Rockbox Development > New Ports
Rockbox Player - Project to design and build a Free/Open hardware audio player
Der Papst:
--- Quote from: 00christian00 on April 02, 2008, 12:37:23 PM ---Mpeg4 support is not present in rockbox.I don't know if someone could port ffmpeg or some other similar fast decoder.
--- End quote ---
No, not yet. ;-) But some are thinking about if the Gigabeat S and the D2 are supported.
--- Quote from: casainho on April 02, 2008, 02:40:22 PM ---Simple because they were design for video and not audio! So they have a large and expensive battery. We want also a player that is small and cheap, and we get It reducing audio for 24 hours, for example - so we can have a battery less than half of that one, and cheaper. The money saved on that, can be put on good quality hardware for recording and playing.
--- End quote ---
I don't think that the price difference is making SUCH a big difference and i'd be more than happy to spend 15EUR more for a couple of hours more playback.
--- Quote from: casainho on April 02, 2008, 02:40:22 PM ---As soon as this devices get SoCs for video, they will also have large memories and batteries that can handle Linux.
--- End quote ---
Iirc the SoC you've selected is capable of stuff like MPEG4 so you can bet that any video codecs will used on this device too wasting battery ;-)
casainho:
--- Quote from: Der Papst on April 02, 2008, 03:04:55 PM ---
--- Quote from: casainho on April 02, 2008, 02:40:22 PM ---As soon as this devices get SoCs for video, they will also have large memories and batteries that can handle Linux.
--- End quote ---
Iirc the SoC you've selected is capable of stuff like MPEG4 so you can bet that any video codecs will used on this device too wasting battery ;-)
--- End quote ---
Wasting battery depends on utilization, as we can see in your example:
--- Quote from: Der Papst on April 02, 2008, 12:33:10 PM ---Take the Cowon D2 as example (rockbox port being worked on). It supports various video codecs, has a nice and large LCD (320x240) and "Rated battery life: 52 hours for music, 10 hours for video"
--- End quote ---
With the values you wrote, we can see that video takes 520% more battery than that audio.
Please put your ideas on the RockboxPlayerWishlist:
http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/RockboxPlayerWishlist
Thank you :-)
Bagder:
--- Quote from: casainho on April 02, 2008, 02:40:22 PM ---Simple because they were design for video and not audio! So they have a large and expensive battery. We want also a player that is small and cheap, and we get It reducing audio for 24 hours, for example - so we can have a battery less than half of that one, and cheaper. The money saved on that, can be put on good quality hardware for recording and playing.
--- End quote ---
This reasoning doesn't hold for much scrutiny at all. You can build your player "designed for audio" as much as you like and get NN hours of audio playback and everything is great.
But: if you also instead of using a crappy 128x128 greyscale LCD used a 320x240 16bit color LCD, you would get some more fancy colors for your audio player, it would be somewhat more expensive, it would attract a lot more potential users and it will get roughly the same run-time (given that you don't run it with backlight a lot).
And here's the twist: everyone who enjoys video or browsing album art on their players can do that! On your audio player.
--- Quote ---
--- Quote from: Der Papst on April 02, 2008, 12:33:10 PM ---If this player should compete to other commercial player I wouldn't go below a resolutions of 220x176 (larger LCD means more space for a larger battery ;-)) and a SoC being able to handle MPEG4 with 30fps easily.
--- End quote ---
I think is a mistake to try compete with that kind of players, because market is flood with them and I think will be easy, quick(already done), to have Linux + some media player like VLC instead of making that on Rockbox.
--- End quote ---
This logic is flawed on several accounts. First, there are already a large number of such players and Rockbox runs on several. They typically don't run Linux and no, "just installing Linux and VLC" is not enough to do anything good and you saying so just shows your ignorance and lack of knowledge in this area.
--- Quote --- As soon as this devices get SoCs for video, they will also have large memories and batteries that can handle Linux.
--- End quote ---
Now, didn't you pick a SoC that even already has a Linux port working on it? Exactly what's the difference?
You do the same mistake as lots of others when you think Rockbox is simply a better option as long as everything is small and tiny. Rockbox is not only an OS but also an application suite and everything in Rockbox has been crafted for portable media players, for usability with few buttons and for long run-times on batteries. I'd like to see you config your "Linux with VLC" to be even near what Rockbox is.
--- Quote ---But as we can see, portable players are quick getting media players, who will invest in good, only, portable audio players?
--- End quote ---
Can you name any audio player manufactured and sold the last 2-3 years that cannot also display video?
casainho:
--- Quote from: Bagder on April 02, 2008, 04:22:39 PM ---You do the same mistake as lots of others when you think Rockbox is simply a better option as long as everything is small and tiny. Rockbox is not only an OS but also an application suite and everything in Rockbox has been crafted for portable media players, for usability with few buttons and for long run-times on batteries. I'd like to see you config your "Linux with VLC" to be even near what Rockbox is.
--- End quote ---
Yes, I think as Rockbox good for small and tiny hardware. And yes, I don't now very much, I ignore a lot of things, I can't even boot the ARM9 MCU( I hope to learn) :)
--- Quote from: Bagder on April 02, 2008, 04:22:39 PM ---Can you name any audio player manufactured and sold the last 2-3 years that cannot also display video?
--- End quote ---
The pacemaker, from June 2007. "The Pacemaker is a Pocket Size DJ System. The device features include a 120 Gb hard drive, an SNR of 103, and a slew of basic DJ audio tools. The DJ tools include a Line out Crossfader, a Headphones Crossfader, Bend, Pitch, DJ Pause, Cue, Loop, EQ, Filter, Sound FX, Headphone Jack, Line out jack and a USB 2.0 connector.", without video.
http://www.pacemaker.net/device/
As we can see, thats a device dedicated to portable audio listen and mixing. Not audio recording for example.
Why should we tailor the hardware for video? just because everyone is doing that? why should we go to touchscreen? just because everyone is doing that?
I would prefer to pay for an hardware dedicated to audio than a media player, but thats me :)
Bagder:
--- Quote from: casainho on April 02, 2008, 05:17:25 PM ---Why should we tailor the hardware for video? just because everyone is doing that? why should we go to touchscreen? just because everyone is dong that?
--- End quote ---
You would not "tailor the hardware for video". You would tailor it to be an attractive audio player. That happens to be able to play video too.
Actually. This'll be my last message in this thread.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version