Support and General Use > Audio Playback, Database and Playlists
[iPod 5G] Read iPod native playlists in Rb database
runawaywind:
--- Quote from: Llorean on July 08, 2007, 08:15:36 PM ---Then why is the fact that iTunes puts files in a structure that Rockbox has always been capable of reading relevant in any way toward an argument that Rockbox should accept their playlists?
--- End quote ---
It seemed easy enough to read directories made by iTunes, and was wondering if reading playlists would have been any harder, though I realize that Rockbox does not try to interpret any part of iTunesDB which goes beyond just reading the directories.
It was merely an observation whether it was possible.
--- Quote from: robin0800 on July 08, 2007, 12:14:45 PM ---Are you aware that rockbox already has these WPS Tags
%rp Song playcount
%rr Song rating (0-10). This tag can also be used in a conditional tag, %?rr
which implies some asspects of smart tags are already in place.
--- End quote ---
I know they are available, but havent used it yet. The manual has no extra info about the Runtime Database tags. The wiki has basically the same information. Is there any more extensive documentation of these two features?
Exitao:
So, to make things work, I have to give up iTunes (I'm willing to do this), and use a media manager, like Media Monkey (not bad), but not use MM's ipod feature, just create playlists within the directories and put it in the the iPod as a UMS (which your wiki doesn't bother to translate as USB Mass Storage) device.
This way, I can use M3U or PLS or whatever, system I wan't but I lose all iTunes functionality.
This has the problems that I lose iTunes few worthwhile features intended specifically for the iPod and that I have to export or rebuild my playlists.
But it seems that no matter what I choose I'm going to be losing out because until I can learn to make this crap on my own I'm at the mercy of developers' agendas or attention spans.
So to Apple and the Rockbox crews respectively, thanks for something, thanks for nothing. ;-)
Llorean:
As I said, why should someone who's never going to use it write it for you, if you can't be bothered to do learn to do it yourself and you actually *want* it.
Please, if you're unwilling to sacrifice your own spare time, why should someone else who has to use their own spare time sacrifice family time and other things to do it for you?
All you seem to say is "You should do it because people would like it" but if people would like it, why isn't that a good enough reason for you to do it?
In the case of retail software, there's a strong incentive to reach a wider installed base because you're selling something. In the case of Rockbox, you've got a range of developers who work on the project because there's some aspect of it they're interested in. They work on Rockbox specifically because it's not a job, it's a hobby. Something they do because either they want something more from their player and Rockbox gives them a starting point to create it, or because they're enjoying it, or because of any number of other motives. But very rarely is "Spending time making something I'll never use" a strong motivating force.
It just seems unreasonable that you seem to expect people to jump up and volunteer to do this for you.
Exitao:
At this point, I don't really care. I just think that doing something halfway isn't worth having done. It's your time, whatever.
Both softwares are deficient. Just because the people who develop it don't care that it's deficient doesn't make my criticism less valid.
If it's not worth the time to code, it's not worth the time to reply or defend the lack of interest, is it?
Me? I'm a construction worker. WTF do I know about coding? Nothing. I just have an idea of what well-made means. In other words, I'm not skilled enough to code, I can just point out flaws. Let's just agree to disagree because this isn't going anywhere.
Llorean:
I'll tell you what, you come build me a tool shed, and I'll write your plugin.
In all seriousness, Rockbox isn't "half complete." It's never had a goal of supporting iTunes features. It's a replacement firmware, that works with standard formats. I don't see "doesn't support a single proprietary program out of dozens of proprietary music management programs" as a specific deficiency.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version