[SOLVED] Here's why xrecode2 is better than xrecode3

Suggestions, new features, etc.
Post Reply
TommyGunn
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 2:11 am

[SOLVED] Here's why xrecode2 is better than xrecode3

Post by TommyGunn »

After about a decade of happily using xrecode2, it strangely started to hang on me and there was no way I could fix it. Hence, I was 'forced' to upgrade to xrecode3. I'm running WIn7 Pro on a laptop. i've even done a regedit purge and, somewhere, xrecode is leaving footprints (as when I re-install 2, it still shows being registered to me).

So far, I'm pretty disappointed. And, this transcends the ubiquitous upgrade friction. No, the new version is not as good.
1) The shell command isn't working, first off (yes, I've uninstalled/reinstalled a couple times now).
2) There was no means to transfer profiles from 2 to 3 and the creation of new ones not nearly as intuitive with 3.
3) I often use xrecode to clean up my file tags. In 2, you could set the front cover to resize just by saving the metadata. With 3, the only way to resize is via transcoding files. Lame.
4) Along the metadata lines.....there is no 'select all' box/etc in 3. This is not terrible, as the user can just manually select all the files. Despite, just not clean UI design.
5) no clean uninstall feature (must go to control panel; II has uninstall at the program folder level)

Due to my previous wonderful experience all those years using xrecode2, I'm inclined to buy another license. But, right now....since 3 is annoying me, I'm holding off. I just wish I could download xrecode2 again and get it running.

I hope the developer(s) read this.
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Here's why xrecode2 is better than xrecode3

Post by admin »

1) Did you install the proper version, i.e. 32bit on Win32 or 64bit on Win64? 32bit on Win64 can be installed, but shell extension won't work.
2) yeah, maybe :) Initially there were no profiles in version 3. They were replaced with tabs and then brought back.
3) I will check this one.
4) There is select all in right-click manu, as well as Ctrl+A works.
5) Uninstalling via Control Panel is the standard way.
TommyGunn
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 2:11 am

Re: Here's why xrecode2 is better than xrecode3

Post by TommyGunn »

@admin

Thank you for the kind reply. Sorry if my tone came off a bit brash. I had just spent a few hours trying to sort out my xrecode issues so was a bit raw when i wrote the post.

To your suggestions/comments:
1) yup, that did the trick. Thank you!
2) I can live with creating the profiles from scratch. but, it's not quite as intuitive as it was in 2. at least the string creation part.
3) yes, please do check this. I'd really love to see this feature return. it helps with creating the right type of files to upload required by trackers
4) yup...duh. the rt click feature is great, thanks.
5) so is this a material design thing now? i still seem to see apps installed with the uninstall feature placed in the program folder from the start menu. whatever...i can also live with this as well. hopefully i won't need to uninstall xrecode and the complaint becomes moot.

Again, thanks. I really did think your xrecode II was the best out there!
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Here's why xrecode2 is better than xrecode3

Post by admin »

I just released new beta version (you can get it like this - viewtopic.php?f=16&t=40)
Now covers will be resized once they're added (If it's configured in Metadata Settings).
TommyGunn
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 2:11 am

Re: Here's why xrecode2 is better than xrecode3

Post by TommyGunn »

@admin

Okay, I just installed the beta and have a question and some feedback:

Question - when clicking 'download and install,' does the update file delete once installation is complete (it's of a significant size)? If not, where does it reside so that I may go in and manually delete it?

Feedback:
1) upon booting the app, I get this error: "Setting enc.copy.pattern.filename not found" I also got the error when saving the metadata
2) i have my cover art settings at 100 x 0 for front cover to embed in the output file. when I just tested this with a 700x700 cover, when I clicked 'save' the cover remained the same (did not resize to 100x100). think you wanted to include this feature in the beta, right?

let me know.
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Here's why xrecode2 is better than xrecode3

Post by admin »

Please send me the diagnostic information (it's under About/Diagnostic) to xrecode@gmail.com - I'll try with your settings.
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:56 pm

Re: Here's why xrecode2 is better than xrecode3

Post by admin »

Issue was resolved in the upcoming version (viewtopic.php?f=16&t=40).
TommyGunn
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 12, 2017 2:11 am

Re: Here's why xrecode2 is better than xrecode3

Post by TommyGunn »

@admin

Thanks for the fixes!!
Post Reply