Feature Request: multi-user support

Channels DVR Server
#1

don’t panic, i’m actually not asking for anything too complicated. all i’d really like to see is an “upper level” tag/filter. all DVR functionality would remain completely untouched. basically when a user opens the DVR from a device they’d be given the opportunity to remain in a default “All Users” mode, or select a unique user. on a specific device they’d be able to select who the default user on that device should be.

from there, any activity that unique user does will be tagged with that unique user’s name. so that when that user views Recordings, etc, they will only see those that are relevant to them. this would be very useful in a family setting where dad and mom each have shows they individually are interested in, and when you throw kids into the mix even more so. now dad can setup his personal devices to always open in “Dad” user, and he won’t have all his recordings cluttered with those of other family members. since this really is just a tag/filter feature, the ability to go in after the fact and add/remove specific user tag(s) for a recoding would allow a recording to be easily converted from a Group tag to just a Dad tag, or maybe a combination such as a Mom and Child tag. at least in web access, the user control would simply be in the top right of the page along side the Account log in/out.

i would say Schedule under DVR would still show all recordings but maybe add an indication as to who the user was that scheduled it. that way if there is an observed conflict, a user would know who to go to to let them know their recording is not going to be caught bc mom and dad have something more important to record :slight_smile:

this would also help lay the ground work for another feature: for parents being able to set up their kid’s devices to only be able to access recordings tagged with their unique username, and kids not being able to change that setting. parents could create Passes/Recordings and tag them with their child’s username, and only those recordings would appear on their child’s Channels app on their iOS device or ATV. kids would be able to set up their own recordings.

5 Likes
#2

This is awesome. With this I could easily get me mom setup on this and maybe even my mother in law.

1 Like
#3

I’m not for or against this, although I wouldn’t use it if implemented. I would prefer it be as unobtrusive as possible, ie: no passwords. But from a programming perspective, what you are asking for is complicated, as it requires multiple levels of changes across multiple user interfaces.

#4

respectfully i don’t agree for a number of reasons. one, i never said anything about password. this is NOT a user account, authentication methodology at all. it’s merely a tagging/filter approach. i’ve written databases for several decades, the only way Channels works in the first place is through a relational database structure. my opinion is that adding one more variable to the relationship is about as simple as you can make it. as for the interface, i think iOS and ATV Channels apps would require the most tinkering, but none of the day to day pages would have any changes whatsoever to them. and if they did it would be the addition of an additional selection that can be made at the top of the page which determines (filters) the results being shown below. there are already headers with options, so adding an additional option isn’t a stretch. as for the web interface that i would imagine would require far less effort to change than the apps. adding an option in the header to the top of the page adjacent to the already present account log in and out, would be pretty easy. again, this wouldn’t be an authentication thing, and it wouldn’t be marketed as a way to “keep” kids out of content they shouldn’t see. it would only be to help filter the content that’s there to improve the experience for each unique user in a household.

1 Like
#5

for the record, this is already occurring wth the whole All, Sports, Kids filtering that occurs on the Recordings page already. there would just be a level of filtering one step above that that would tag each recording with this additional variable so it can filter out content a particular user has no interest in seeing since it wasn’t something they wanted recorded.

1 Like
#6

While I agree with both of you…I am leaning towards a more complicated side when you start thinking of user scenarios.

Mom: Records Dancing with the Stars
Mother in Law(MIL): Also records Dancing with the stars. However she also sets the record time to extend 5 minutes

Do you do 2 recordings? Same recording but it handles the times different? Could be simple in program…could be difficult?

This one will be the most challenging: I have 2 CBS affiliates. With the above scenario, what if Mom records on CBS1, while MIL records on CBS2? Same show, different channel. You now have 2 recordings with the same exact XML…aside from channel #

#7

add to that that the all, sports, kids, etc tags are not SQL-type relational databases. It is part of the guide data that comes from the guide provider. So it’s not just adding a new tag. It is creating a new database to store the new tags and user/recording priorities. And what about the settings options? Do these get changed to multi-dimensional arrays to hold data for each user?. A new priority system has to be implemented to resolve conflicts or weird things will happen. And how does up-next work? Does up-next predict what each user tag wants to watch next?
Not to mention the whole default-user per device thing.
I am not trying to argue with anybody. And I do think that Channels will probably eventually implement something like what you are suggesting. Surely, it is possible. Netflix allows separate user accounts, all with their own settings, favorites, they even each have unique suggestions for what to watch. It works great. I am just pointing out, as a programmer, that this “really simple idea” is in-fact not as simple as it seems.

#8

With all respect to everyone here, I’m really beginning to feel like I’m speaking French. Why does everyone want to keep over complicating my suggestion?!

