Rockbox Development > New Ports

Rockbox Player - Project to design and build a Free/Open hardware audio player

<< < (79/144) > >>

AlexP:

--- Quote from: spark on April 27, 2008, 03:39:00 AM ---2) "as per our requirements" means whatever is long discussed in this forum and mentioned in the wiki. It is a mutually agreed list of requirements and nothing specific to a single person.

--- End quote ---

Mutually agreed my ....  There has been one person pretty much saying this is what *we* want.  I have said many times that I personally would be interested if sensible hardware choices were made, which in my opinion, has not so far happened.  I mention the screen as one example.

However, I'm not a "senior developer", so take this as you will.

spark:
For me, the opinion of a rockbox expert is valuable.
I agree that some of the discussions might have gone bitter between some people. But i don't want that to be a reason to scrap the idea.

we need to work co-operatively to get something productive.

Please assume we have the decent screen size and color requirements on board. And video is playback definitely acceptable.

Llorean:
Well, you addressed the question to "Rockbox senior devs" then used "we", and since I assumed you didn't qualify yourself as a Rockbox Senior Dev, I thought you were separating it into two groups, rather than including yourself into the "we." I'm sorry for the misunderstanding, but I'm sure you can see how it could very easily be read that way.

(note: $ refers to USD)
Basically, *most* needs of Rockbox users can be met by existing players on the marked. The Toshiba Gigabeat F40 / F60 is a beast of a player for $100 to $120 (refurbished or used) that has good video playback speed and a very fast processor. You can get a c200 or e200 for <$50 - $60, sometimes less than $20 and they feature radio, recording, internal mic, and MicroSDHC.

For most of the Rockbox devs, based on my observations of their opinions the desire is for a player that offers a few of the more obscure features. These are not in any particular order.
1) Digital recording
2) Large storage (possibly even 2.5" HD depending on how big this necessitates the final unit be)
3) Input has tactile feedback (buttons, mostly, rather than touch sensitive things or wheels that waste a lot of space for essentially being 2 buttons)
4) Enough power that none of the formats stutter at any compression rate, even with all CPU intensive DSP effects enabled (with the exception of the Monkeys Audio codec, which frankly has requirements not suited for a DAP anyway at its higher rates).
5) Good audio output (carefully chosen components, and very little or no introduced noise from other problems)

Of course price very much depends on the feature set, but I personally would be quite willing to pay $200-$250 for a player that met all my personal needs, knowing Rockbox would run well on it.

AlexP:
I agree with Llorean's assessment.  Something along the lines of the iriver H100 with a bit more speed for video and a nice screen.

I would say though of the things Llorean listed, for me the most important is storage size and audio quality.

spark:
it's ok Llorean. we can forget the misunderstandings. thanks for your views on price and features.

Apart from electronics, we also need to create a decent casing. one thing is for sure, the open hardware player will not beat the commercial players in terms of price, unless we can produce it in volumes of maybe 100+, which i'm afraid may not be the case.

If we want to make the player popular, it needs to have a unique feature that is not available in commercial players. Can anyone share some light here?

My query still remains. Is it really worth spending time, effort and money on this idea?


--- Quote from: BigBambi ---Something along the lines of the iriver H100 with a bit more speed for video and a nice screen.

--- End quote ---
noted. thanks.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page