I have a feeling we will soon get the next beta and I would like these changes in it.

1. Ability to set the default value when a new profile is created and added to the collection, for Video Standards (PAL or NTSC). This is the most annoying default setting in the entire application (for me) as I NEVER buy NTSC formatted DVDs and I NEVER will. Yea, I'm in region 2 country. In Sweden, 99% of all DVDs are PAL, I think.

2. Whenever I add a couple of DVDs and I set purchase place, then I happen to add a new profile and I have to set the purchase place again. What is up with that? I'm still doing it from the same ordered place, say discshop for instance. next I add a profile that exist and the purchase place is there. Why does it not remember set purchase place if the profile doesn't exist in the online database?
I think the same happens to purchase date too.

3. In the Add DVDs to owned/ordered/wishlist window -> title -> type a title = not in online -> click the Download Profile from Invelos (untick) checkbox -> re-enter title. Why can it not remember what I just typed?

4. And, (for me) region 2 is preselected and yet after adding the profile to the pending additions and the edit window appears it says No region coding in the general information tab??? Luckily, the preselected locality is sticking.

5. Ability to set the default font size in the HTML editor (coding window). Now it is too small and I can't find a way to enlarge it. Maybe there actually is a hack to do them larger myself, which would be awesome.

6. During the download process of pending additions I think it would be good if a profile defaults to PAL if the default value of Video Standard is set to PAL (1.), possibly with a an option to do this action.

7. Better visual difference indication for textarea based fields like Overview in comparisson window while evaluating a profile.

The collated thread is just a compiled list of popular requests from other threads.

It actually starts with -

Quoting Kulju:

Quote:

NOTE:
This thread is not for suggesting new ideas, but for collating the most popular ones from the separate threads. So if you have a brand new idea, please start a new tread for that first.

These are just the things that xyrano would like to see so starting a new thread is correct.

OK.

The problem with his thread then becomes 10 milles of posts from all corners, which Ken probably won't look at. The way he worded it sounds more like an invite than specifically what he wanted necesssarily , and I would guess that it would not be very hard to find several similarly configured thread already. I am not putting him down or anything, just saying that I don't think is the most effective method. I have watched users do this for TEN years, repeatedly, this is nothing new. Just sayin' and offering friendly advice.

Skip

Xyrano:

We already have a GROUP thread for Feature Requests that is stickied to the Forum. If you make a feature request the user that is running that thread should pick it up and move it there. You set up- a thread that is tottally separate and subject to bouncing around and you expect it to be found. How many of them do we need. The stickied thread is already intended to COLLECT Feature request, we don't need another one. Hellooooooo, McFly.

Skip

Skip - that group topic is not for posting new feature requests, it says so right on the top of the first post (in bright red even).

You're supposed to start separate threads for different feature requests.  That's what this forum group is for.

Quoting Dr. Killpatient:

Quote:
Skip - that group topic is not for posting new feature requests, it says so right on the top of the first post (in bright red even).

You're supposed to start separate threads for different feature requests.  That's what this forum group is for.

You missed it, Doc, But Kulju, got it.   This thread is not an individual request thread. This thread essentially duplicates the stickied thread without the sticky. I have made no comment on what i think of the validity of xyranos request. I have commented on the need for a travelling mass Request thread when we already have one which is STICKIED. Perhaps it is in the way I read the Thread title, but that is what it looks like to me.

Skip