Extreme confusion regarding RB on Creative ZV:M

[kishkizzle]

I really wish my first post here could have been on a more positive note...

I've been watching the RockBox project since I got my player, a black Creative ZV:M (ZEN Vision:M) 60GB (the chunky one) a couple years ago. When I first looked into it, as far as I could tell, prospects were bleak and there was a lot of doubt about it ever working.

Let me say that I LOVE the idea and the drive behind the project, and I think it's awesome that people are dedicating themselves to it. The end result, which I'm sure someday there will be, will be spectacular.

My problem is this: I do not understand this website. I do not understand the posts on this website. I do not understand the wiki on this website. I know, this is a technical thing, and I am not a technophobe to any extent, but sometimes I just prefer the "simple version". The next time I see "the diff file", "the SVN", or a page jam packed with files whose descriptions cannot be understood by a newcomer, I will smash my mouse into a billion pieces.

That being said...I am very interested in this project. Let me explain what I believe I know so far:

-There is a functional version of RockBox which has been booted on a ZV:M.
-This version has done nothing more than booted and performed basic menu commands.
-There is no audio or extra feature support of any kind yet.
-No operations involving putting RB on the ZV:M can be done without disassembling it first.
-The RB ZV:M port is very much active and being worked on regularly.

If anyone has any corrections for me, please tell me.

On top of that, I would just like to know the "simple version" of the status on RB for the ZV:M. I really don't know how else to ask for it...just a simple, "every day normal words" version.

Please, and thank you. I have read the threads about this, and I believe I have seen all of the information about it...I just don't know what on Earth is going on.

Thank you,
kishkizzle

[Llorean]

There's no "simple version" because things aren't ready for people who need such a simple version of information yet. This is a technical project, and discussion continues at a technical level until such time as it's in a complete enough state that things can be brought down to a non-technical level.

At this point if discussion of diffing, compiling, using SVN or other things which (by the standards of the people doing the work) aren't that particularly technical (they're sorta "entry level" in terms of actually being able to contribute at all) you probably shouldn't be concerning yourself with its status beyond "not ready for you to use yet." Trying to play with what exists so far will probably cause you to run head first into needing to learn what these mean anyway.

[kishkizzle]

Ah, see, that's what I wanted. LOL!

I understand it is entry level stuff, and again, I am not a technophobe, and as far as the IBM compatible PC goes, I know more than very, very many people in every category there is....but as far as this stuff goes...I consider my mp3 player as a single unit. A single unit which just works, and works well.

For the record, my player has locked up a total of under 10 times in its lifetime. Apparently, this is quite a good track record.

I like trying new things, but when it relates to this 'single unit', I simply don't care how it works, as long as it does work. I know I'm not the only one who thinks that way but still wants to try third party firmware.

Thanks again for all the good work you folks are doing...and I really do mean this as constructive feedback when I say the site is a little tough to figure out for the first couple visits, even for someone who is no "n00b" in general, but who is to this particular aspect of technology.

[GodEater]

I understand it is entry level stuff, and again, I am not a technophobe, and as far as the IBM compatible PC goes, I know more than very, very many people in every category there is....but as far as this stuff goes...I consider my mp3 player as a single unit. A single unit which just works, and works well.

Just for the record, all the items you listed in the first post as "thing you don't understand" are in no way specific to mp3 players. They are aspects of technology used in all manner of development projects that run on PCs - so as someone who is "not a technophobe" and knows "more than very, very many people" it's perhaps time you learned a bit more?

[kishkizzle]

Ah, touché, however, I am not referring to the aspects common to other areas such as drive interfaces, format types, and IO...I am referring to terms specific to MP3 players and concepts specific to them.

I'm always up for more learning, but I need a finished product before I can (visual learner = requires end result to backtrack through development). For example, I can take apart an optical mouse, look at the assorted components, determine the essentials of how it works, and then study it in action, after which I can research components which I do not understand. Traditionally backwards as far as development goes, but it's how I learn. Since nobody has "fully 100% perfectly completed" anything for the ZV:M I am lost until they do.

[Llorean]

The terms you specified (SVN, diff) have nothing to do with MP3 players, they're just generic software development terms.

[kishkizzle]

It appears there has been a misunderstanding here. I was not referring to those as terms I did not understand.

I was attempting to communicate that "the simple answer" needs to be put somewhere on this site for everyone like me. The simple answer never includes anything more than "version number, complete or incomplete, stable or unstable, ready to go or in development".

My problem is more with the lack of an easily accessible "simple answer" and having to read "techy" stuff to get an answer I routinely check here for but can never find, at least until I posted on a forum which suggests in its guidelines that if no contribution is being given, "get lost". Since outsiders are who the guidelines target, I'm giving you the outsider perspective.

(edit: indeed, they must be designed for outsiders, since as a registered member I can no longer locate them)

[MarcGuay]

This page seems pretty straightforward about the status of ports:

http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/TargetStatus

The ZVM is in the "not ready for everyday use" section.

[kishkizzle]

That it is. For the record, I have seen that page before I posted anything at all. It's just rather inaccessible without already knowing where to look for it. By no means am I saying "derr, I still don't get it", I am saying that a less patient person than myself would have given up, mentally associated the site with, well, "not good", and never ended up using RB.

Their loss? Perhaps. It would also be the projects loss because people develop software for people to use.

Not trying to turn this into any sort of war, battle, or fire. Perhaps if someone had said, "well, yes, I do agree there are some navigational problems that make it difficult for newcomers to find information", I would have respectfully thanked them, bookmarked the status page, and left.

[Chronon]

I don't think it's very hidden at all.  It's directly linked from the main page as "Current Status" under the list of currently supported targets.

[MarcGuay]

I agree that it's a bit confusing at first - I personally got extremely overwealmed when I first came to the site, even when just trying to find the answer to a very simple question.  So I cleaned up the wiki as best I could, and in doing so learned a lot.  But the fact is that right now, the page I linked to is on the front page, directly under the "rockbox works on these players" header, and I don't see how it can get any more straightforward than that.  Any suggestions?

[kishkizzle]

Actually if anything, probably optimizing search engine results, but *I* would think an easy solution is just putting a "status" link on the left. I know you can easily get to the status info, but a lot of links into the site go straight to forum threads or deep within the wiki. Having a link right there visible from everywhere (but not "in the way") is my one real suggestion.

I don't think any time except once though I've come to the site and ended up seeing the homepage (as a result of always coming into the site via links going elsewhere). Now, that's not to say everyone is me, but the internet is pretty universal, so it's safe to say a lot of people come in via similar links which go to (again, to the newcomer) overwhelming content.

I won't suggest this, but I'll sort of throw it out there....a referrer check to see if someone came in from no site (ex. bookmarks), this site (ex. already knows what's going on), or another site (ex. clueless).

[AlexP]

To be honest, I think it is even more simple.

If you come to the site looking for a simple, non-technical answer and don't want to/can't look into at all, then if the DAP is not listed on the front page, then it isn't ready for you.  Simple as.

If it isn't listed there it means you are going to have to dig at least a bit to find out and understand to what extent it works, how to make it work, what needs to be done etc.  If you don't want to/can't do that, then it isn't ready.