Let me under complicate for a moment. CHANNELS ALREADY TAGS!!! Whether you realize it or not Channels already tags your recordings, I’m merely asking for a way to tag with a unique user identity.

When you record a football game, Channels automatically tags it as “Sports”, when you record “Winnie the Pooh” Channels automatically tags it as “Kids”. Then when you look at your list of recordings you can filter by those tags by choosing All, Sports, or Kids.

Nothing I’ve suggested adds anything to what’s under the hood of Channels already other than adding the ability to add a tag for unique user.

Channels would never have to decide if it needs to record a show twice because unique users are still interacting with the same guide and schedule. All that would be happening is a scheduled event would be tagged with who scheduled it so the resulting recording could be tagged with that same info.

Mom going into the guide to record something would see that Grandma had already scheduled it. If mom wanted to, she could then add her tag to the scheduled event so it would appear under her preferred shows later, and if she didn’t she’d still see it listed under All Recordings just like happens now.

The only automated thing I’m suggesting is that there could be a default tag selected for a device, so that a user can better tailor their experience on their own devcie(s)

#9

Those tags are from the guide data provider

#10

You are correct, but there is a database structure that Channels creates and uses for tracking your schedules and recordings, none of that is provided through the guide data. So adding a field to that structure for tagging a recording would be a simple procedure.

Again, as I said before I’m not asking that ALL elements of the Channels interface be changed to reflect the unique user experience, just the Recordings view. That view already respects the All, Sports, Kids filters, Channels would just add a filter for user. In the iOS and ATV apps, it would just add an additional section below/above the other (Up Next, All, Sports, Kids) for each user.

#11

So, given that I don’t understand how the code works things in Channels, I would be interested to here from @tmm1 or @maddox just from a feasibility standpoint how they see their code working with this type of request.

#12

funny you should say that scooter, as i was just about to say i’m not quite sure why we’re all going back and forth on how this should be implemented as all i did was request a feature. how it gets done is up to the developer to figure out. assuming they like the idea to start with.

i am surprised there aren’t more people speaking up who would like the ability to “hide” all the crap that other people in your family are recording, so that you can more easily get to your stuff. but i guess i’m just weird or something

#13

You know how it goes…one thing led to another, and then… :smiley:

1 Like
#14

There have been previous requests for “profiles” going back to last April, however it would be implemented. I thought it was a “nice to have”, but it’s never created any problems in my house with too much on the screen or people deleting or messing up the progress info.

Ensuring that all the existing clients are closer to parity with iOS/tvOS (excepting for platform abilities) or a Win10 UWP would be higher on my list.

Multiple Profiles
#15

ImNotSerious, thanks for the informative response. my only counter to that would be that i have a 4yr old with an iPad Pro and she can totally rock that thing. but it would be nice if i could set up channels to only show “her” shows when she opens it, so that i know she has easy access for getting to the things i’ve recorded for her.

as i said before, i’m not looking for authentication here, so i’m not suggesting Channels should aid in keeping my child away from content i don’t want her seeing.

i will search the term “profiles” and see what i can learn about other’s suggestions/request on the topic. thanks

#16

Hi folks.

Realistically speaking, multi-user support is not something we’re going to have the bandwidth for until sometime next year.

There’s no sense in talking about implementation details- we’ll figure that out. What we’re most interested in from everyone is use-cases. This is a great one for instance:

We would love to hear more concrete use-cases like this as it will help us design and implement something that makes Channels DVR better for everyone.

5 Likes
#17

I feel better trying to think like a programmer though…even though I’m not one. ha

#18

when you’re not neck deep with other stuff, would you mind explaining a little the “bandwidth” statement in some more detail?

i had really thought a simple “manual” filter vs an all out user account management approach. but like you said, you guys will figure out the devil in the details

#19

We use the term bandwidth for other things at my work too. I think he is just saying they only have so much time and resources to put toward upgrades. Until he has more “bandwidth” to get to this sorta thing on the agenda they have for the app it just can’t get implemented.

Definitely interested for the same use case as my 2 year old gets around apps like crazy herself.

1 Like
#20

The “recorded” show index database doesn’t get touched

new table added for user filtering

table: viewer ~~> id,name,adult_content(true/false)

                  note: adult_content(true/false) set when submitting recording default = false

table: dvrshow_viewer ~~> viewer.viewer_profile_id, [dvr_recordings?].show_id

gui stays the same in
if there is a profile chosen “viewer” then filter all recorded shows for viewer.
recording something that someone else already set to record show appear as it does now… i.e. “modify” with the option to [add to my profile]

in short this took all of 5 minutes to conjure up.

There is a need to sort out a recordings per each family member. especially to protect children!