Why are the skins so basic & plain? (1 Viewer)

[Livin]

I've been trying MP after using XBMC for 6 years... just to see how MP is.

One thing that strikes me is that the skins are severely lacking.

The skins for XBMC are amazing. Not just the animations but the creativity and differentiation between them. the skins here are all the same. Mostly, change gfx and keep everything else the same. Boring, lack polish, and lack creativity - and, with a few exceptions, look no better that what you get stock on a $99 media player, bluray player, etc.

I'm not sure if this is a limitation of the skinning engine or lack of talented skinners?

I'm not trying to bash the skinners as you are probably doing the best you can but there are many features MP has over XBMC but winning people over is just as much about look'n'feel as it is features... Apple proved this true.

again, this is not a flame... I'm just trying to understand why the drastic difference from XBMC?

(note: I plan a full review/comparison between XBMC and MP... they both have strong points)

 

[2BitSculptor]

... and this is why MP II is under development to allow for more creative tools for the skinners and a more comprehensive platform for users.

MP 1 is not slated for many improvements as the current skin engine is pushed almost to its capacity now. There is still room for small tweeks and fixing known issues, but the focus will be on MP II shortly. The MP II team is already being assembled and have shifted support/development for MP 1 to a new (capable) team.

You could always try your hand at creating a skin or two that moves MP 1 in the visual direction you would like to see. Or do a few phot0shop mock-ups and convince a skinner to collaborate.

Best regards, and welcome to the forum...

Chuck

 

[Livin]

Since XBMC is open source, what about making the MP skin engine compatible with the XBMC format? Then skinners, and skins, can support both easily.

 

[gxtracker]

Several skins have already been ported over from XBMC - Project Mayhem, for example, was a great early skin that was ported over. For some really good modern skins take a look at StreamedMP or Xface - both of which put anything XBMC has to shame IMO.

Im currently using StreamedMP with the Basichome personalized and everybody who uses it is constantly in awe of how beautiful the interface is. I know that MP2 will be able to build off this foundation and add even more functionality for skinners to create with.

With that being said, i enjoy the fact that there are better community created skins out there then what is included by default. Yes, i agree that you do need a good looking and functional interface that ships by default, but being an open source project it only makes sense to have MP lean on its userbase to create amazing content.

I have always been of the belief that the core developers should concentrate on creating the most stable and feature rich core application they can. Build a good API to let external developers and designers build off that strong foundation, and you have the makings for a very powerful HTPC solution.

 

[joostzilla]

True, XMBC has the edge when it comes to eyecandy skins. But I bet MP is used more often as a dedicated mediacenter in peoples livingroom. Mostly due to the TV feature i guess.
And a mediacenter really cant function properly without a 10 feet interface. And that where XBMC skins fall short. Often to much eyecandy, to much info on one screen and to little eye for usability for dailly family use.
Dont get me wrong, i like eyecandy to show off my system but when it comes to WAF simple, clean skins are preffered. Apple proves this true
That said, i agree that the skins at MP could be more professional looking though.

 

[Paranoid Delusion]

So much eye candy, so little functioning use, using latest xbmc and none of my mkv files will play, getting audio only.

 

[SpudR]

That'll be your dodgy film collection PD
I don't agree that XBMC has the edge on skins - I believe the best looking ones get ported over anyway!
Engineering 101 - functionality over form a great looking car wont be any good without a working engine..!

but winning people over is just as much about look'n'feel as it is features... Apple proved this true.

Actually this has a lot to do with the functionality of the product - over priced and insecure yes, but fabulously simple to use and they work (generally) - it just so happens that they also have great designers in the Apple camp too.
The early Mac UIs were seriously ugly IMHO, but the functionality and simplicity made them sell...

Note to dev's - sod the looks, make it work

 

[bhengeveld]

I like them being plain and simple. Mostly there's to much info being displayed imho, but if there's anything I (or anyone else) wants to add, the XML stuff is not that hard. I like to mod around with the Maya skin myself. (and yes, I have to add that's because I saw the 'Alaska' XMBC skin on a mediacenter one of my friends made )

 

[kiwijunglist]

Livin - I suggest you check out

Maya
Fidelity
StreamedMP
Monochrome / Indigo
Mustayaluca
Xfactor
Bleazle

 

[Livin]

re: Why are the skins so basic & plain?

This thread is about skins, not other funtionality - I will do a direct comparison of other functionality in another thread.

I've been using MP for 2 weeks now, I used XBMC for many years.

I've tried several skins and currently using StreamedMP but the text is too small on my 65" screen from 10' away. Others like Maya are so basic they look like the $99 devices from Seagate/WD/etc. While others have potential but lack polish (fit & finish).

On XBMC I use the skin called BIG Alaska... it is very simple, very easy to navigate, but very polished and appealing to use on a large screen. There are a few others in the works that are also move eyecandy and have a lot of potential.

The skins on XBMC beat MPs skins with ease in these areas...

ease of use & navigation
look'n'feel - proper alignment of text/graphics, use of screen real estate, etc
polish - overall quality of graphics


I'm pretty sure this is a large reason why XBMC gets so much press and many other apps are based on XBMC, not MP.

There are many things I like MP over XBMC for and I will explain those in another thread but I was curious why the skins lacked luster - it looks like maybe a combination of the skinning engine and there is less emphasis put on skinning at MP.