Talk:Front Row
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Macintosh. This means that the WikiProject has identified it as an article pertaining to Apple Computer, but is not currently working to improve it. WikiProject Macintosh itself is an attempt to improve, grow, standardize, and attain featured status for Wikipedia's articles related to Apple Macintosh and Apple Computer. We need all your help, so join in today! |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. |
Contents |
[edit] POV Dispute
"The remote is based on the interface of the iPod shuffle which has six buttons and demonstrates the simplicity portrayed by the design of all Apple products, compared to the 40 buttons of a Windows Media Center remote."
The wording presents a bias against MCE of unneeded complexity. In addition, there's no reason to compare the remote for Front Row to the MCE remote. For one, this article is about Front Row not MCE. Secondly, the MCE remote is designed for a system that does more than Front Row (i.e. channel changer - that's 10 buttons right there). In short, the comparison does not belong in the article, nor is it balanced. Paul Cyr 05:09, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- That is absolute POV. I've made an edit that limits that section to the facts - I love Apple products, but Wikipedia should not be the location of Apple's promotional material. The fact that Front Row is meant to compete with MCE is contained in the next sentence. Does anyone oppose my edit? Bbatsell 06:10, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- I've re-edited the section, noting that the comparison originated with Apple. I don't find the button-number comparison POV because they are simply facts. And important ones too But I agree that "demonstrates the simplicity portrayed by the design of all Apple products" was perhaps pushing it. Feel free to find a quote from microsoft saying why MC remote is better if you think this isn't balanced. --Quasipalm 14:41, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- I don't want to put a quote in by MS for the reasons in my original post. As well "It is likely that Front Row was released to compete with Media Center." do you have a source for this? Paul Cyr 15:25, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- It's quite obvious that it is meant to compete with Media Center, it has very similar functions, a similar user interface, and aims to bring the Macintosh to a good deal of usability in the living room, like Microsoft have been trying to do with their Media Center software for PCs. What is it competing with if it's not competing with Media Center? — Wackymacs 16:05, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- If it is so obvious you surely can provide a source. As for similar functions, it doesn't even have a PVR. "What is it competing with if it's not competing with Media Center?" So iLife is competing with what MS product then? This isn't really a new product as it is an improvement to the iMac. Saying it was designed to compete with MCE "just because" is like saying the iPod Nano was designed to compete with something from MS. Just because MS has something that has to do with media management doesn't mean Front Row is competing with it. Because of this uncertainty, for the article to even have a chance of having that comment in you must provide a source. Paul Cyr 16:47, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- Not every product has to be competing with something, so your comments about the nano and iLife are irrelevant. We can assume that Front Row is competing with Media Center because Steve Jobs himself spent time comparing their features and remotes in his keynote, which happens to be where your debate started. Wikipedia should not be used to promote a given product, but facts used in product campaigns don't have to be kept secret. When a company is competing with another, their arguments are valid material. Sidney 07:28, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- You (Paul Cyr) asked me for a source, but I wasn't the one that put that in originally, I just replaced it since it's not POV. However, I'll leave it out for now. Now, the fact that most remotes have many more buttons is very relevant and it's certainly not POV. Saying it's better than the media center remote would be POV, but this line didn't -- it simply offered the numbers for comparison. I think the idea that this is POV is meritless. --Quasipalm 23:32, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- This wouldn't have even been an issue had the original editor not used the phrase "...and demonstrates the simplicity portrayed by the design of all Apple products, compared to the...", which is clearly POV. Paul Cyr is very correct in the fact that Front Row does not have MANY of the functions of MCE. So, if the phrase is going to compare the remotes and imply that Apple's is simpler, in my opinion it should also be stated that the probable reason for this is the different aims of the two different pieces of software, as well as their differing functions. Otherwise, it is POV. Bbatsell 02:38, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- Head, nail, Bbatsell hit ;) Paul Cyr 03:19, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
