SanDisk Sansa® e200 V2 USB?

[chrisjj]

Can someone tell me whether Sansa e200v2 running rockbox has a functioning USB? The two articles below have left me thinking the answer is either Yes or No

Thanks.


http://www.rockbox.org/wiki/TargetStatus#New_Platforms_Currently_Under_De
 SanDisk Sansa e200v2      _USB_

http://www.rockbox.org/wiki/SansaE200v2

USB Mode

As of Firmware version 03.01.14A, you can go to Settings/USB Mode and select between three options: "Auto Detect", "MTP" (Media Transport Protocol), and "MSC" (USB Media Storage Class Device aka USB Drive).

On Ubuntu and Windows 98SE, as well as any other OS that does not support MTP, both before the firmware update and afterwards using "Auto Detect", the Sansa appears automatically as a USB Drive. On 98SE some generic MSC drivers are needed. YMMV.

If you don't have that firmware, there is a way to change into MSC mode:

1. Power on your Sansa e200v2 2. Switch ON the hold button 3. Press the |<< button and plug in your USB cable 4. Keep it pressed until the Sansa is completely recognized by your OS

This should work on Windows XP and Windows Vista.

[saratoga]

As of Firmware version 03.01.14A,

Thats an OF version number, not rockbox, so its clearly referring to the OF and not Rockbox.  Hope that helps.

[chrisjj]

Can you tell me whether Sansa e200v2 running rockbox has a functioning USB?

[karashata]

From the wiki: http://www.rockbox.org/wiki/SansaAMS#Port_Status

No. USB support in Rockbox isn't functional yet. (Unless that page is out-dated, in which case this post should bring attention to that matter.)

[chrisjj]

> USB support in Rockbox isn't functional yet.

OK, thanks.

Karashata, do you agree that this should be corrected e.g. qualified?
 

http://www.rockbox.org/wiki/SansaFAQ#Does_USB_work
Yes, as of 2009-02-26 (r20105), Rockbox supports USB on the E200 and C200 targets.

[Chronon]

It could be.  The convention here is usually to assume v1 if no version number is specified, but I added a note to the top of the FAQ.

[chrisjj]

> The convention here is usually to assume v1 if no version number is specified

Ooer. That's bad for an unknowing V2 owner.

[karashata]

Since the FAQ was written well before the V2 Sansas started appearing there was no reason to qualify it, and I'm sure no one thought to check back and update it. Chronon's made a pretty reasonable note on the FAQ now though so hopefully anyone checking the FAQ for info will understand that it's not applicable to the V2 models.

[Chronon]

I also linked e200 and c200 to respective port pages that make clear how to determine whether you have a v1 player or not.

[chrisjj]

> I'm sure no one thought to check back and update it.

A frequent disrecommendation for such conventions

> Chronon's made a pretty reasonable note on the FAQ now

Thanks.

[karashata]

@Chronon: Ah, indeed you did. That should help even more then.

I suppose this little side conversation is probably unnecessary though so I'm gonna cut it out here now, heh.

In any case, the FAQ page should be clear enough now between the note on it and the links in the note, and the original question has been answered, so I think everything should be satisfactory now, yes?

@chrisjj: I understand that it's not really a good thing that it got forgotten about but keep in mind that the developers themselves focus more of their time and effort on actual development rather than making sure that everything in the wiki stays up-to-date. Wiki pages will get made and updated as necessary during development but even then older wiki pages may still get missed in some cases. I'm sure this is just one of those cases.

[Chronon]

The convention is due to historical reasons as karashata explained: Originally there were no version numbers.  It would have made no sense to attach v1 to the names of these devices when they were not labeled as such.  It is made clear on the port page for c200 and e200 that they correspond to the v1 hardware with instructions on how to check whether you have v1 hardware or not.  The AMS Sansas have their own port page at SansaAMS.  Eventually, the SansaFAQ should either be expanded to include information about the AMS players or else a new FAQ made for those players.

[chrisjj]

> keep in mind that the developers themselves focus more of their time and
> effort on actual development rather than making sure that everything
> in the wiki stays up-to-date.

Will do. Please make allowances for my coming from a background in which /actual/  development includes documentation.

> Wiki pages will get made and updated as necessary during development

I can't guess what determines necessary here

[funman]

> Wiki pages will get made and updated as necessary during development

I can't guess what determines necessary here

The person editing the wiki (it could be you) judges if it's necessary or not

[karashata]

A necessary change could be, for example, a change being made to state that a feature's status has changed (such as USB support being added to a supported target that didn't have it at the time the documentation was last updated, to make this somewhat relevant to the original topic), or to add (or remove) information that is (or is no longer) relevant to the current status of a given topic.

As funman said, it's up to the person making the changes to determine the necessity of the changes. If one is unsure of something, one should ask about it, either in IRC or in the appropriate subforum for the given topic.

(If one is completely unsure of which subforum a topic belongs to, it's likely alright to post the question in the General Discussion area, if someone determines it should be moved later, they can always do that then.)