Article: JPLAY for iOS Is Now Available

[steveoat]

I am trialing jplay for IOS and none of my lumin streamers are seen by Jplay.  The only thing seen are my ipads and ZenStream.

[steveoat]

When will the update that fixes the problem with Lumin streamers be available?

[steveoat]

2 hours ago, stefano_mbp said:

This seems a fine compromise, hope to see it “in action” asasp …

So much for the extended trial period.  I just received a receipt from the Apple store acknowledging my purchase of JPlay.  I will honor this hoping that the promised changes/improvements take place.  However, thus far a very disappointing experience -- no fixes so I can actually perform a trial using my lumin streamers.  So I have had an essentially useless trial period.  You have to do better than this!!

[steveoat]

"Update for build 22.  Where did you get this build from.  I checked the iphone store and still no oupdate.

 

[steveoat]

4 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Marcin has a small group of beta testers, to improve the app for everyone without having everyone test and get frustrated. 

And paying for a product which is unusable is not frustrating?

[steveoat]

9 hours ago, wklie said:

 

On December 13 (page 7 here, a few posts above your first post in this thread) Marcin asked Lumin users to send him a PM.  If you did that you'd have access to the test builds of JPlay app.

 

I did this but he told me he had enough beta testers and didn't provide anything.  I also believe he said that he would extend the trial period, but never did.  I would never do business like this.

[steveoat]

3 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I assure you, if you developed an app, you would cap the number of beta testers. 

Why do people keep making excuses for what is clearly poor business practice.  We were told that the trial would be extended, but I was just charged $49 for buying the app, which has been useless to me.   Compare this with the exemplary responsiveness of Peter and Lumin.  You should note that although I am now retired, I was involved in product development for both online and in-store products.  If I acted like this, I would have been fired.

[steveoat]

23 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I assure you, if you developed an app, you would cap the number of beta testers. 

I have been involved in extensive beta testing.  In pre-product beta testing, of course you would cap the number of users.  However, once a product is released and you have what you believe to be a workable fix (as Marcin told me in the email), you give the person that fix to try out.  This has been the policy of Audirvana, Lumin and many other companies.  Marcin did not do this, and told me the fixed release would appear shortly -- it obviously has not.  People keep saying "after Christmas" and "after New Year".  Maybe should qualify this by stating which year they are talking about?  And note that the developer has been non-existant recently on this forum to respond to these issues.  Is this also acceptable?

[steveoat]

3 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

 

steveoat, perhaps your expectations are a bit different than many of us. Marcin is likely taking a bit of time off to spend with his family over Christmas and New Year's holidays. 

 

I'm much more inclined to encourage a developer and support a developer who offers a product that I believe the market really needs, rather than get irate over a $50 purchase that isn't perfect and wasn't updated immediately. If everyone responded like you, I know I wouldn't develop an app for public release. People aren't perfect and can't meet everyone's expectations. A little grace and encouragment goes a long way. 

 

Also, comparing an app that has been available for one month, to apps with over a decade of availability and much larger teams working on them, is a bit over the top in my view. 

 

 

I'm only speaking for myself here, but perhaps you aren't the first person I'd supply with a beta fix. Your expectations can't be met without perfection.

This is unfair.  I have received beta fixes from Audirvana which didn't always work, but appreciated the attempt and gave what I hope would be useful feedback.  Not looking for perfection, but an honest attempt and most importantly communication.  If the developer would have simply communicated that the update is taking longer than he expected and that he would definitely extend the trial, I would have been happier.  And, if I wasn't charged $49 for what is initially an unusable product, that would have been fine.  I am far from a perfectionist -- anyone who has worked on beta tests can't expect perfection.  I am talking about managing expectations.  And I don't appreciate you giving the developer the benefit of the doubt, and not the consumer (me).  I also hope you can do better in the future.

[steveoat]

8 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I've known Marcin for years. He is one of the nicest guys in the business and is extremely competent. He wants this app to be perfect far more than anyone complaining. He is an audiophile who uses what he creates every day. Based on who he is, he deserves the benefit of the doubt. He has earned it.