- This wouldn't have even been an issue had the original editor not used the phrase "...and demonstrates the simplicity portrayed by the design of all Apple products, compared to the...", which is clearly POV. Paul Cyr is very correct in the fact that Front Row does not have MANY of the functions of MCE. So, if the phrase is going to compare the remotes and imply that Apple's is simpler, in my opinion it should also be stated that the probable reason for this is the different aims of the two different pieces of software, as well as their differing functions. Otherwise, it is POV. Bbatsell 02:38, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- You (Paul Cyr) asked me for a source, but I wasn't the one that put that in originally, I just replaced it since it's not POV. However, I'll leave it out for now. Now, the fact that most remotes have many more buttons is very relevant and it's certainly not POV. Saying it's better than the media center remote would be POV, but this line didn't -- it simply offered the numbers for comparison. I think the idea that this is POV is meritless. --Quasipalm 23:32, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- Not every product has to be competing with something, so your comments about the nano and iLife are irrelevant. We can assume that Front Row is competing with Media Center because Steve Jobs himself spent time comparing their features and remotes in his keynote, which happens to be where your debate started. Wikipedia should not be used to promote a given product, but facts used in product campaigns don't have to be kept secret. When a company is competing with another, their arguments are valid material. Sidney 07:28, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- If it is so obvious you surely can provide a source. As for similar functions, it doesn't even have a PVR. "What is it competing with if it's not competing with Media Center?" So iLife is competing with what MS product then? This isn't really a new product as it is an improvement to the iMac. Saying it was designed to compete with MCE "just because" is like saying the iPod Nano was designed to compete with something from MS. Just because MS has something that has to do with media management doesn't mean Front Row is competing with it. Because of this uncertainty, for the article to even have a chance of having that comment in you must provide a source. Paul Cyr 16:47, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- It's quite obvious that it is meant to compete with Media Center, it has very similar functions, a similar user interface, and aims to bring the Macintosh to a good deal of usability in the living room, like Microsoft have been trying to do with their Media Center software for PCs. What is it competing with if it's not competing with Media Center? — Wackymacs 16:05, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- I don't want to put a quote in by MS for the reasons in my original post. As well "It is likely that Front Row was released to compete with Media Center." do you have a source for this? Paul Cyr 15:25, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
- I've re-edited the section, noting that the comparison originated with Apple. I don't find the button-number comparison POV because they are simply facts. And important ones too But I agree that "demonstrates the simplicity portrayed by the design of all Apple products" was perhaps pushing it. Feel free to find a quote from microsoft saying why MC remote is better if you think this isn't balanced. --Quasipalm 14:41, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] POV continued
So are we in agreement that the comparison of buttons between Front Row and MediaCenter is OK -- as long as it is phrased in a way that implies that neither remote is inherintely superior? --Quasipalm 18:11, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
- I would still avoid it for my original reasons, however if it did not imply one controller was better than another, then at least it is not POV. Paul Cyr 03:21, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Disambiguation needed
I just noticed that about half of the links coming to Front Row are actually about the BBC Radio 4 arts programme, rather than the Macintosh application. Clearly we need some disambiguation, but I have no idea what the best way to do it is — should the application remain at Front Row with the radio programme moved to Front Row (radio), or should Front Row become a disambiguation page with the application moved to Front Row (Macintosh) or something? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 17:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- From what I can tell, a few more than half are for the Mac software, so it'd be easier just to change the 5 links for the radio program to Front Row (radio). --Quasipalm 19:00, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- Done. If you want to make the radio show page, do so at Front Row (radio). One of the 5 links was actually for a third item: a video label company, so 4 were changed to the radio link, and one was changed to a third link: Front Row (label). Thanks for pointing this out. --Quasipalm 19:03, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- I've created a stub at Front Row (radio), which anyone else who's interested can expand, and added a disambig notice at the top of Front Row. Thanks for taking care of the links! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 21:47, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
-
[edit] Illegal file link?
Should wikipedia post a link to the Front Row Enabler, which is an illegal download and violates Apple's copyrights and terms of use? Alegoo92 16:45, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- Front Row Enabler is not illegal. AlistairMcMillan 22:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] How to boot to Front Row?
Is this a reasonable page to ask about setting up to boot the mac directly into Front Row, if it's supposed to be a media centre, rather than a computer with aspirations? Ta.
