Support and General Use > Audio Playback, Database and Playlists
[iPod 5G] Read iPod native playlists in Rb database
bluebrother:
--- Quote from: Llorean on July 09, 2007, 03:13:34 AM ---In all seriousness, Rockbox isn't "half complete."
--- End quote ---
Despite Rockbox having a different goal than the Apple firmware it also hasn't even been released for all supported players except the Archos models. You shouldn't forget about that too.
And a software isn't deficient because it uses different approaches you are used to. Some people might even like the different approach and consider it as superiour (like me, when comparing Rockbox with AppleOS). As this isn't a commercial software there is absolutely no requirement to support feature A or B other software does.
GodEater:
--- Quote from: Exitao on July 09, 2007, 03:08:25 AM ---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.
--- End quote ---
But you're only viewing it as "half done" because it lacks a feature *you* want. We don't see it like that because it's not a feature that *we* want.
TeamHCN:
--- Quote from: Llorean on July 03, 2007, 11:33:14 AM ---Seeing as Rockbox is a "replacement" firmware, that only partially offers the ability to run alongside another firmware, why should it add in an option that is only useful specifically if you're *not* using it as a replacement, adding code bloat and a decreased audio buffer for anyone who doesn't use a program not meant to be used with Rockbox in the first place?
--- End quote ---
If Rockbox isn't intended as a replacement for the default Apple firmware, then what is it intended as? Rockbox is a competitor of iPod Linux and Apple's firmware, regardless of what anyone says about who the target audience is. I could understand not offering native iTunes playlist support in Rockbox because it's technically impossible, but excluding it because of messy coding seems incredibly short-sighted, when you consider that the vast majority of iPod owners who would be using the Rockbox firmware are syncing to iTunes. I love Rockbox's custom EQ features (since I listen to a lot of lossless audio, using audiophile-quality earphones), but there are a lot of things that make it incredibly frustrating to use (i.e. lack of iTunes playlist support, freezing during lossless playback, etc.)
Don't get me wrong, I understand Rockbox is still far from being complete, and that bugs are to be expected. I'm certain anyone who's looked at the features list realizes the huge potential that Rockbox has. Furthermore, I understand that developing software, especially on a volunteer basis, involves a ton of (often, seemingly thankless) hard work.
That being said, it would be nice if some of the staff would try to be a little more open to suggestions, and a little less defensive. Llorean, no offense, but it seems like a lot of your responses I've read are telling people why their questions or suggestions are wrong or stupid, or how they should go use another program if they don't like something about Rockbox. The thing is, people will do that – if you keep treating them that way. I don't think that's what you want. That's not what I want.
--- Quote from: GodEater on July 06, 2007, 01:27:54 PM ---i.e. if you prefer how the original firmware works - then go use it - no-one's making you use Rockbox :)
--- End quote ---
^^^
This is exactly the kind of thing that makes people not want to support a developer. It's not very nice, and it doesn't do anything to answer the question or address the suggestion of the end-user (the person who ultimately makes the software's continued development/success possible).
Chronon:
--- Quote from: TeamHCN on July 10, 2007, 02:47:33 PM ---
--- Quote from: Llorean on July 03, 2007, 11:33:14 AM ---Seeing as Rockbox is a "replacement" firmware, that only partially offers the ability to run alongside another firmware, why should it add in an option that is only useful specifically if you're *not* using it as a replacement, adding code bloat and a decreased audio buffer for anyone who doesn't use a program not meant to be used with Rockbox in the first place?
--- End quote ---
If Rockbox isn't intended as a replacement for the default Apple firmware, then what is it intended as? Rockbox is a competitor of iPod Linux and Apple's firmware, regardless of what anyone says about who the target audience is. I could understand not offering native iTunes playlist support in Rockbox because it's technically impossible, but excluding it because of messy coding seems incredibly short-sighted, when you consider that the vast majority of iPod owners who would be using the Rockbox firmware are syncing to iTunes. I love Rockbox's custom EQ features (since I listen to a lot of lossless audio, using audiophile-quality earphones), but there are a lot of things that make it incredibly frustrating to use (i.e. lack of iTunes playlist support, freezing during lossless playback, etc.)
--- End quote ---
Read what he wrote again. He said that it *is* a replacement firmware. With that in mind, why should Rockbox bend over backwards to attempt compliance with closed, proprietary software. Apple has taken many steps to do things their own way rather than seek broad compatibility. Maybe you should ask why iTunes doesn't just use m3u playlists.
--- Quote ---Don't get me wrong, I understand Rockbox is still far from being complete, and that bugs are to be expected. I'm certain anyone who's looked at the features list realizes the huge potential that Rockbox has. Furthermore, I understand that developing software, especially on a volunteer basis, involves a ton of (often, seemingly thankless) hard work.
That being said, it would be nice if some of the staff would try to be a little more open to suggestions, and a little less defensive. Llorean, no offense, but it seems like a lot of your responses I've read are telling people why their questions or suggestions are wrong or stupid, or how they should go use another program if they don't like something about Rockbox. The thing is, people will do that – if you keep treating them that way. I don't think that's what you want. That's not what I want.
--- Quote from: GodEater on July 06, 2007, 01:27:54 PM ---i.e. if you prefer how the original firmware works - then go use it - no-one's making you use Rockbox :)
--- End quote ---
^^^
This is exactly the kind of thing that makes people not want to support a developer. It's not very nice, and it doesn't do anything to answer the question or address the suggestion of the end-user (the person who ultimately makes the software's continued development/success possible).
--- End quote ---
I don't see that Llorean was doing that. He gave basically the stock response for people asking for features that lie outside of what would be considered core functionality. What I see is that most of the developers probably would not use such a feature and so the point is being made that if someone wants this feature then they will need to code it themselves. I see no reason to take offense. You can either sit back and hope that someone else decides that it's worth their time to code this OR you can take things into your own hands and learn how to do it yourself.
I think Llorean summed it up pretty well with this:
--- Quote ---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.
--- End quote ---
GodEater:
--- Quote from: TeamHCN on July 10, 2007, 02:47:33 PM ---This is exactly the kind of thing that makes people not want to support a developer. It's not very nice, and it doesn't do anything to answer the question or address the suggestion of the end-user (the person who ultimately makes the software's continued development/success possible).
--- End quote ---
You think we need end-users to continue developing Rockbox? How funny...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version