Jonathan Gordon schrieb:
> replace "you" with "me" or "I" in that paragraph and it might make
> sense.. We obviously do playlisting very differently... the fact that
> you presume to know how I do it is well....
The way he described works well, and it's probably the best if you
really intend to create playlists that are supposed to live longer than
until you shutdown.
> When I use custom playlists (most of my listening is dirplay) I will
> often go looking for a song i want to listen to (or just add) and
> usually dont care if its next or later... then there are the times i
> want to listen to song A next, then do a bit more browsing and decide
> i want to hear B next instead....
So, you're basically saying "one time I want this, then I want the other
thing maybe, let's see what I'm going to use tomorrow". Well, but then
again you said that you hardly use playlists extensively at all. That
doesn't sound like serious playlist creation, but rather than toying
around. That isn't bad at all, but you most certainly wouldn't ever get
happy with ANY single action anyway. You hop around through the
possibilities, so you need it configurable. But even then you'd
constantly changing the action the button is going to do, which
effectively yields zero button press/time savings.
> From a purely technical POV there is sfa difference in the code
> changes needed to do what I want compared to the current patch (maybe
> a few extra lines).. more power to you if you never end up using it,
> but you certainly arnt the entire user/dev base.
I don't know what you tried to tell us here, but I certainly agree with
Paul to all extends.
>> 0.. like I said I barely actually use playlisting.. I'm just saying
>> you want to add pointless artificial limitations on it.
I figured. But I don't think we put pointless limits. Non-configurable buttons surely make support easier. But it also keeps the settings bloat and ease of use well-balanced. I don't need other features on this buttons, the ones I offer are the ones that I miss most in Rockbox.
That said, I can surely understand the demand for customizable buttons. Even some OFs offer some slight degree of it. How you interact with the software is very dependent on how well the buttons are mapped to common jobs. The obvious way out is to make them configurable, so that every individual can map the buttons to fit his needs. But I still don't think that this is the perfect solution.
Received on 2009-03-05