Fine, but what about your derogatory comments about me:  "I'm only speaking for myself here, but perhaps you aren't the first person I'd supply with a beta fix. Your expectations can't be met without perfection."  This is not true, and I feel out of line.

8 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

 

 

[steveoat]

21 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

I can only go on what I know. It appears to me you have incredibly high expectations for an app that's about a month old, and freely voice opinions on the level similar to someone who just spent $1,000,000 on a new house only to find out the roof leaks, the basement leaks, and the key to the door doesn't work.

 

There's nothing derogatory about believing you have high expectations, based on your statements. There's also nothing wrong with having high expectations. You are free to live as you choose. We are all different. 

You seem to conveniently ignore my prior statements and selectively choose what you want to respond to.  My comments reflect being charged $49 for an app that does not work yet for me, when I was told that the trial period would be extended.  Given this, I never expected to be charged.  I had many years experience in market and product research for large and Fortune 500 companies.  I see myself as reasonable and expect problems -- you chose to ignore my comments about Audirvana and my expectation that as long as a company communicates with my clearly and keeps me in the loop I am fine with imperfection.  You seem to explicitly side with the manufacturer without considering the full range of comments.  I was originally trained as a psychologist, as well as a market researcher -- I have a Ph.D. in psychology.  Your inference of my personality is quite erroneous and seems to be based more on your familiarity with the developer -- if I am to be psychological, you seem quite protective of him.  You know nothing of me and I think your inferences are way off the mark.  You are also free to live as you choose.  I choose to be more careful in my assessments of people until I have more information about them.

[steveoat]

14 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

 

Great, then you full understand the Goldwater Rule.

Yes I do.  I also stated that I am no longer a practicing psychologist, and in my above statements never stated that I am offering a professional assessment.  Prior to this I thought better of you.  I now see you are petty and arrogant and can't admit that perhaps you made an error.  If you look at the context of all my comments and yours, you can see that your responses are highly selective and always give the benefit of the doubt to the developer, not to the frustrated customer.  You want to state the Goldwater rule -- fine.  I will leave you with marketing 101 --"Never insult the customer".   I am willing to admit to error when I make one.  This is how I choose to live my life (I am using your statement, which appear to be incredibly condescending).   You obviously have chosen a different path for yourself.  

[steveoat]

11 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

 

 

Wow... 

 

And a good day to you as well.

I see its a waste of my time to comment about what I felt was a disappointing initial response on the part of the vendor.  Your comment implies that there is no merit to my argument and you only seem to defend Chris.  That's fine, but I wonder what precedent this sets for other members of this forum.  You only seem to see fault in my response, and not that of either Chris or the vendor.  I hardly see this as the winning formula for a discussion forum.

[steveoat]

5 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

 

If you insist, I see hypocrisy in your comments. You say that you are willing to take responsibility and admit when you have made a mistake, yet you continue insisting that everyone else is wronging you when no such thing has happened. Perhaps you think you are special and deserving of extra attention from Marcin rather than being the recipient of the same communications and problems with the app as everyone else here.

 

At this point either request a refund and delete the software, or try the update and if it fixes your problems then come back here, apologize to Marcin, and admit that your behavior was in error and the problems you mentioned are fixed.

I see you have misinterpreted all of my comments and your response to my comments is ridiculous and beyond any further comment.  I will not participate in any future comments on this forum.  You will probably be happy with this -- so be it.

[steveoat]

4 hours ago, stefano_mbp said:

How did you get it?

For me the prior version was able to open pdf files. -- I would click on the icon and the pdf files would open for my local albums (version 1.02). However, with the newest version I can see the icon for the pdf file but when I try to open it I get the error message "Requested resource could not be found".  I am currently using version 1.03.  By the way, pdf files open fine from Qobuz

[steveoat]

8 minutes ago, mnuno10 said:

@Patatorz @stefano_mbp

I think "Digital Booklet.pdf" will not be recognized by MinimServer. Try change the filename to "booklet.pdf".

Check this page for more info on the subject:

https://minimserver.com/ug-library.html#Information files

The pdf booklet function was working fine for me in 1.02.  However, in the new one, jplay shows the booklet icon, but when I click on it I get the same error term others have gotten.  I tried rescanning minimserver and resynching, but no luck.