good value either way. Too short for those who try to keep an eye on the tiny "seek +xx:xx" text (Confluence skin) to decide if they need another button press or two and too long for the impatient types. For new users, I would suggest making it longer (> 1 s), so they have time to understand what's happening. Those who already know what's going on, have no trouble finding the setting and adjusting to their liking anyway.
Not being able to define custom steps (even if editing some settings file) is a big negative in my opinion.
PS. This feature (lack of it) was one of the big WAF-killers when I introduced XBMC on the htpc next to MediaPortal

[bossanova808]

Regarding my thoughts that there really should be a smallstepback - an alternative would be an xbmc builtin .seek() that accepts on offset parameter in seconds, so you can have arbitrary seek bindings for those that want to have something else in addition to 'smart' seeking.

I really think one or the other is needed though - it's really tedious having to click back multiple times to do simple things because I want a short step in there....grrrr

[nickr]

Yes I cannot fathom why there is not a seek that takes a time as parameter. myth has this and it is very easy to set your remote exactly as you want, using as many arrow type buttons as your remote has. Some have the up down left right as well as >> and << and >| and |< - that's eight buttons or four different steps in each direction.

[Ned Scott]

I think the 750ms is not a good value either way. Too short for those who try to keep an eye on the tiny "seek +xx:xx" text (Confluence skin) to decide if they need another button press or two and too long for the impatient types. For new users, I would suggest making it longer (> 1 s), so they have time to understand what's happening. Those who already know what's going on, have no trouble finding the setting and adjusting to their liking anyway.
Not being able to define custom steps (even if editing some settings file) is a big negative in my opinion.
PS. This feature (lack of it) was one of the big WAF-killers when I introduced XBMC on the htpc next to MediaPortal

That's more of a learning issue. Sure, a longer time will help people figure out what is going on, but for actual usage 1 second is painful to wait for seeking to actually kick in. So you'll have more people who understand the feature right away, but I think they'll not like it because the delay is too long. I'd rather it take a little longer for people to get the hang of the feature and see how it works properly.

I think this will have a big impact on whether people like the new behavior or not.

[sualfred]

First of all, I love this adaptive seeking.
But I'm missing a 1min30sec seek step. A lot of TV shows have exactly this time value for the intro or "see what happened at the last episode" (most of the "24" episodes for example). Very painful for tv show marathon watchers like me

Another thing is, that the the seekstep is always correctly displayed with +30/+60/etc, but as soon the 750ms are over, the value switches from "+30sec" to "+28sec" for example. This always looks a little bit strange.

[jjd-uk]

Create a Custom Skip Steps list then to provide a 90sec skip step.

[da-anda]

I think the 750ms is not a good value either way. Too short for those who try to keep an eye on the tiny "seek +xx:xx" text (Confluence skin) to decide if they need another button press or two and too long for the impatient types. For new users, I would suggest making it longer (> 1 s), so they have time to understand what's happening. Those who already know what's going on, have no trouble finding the setting and adjusting to their liking anyway.
Not being able to define custom steps (even if editing some settings file) is a big negative in my opinion.

This sounds more like a UI issue than a functional issue. IMO the step size needs to be more prominent in the OSD for easy reading (MediaPortal style). >1s is way too much and < 750s whould be a bit too fast for some remotes and regular users.

[snuupi]

Yes, the small text is a UI/skin issue, I too think it should be more prominent. The delay I have set to 1s now and I find it good. Time is a relative thing and I've never met a regular user in my life

[sualfred]

Create a Custom Skip Steps list then to provide a 90sec skip step.

Thx, did not noticed that this is possible with the advancedsettings.

[da-anda]

Yes, the small text is a UI/skin issue, I too think it should be more prominent. The delay I have set to 1s now and I find it good. Time is a relative thing and I've never met a regular user in my life

true, there is no regular user but we can use averages. You prefer 1s, others 250ms. So we could have a default of 500 or 750ms while I think 750ms is a better default as it better compensates possible input lags.