Quoting movie_madness:

Quote:
DVDP is a *disc-based* catalog instead of a *title-based* catalog like IMDb.

This is only true of the online database, not of our local databases.  I'm happily cataloguing many scores of digital recordings with DVDP right now with no problems at all.

---------------

Quoting DJ Doena:

Quote:
Quoting movie_madness:

Quote:
The prime flaw in DVDP is that its database structure is set up to work only for one movie per disc.

At least that has changed with Alternate Profile IDs.

No, this was only another workaround to cope with a false data base structure. Allowing profiles to have more than one ID does not eliminate the boundaries of the profile based data structure.

In theory it reads: As long, as data is duplicated within a data base, the data base layout is not correct (3rd normal form). ... and theory should be the base of practical products.

The example with the cast and crew is not the only problem in the data base layout, but the most obvious one. I have to agree with movie-madness, that DVDP will never work without friction on base of this data base layout.

Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
Quoting AiAustria:

Quote:
Allowing profiles to have more than one ID does not eliminate the boundaries of the profile based data structure.

I do not see the problem.

The problem AiAustria is referencing refers to something else. If I understood movie_madness correctly, he has DVDs with more than one feature film and he felt like DVDP could not handle that. By now it can (alternate IDs).

What AiAustria is referencing is the problem that every EAN / UPC of Gladiator has its own set of cast and crew for that movie which are completely independent.

If someone fixes the credits for the American DVD that does not fix the credits for the American Blu-ray, nor the English DVD.

If someone adds a birth year for an actor, it does not populate throughout their movies, it stays in that particular profile, if there's already more than one birth year.


A proper database layout would have an actor list where every actor exists only once - like IMDb does.

Then - since we profile discs and not movies - it would have a title list that allows for multiple credit sets for the same movies, e.g. extended cuts with extended credits or localized role names - here IMDb has the reverse problem. They only have one set of credits and have to clumsily add "japanese version" or something like that to the credit list.

And in the DVD profile, you would simply select the proper movie profile.

This way you would have only one actor Russell Crowe born 1964 and (ideally) only one cast list for Gladiator.

But that should have been done years ago and it has been asked for for years. But for Ken it does not seem to be an important feature.

Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
In fact, you are unhappy with Invelos database, and I'm at least as unhappy as you and do not use it, the problem not being its structure, but rules that request incorrect data. But the program is great and has not need to be replaced. In fact I think that I'll use it for ever even without new updates, since it can be used locally without any problem nor link with Invelos.

While I am not as unhappy with the database as Surfeur is, I have to agree that the program is great and you can do, almost, anything you want with it.  I see no reason to chuck the program, with an easy to use interface, simply because one doesn't like the online database structure.

Does anybody have the skills and desire to create a proper database design? There can be no valid discussion of a solution unless such a thing exists and can be implemented. All the years of carping, complaining, wishes, hopes, and all other emotions can be quashed by that. I wouldn't be surprised if nobody can do it, but if they did, I would certainly use it. If such a thing had been produced years ago, by now, a huge portion of the online in use by members would already be converted - little by little.

So how about it? Some action to replace the hopes, dreams and complaints? 

I do not have the necessary skills nor the time to do something like that, but I strongly applaud DJ Doena's past efforts and his and AIAustria's ideas on a proper database structure for the program.

At the same time, I'm not optimistic that we will ever see it happen, as it' would require a huge effort both to develop a new database structure and to convert all accumulated data.

DVD Profiler does not have sustainable development to warrant frequent updates. Invelos should fork the application into a new release and change updates to a subscription base.

Being a developer myself I am a little tempted to create an open source collection management application for home media (strange to think there is no such FOSS already). Even if its just for fun.
After writing this I had to check if there are any such OSS applications out there:
http://www.antp.be/software/moviecatalog
http://www.junauza.com/2013/01/best-movie-collection-managers-for-linux.html
https://macawmovies.wordpress.com/

Quoting Lowpro:

Quote:
Quoting movie_madness:

Quote:
Quoting Lowpro:

Quote:
DVD Profiler isn't dead or hibernating as far as I'm concerned.  It does a more than respectful job of cataloging my physical DVD and Blu-ray collection and will continue to do so, irrespective of what updates may or may not come in the future.  I also have no interest in digital downloads.  I own 4,193 DVD's and Blu-ray's and have yet to redeem a single digital download.  For those that find value in digital downloads knock yourself out.  Color me not interested.  I have no interest in purchasing and cataloging digital downloads and no interest in discussions about digital downloads quite frankly.

