RockboxPlayerV1 - Free/Open hardware audio player for Rockbox

[casainho]

Rockbox already has many features that make use of a color screen. Why exclude them just because *you* don't want a color screen. Other than a slight increase in cost, what harm is there in a color screen? I don't see a color screen being "unrealistic."

Please read the wiki pages about the project. And as I said before, actual PrototypeB will use OLED 18 bit color.

The features that RB have, will not modeled the RockboxPlayer, just It objectives - and using a color or a no color screen, are not in the objectives.

[AlexP]

This is the thing though - all throughout you are saying it WILL have this, it WON'T do this, this is NOT in the objectives.  These are all definites, so what is the point in discussion?

[casainho]

This is the thing though - all throughout you are saying it WILL have this, it WON'T do this, this is NOT in the objectives.  These are all definites, so what is the point in discussion?

I will not discuss nothing with you since you are not in the project. About screen, I will discuss It with who will implement that on hardware. There are registered opinions about screen, we will have them in account when deciding about it - also the same for the other things.

[Llorean]

Maybe you should rename this, and list who is in the project. I thought the idea was to design this so that other people interested in it could also purchase the player. Doesn't that mean that the people whose money it would be should have some say?

Where is the list of who is "in the project" so the rest of us can know that you've decided we need to shut up?

[Davide-NYC]

People, relax.  We are arguing semantics.

The point of contention (that sparked this little flame) was the color screen issue. Since the screen on the prototype will be color, I presume there is no longer an issue.  

I in no way want to discourage this project.  If this project actually happens, with high end audio input capabilities, I will certainly buy one (cost permitting).

Smile on folks, Rockbox is amazing.  

D.

[Llorean]

I want everyone to stop right now, and define clearly who this project is, who is allowed to speak, and what the "unchangeable" goals are, so that nobody wastes any more time thinking it's a community project and then gets told they're not allowed to speak or attempt to contribute.

Who is allowed to speak? What can we not make suggestions about improving because of "objectives"?

[casainho]

I want everyone to stop right now, and define clearly who this project is, who is allowed to speak, and what the "unchangeable" goals are, so that nobody wastes any more time thinking it's a community project and then gets told they're not allowed to speak or attempt to contribute.

Who is allowed to speak? What can we not make suggestions about improving because of "objectives"?

There is a list of people in the main project page, under title: People that are interested and can help.

And everyone can speak, however I personally don't have infinite time to read all, instead I prefer to focus on whats I think is important, so I will ignore some talks that I think that are not important.

And I think the things here are like what RB developers usually say to people that are just chatting and asking: "Ports are made by people who want to port, they are not done on request." --> here the same, hardware is made and decided by who do it, not on request. So It's a community project - IMO, the community is who make, work and will decided.

[Llorean]

But anyone can add themselves to that list.

There's a major difference here: With Rockbox, we don't need to sell the project to other people. With your hardware, you need to make a certain number before it's cheap enough to be reasonable to manufacture. This means you must take an interest in what's most likely to make more people willing to buy one.

You alone do not get to decide what is or isn't important. If you do, you need to say clearly "This is my project, I will make all final decisions." Otherwise you're going to make other people waste THEIR time, because they don't know that you value your own time more than theirs, and don't care about their interests.

Unless the ONLY people spending money will be the designers, the community is "those who will buy" not "those who will work."

[AlexP]

I will not discuss nothing with you since you are not in the project. About screen, I will discuss It with who will implement that on hardware. There are registered opinions about screen, we will have them in account when deciding about it - also the same for the other things.

This is unnecessarily rude in my opinion, and furthermore I take it then that if I edit that wiki page and add myself to the list I can talk?!

You really need to look up community in a dictionary.  Either you want opinions or you don't.  It doesn't seem like you do.  That is fine, but in that case this is NOT a rockbox player, it is a casainho player, and you should designate it as such.

[Llorean]

And as a note, Rockbox still accepts feature requests. And we still work on things *we* don't need, because it would benefit other people. And we even actually *justify* why we reject things. By explaining what it would harm to do it that way, and why we think it's not beneficial to the project to accept that feature request.

[casainho]

So if I add myself to the list I can talk!

