From: Dave Hooper <dave_at_beermex.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 21:31:18 +0100

I guess it's a marketing point. Personally I think iTunes sucks, but maybe
the db format is something good...

----- Original Message -----
From: "BlueChip" <cs_bluechip_at_webtribe.net>
To: "Rockbox development" <rockbox_at_cool.haxx.se>
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 8:55 PM
Subject: Re[2]: ID3 database browsing


>
> >>If there is a well documented pre-existing standard that offers the
> >>functionality we desire - I can see no reason to invent something else.
> >
> >The reasons would be: minimal memory use and minimal CPU requirements
when
> >doing lookups.
>
> Yes, if the process is memory hungry and/or overly CPU intensive, then
that
> would be a good reason to reinvent the wheel ...with perhaps a few less
> spokes, but with a matching air valve if possible? (don't you love
> extended metaphors - lol)
>
> >>Adding itunes support sounds like a clincher to me.
> >
> >Uh sorry for being an itunes cluebie, but in what way can a dataabse with
> >artist names, album names, track names etc have "itunes support" ?
>
> I quote the mail to which mine was a reply:
> "The apple ipod database format is very well documented. Why not use
> that? Then people who use itunes can also benefit from this... -eric"
>
> I have no idea at all about itunes and personally have zero use for it - I
> couldn't even tell you if such a thing is available for the PC, or if it
> just a MAC-thing.
> What I do know is that a LOT of people use it, and guess that they would
> probably be very pleased to have Rockbox "link up" with itunes in a way
> which is beneficial ...as is suggested by -eric.
>
> BC,
>
> PS. What is a "cluebie"?
>
> _______________________________________________
> http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox
>

_______________________________________________
http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox
Received on 2004-10-13