Do you realize a lot of movies are available for online streaming or download only (in HD, to boot) and are not or has never been, or even never will be, on disc, let alone Blu-ray?  If you love old or non-mainstream movies, you must know this.  A lot of those titles are so obscure that disc releases are probably very unlikely.  That is especially true for Blu-ray, since Blu-rays are more expensive to make.  For instance, a ton of Shaw Brothers martial-art flicks have been released in *HD* on iTunes, Amazon, and Youtube.  Good luck waiting for Blu-rays for those titles.  They don't get or may never get Blu-ray releases even in their native Hong Kong.  Among western films, there are several Hitchcock silent films that are available for HD streaming, but no Blu-rays.  Then you have 20th Century Fox that celebrated its 100th anniversary by releasing 100 titles only digitally.  That's just at the top of my head; there are a lot more.  Just sign up Netflix for a month and you will find untold number of films and TV shows in HD streaming but not on Blu-ray and never will be.  I'm not telling you to give up discs, since I still buy lots of discs myself.  But DON'T IGNORE STREAMING just because of some silly personal principles.  Have an open mind and you will only benefit yourself, instead of limiting yourself only to discs, which will only result in you having fewer chances to see certain movies than you would otherwise.

I own over 4,000 DVD's and Blu-ray's.  Do you really think I need enlightened?  Please.  Of course I know there are titles which are only available via digital downloads and/or streaming, many of which may never see the light of day on DVD or Blu-ray.  Even so, there are still more titles available currently on DVD and Blu-ray than I'll ever have the time to watch in my lifetime, not to mention any future DVD and Blu-ray releases, both catalog titles and new releases.  That being said, I'd really suggest you read my words more careful.  Don't ignore streaming because of my silly principles?  Have an open mind and I'll benefit myself?  Really?  What I said was that I have no interest in "purchasing" and cataloging digital downloads.  That type of "collecting" doesn't interest me.  If I miss out on various titles as a result so be it.  Worse case, I'm left with more time to enjoy other things in life.  As for streaming, I never even mentioned streaming.  For the record, I've been a member of Netflix since the service was first debuted, both for physical rentals and then streaming as well once it was offered, my use of streaming strictly limited to content not available for rent or purchase on DVD or Blu-ray.

So you care about movies enough to own 4000 discs, but when you can't download digital movies because of some silly principles, you suddenly say to yourself, I don't care, so be it.  If that is your argument, then you don't have an argument. 

And you still haven't answered why exactly you don't like to download movies. Is it because you don't like the technology, you don't have the Internet bandwidth, and/or you don't trust digital services? 

I'm old-school and buy discs just like all of you, but old dogs need to learn tricks too.  This video shows how older folks handle Netflix.


Quoting Lowpro:

Quote:
Quoting scotthm:

Quote:
Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
... lets face it  overall ., DVD sales are pretty well dead ...

thoughts?

While it's true that disc sales are declining, I wouldn't exactly call $5.4 Billion in sales (2016) a "dead" market.

Exactly.  Oh my.  Physical disc sales are declining.  Only $5,400,000,000 in sales last year.  Hardly even worth the bother.

Sales have been declining 5-10% every year for the last few years, and we are already seeing some of the effects.  Studios have been selling those crappy made-on-demand DVD-Rs for years now.  And whenever a 3D movie comes out, it usually does not come out on 3D Blu-ray, and you have to import foreign 3D Blu-ray editions instead.  Maybe you don't care, but the situation is indeed getting more and more dire as time goes on.  A lot more discs would probably have been released if it weren't for these dire situations.  And in movie forums there are always people asking why certain movies are not out on discs.  My friend, the only sadder thing than bad disc sales is someone who doesn't even want to admit sales are bad.