You really need to look up community in a dictionary.  Either you want opinions or you don't.  It doesn't seem like you do.  That is fine, but in that case this is NOT a rockbox player, it is a casainho player, and you should designate it as such.

I do want opinions as I did registered all opinions on the wiki page:
http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/RockboxPlayerWishlist

But some opinions looks like to me as requests, and as a new port of RB, Ports are made by people who want to port, they are not done on request.".

And as a note, Rockbox still accepts feature requests. And we still work on things *we* don't need, because it would benefit other people. And we even actually *justify* why we reject things. By explaining what it would harm to do it that way, and why we think it's not beneficial to the project to accept that feature request.

The same *justify* why we reject things, you can read at the page for the RockboxPlayerV1. I don't do audio records but I was interested in listening people about that, for example.

And please, stop with this, you people looks like arrived now to the project! There was a lot of work done already by a few people - you just don't know that, you were not here on that time.

[AlexP]

I have been here all along, and involved with rockbox for a lot longer than you have.  I just haven't posted on this particular project before now.  You may remember some conversations in IRC when I amongst others attempted to explain to you how rockbox works now, to help you with this design?

As a question, what have YOU actually done for this other than say what you want for the specs?  It looks very much like you want to specify the DAP you want then let others do the work.

Anyway, whatever.  You go ahead, and I hope you manage to persuade the skilled people you need to do your design for you.  Good luck.

[Llorean]

I've been with Rockbox for a very long time. I've been watching your  thread here, but you seem to think that because I haven't spoken, I'm new to having interest. So far, I've had nothing that needed said, because someone else has said it first.

Ports to hardware are not done by request, because people who do not have the hardware can't work on it.

You still haven't addressed the important question: Do you actually want other people to spend money on this.

I'm going to say right now: You need to very, very clearly codify
1) What things you yourself have defined unwilling to change.
2) What people are allowed to comment on.
3) What makes someone "interested enough to listen to."

At the moment, I'm tempted to close this thread until you're willing to clearly define what this project is, and why other people cannot contribute ideas.

So far, you haven't made hardware. You've done very little real work on this beyond planning. And yet you're unwilling to let other people contribute to the design, because they haven't planned as much as you.

New Ports of the SOFTWARE don't happen for new hardware, because if bob tells me he wants me to work on the Vision M, I have to spend $300 to work on it.

New Hardware designs have never happened before, but if I'm going to say "I'm willing to bay $200 for a Rockbox player", I have to know it has a color screen. You don't seem to understand that it's an ENTIRELY different situation.

If you're unwilling to have useful discourse, I'm done with this thread. In the past, you've shown an unwillingness to follow forum guidelines, by starting multiple threads. Now you're showing an unwillingness to actually discuss things, simply telling long standing members of the community to go away because you will not listen to them.

Start acting like a reasonable human being, and explaining WHY an idea isn't worth including in the player, and decide whether this is YOUR project, or a ROCKBOX player with hardware to be defined by what the Rockbox community is most willing to spend money on.

[casainho]

I'm going to say right now: You need to very, very clearly codify
1) What thinks you yourself have defined unwilling to change.
2) What people are allowed to comment on.
3) What makes someone "interested enough to listen to."

1 - Good quality hardware audio player and recorder - no video player or game console;
2 - Everyone.
3 - Depends on what task I am focus on that time.

explaining WHY an idea isn't worth including in the player

I did, again, you can read on RockboxPlayerV1.

decide whether this is YOUR project, or a ROCKBOX player with hardware to be defined by what the Rockbox community is most willing to spend money on.

RockboxPlayer will be defined by people that identifies with the idea of Good quality hardware audio player and recorder - no video player or game console; - It will not be defined by a community is most willing to spend money on! - that kind of community have already a lot of options in market for that!! I would say that all players in the market are targeted for that kind of community.

[cool_walking_]

The only reason I could find on RockboxPlayerV1 was "Fast display, good for peakmeters - for recording I assume".  mborus also gave the reason of power usage.

I don't know about the speed of colour displays, but it seems plenty fast on my iPod.  If those are the only reasons against a colour display, I personally think the positives greatly outweigh the negatives.

I wouldn't have anything to do with the design, since I have no knowledge of that.  I would be willing to learn (but I don't really know where to start... any links?) but I would probably slow you down.