From: Buddy Brannan <buddy_at_brannan.name>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:17:29 -0500

So are we talking about flash-based or hard drive?

I'd almost say having it with only enough on-board storage for Rockbox
and then using microSD or SDHC (more flash is better!) would be great.
I think that this might make the player cheaper, too, and SDHC and
microSD cards are getting very cheap.

I defiitely vote for mic and line-in jacks, though. Stereo. The
present Rockbox talking features are fantastic. No touch screen,
please. So long as the controls are somewhat tactile, I think the
blind users (like me) will be happy. I, for instance, like the
joystick on my iAudio X5, but the buttons and scroll wheel on the
Sansa E200 players has some appeal as well. Just no touch screen! Even
the cursor cross on the Gigabeat's OK. FM radio's so cheap to put in
it probably goes without saying that we can have one :-)
On Feb 18, 2008, at 11:17 AM, Mark Allums wrote:

> Paul Louden wrote:
>> Bluetooth was designed for portable use. It was engineered to be
>> cheap, it's reasonably secure, it is designed for communication
>> between multiple types of devices rather than simply as a
>> networking protocol, and it's designed to be low power. Weighed
>> against "I don't think it's secure enough for protecting my MP3s
>> for the short time I have it turned on while syncing", I think it
>> definitely still has the advantage.
>
> I am not obsessing over my MP3s, I am obsessing over my Windows
> computer. Autorun is increasingly difficult to turn off these days,
> and you can be got before you know what's happening. A lot of
> people were "got" recently by digital picture frames from China.
>
> It should at least be turned off by default. I think it should go a
> few steps further. Rockbox does not have Bluetooth support. It
> doesn't have USB support on every device, either, but it will. I
> think from an implementation standpoint, some sort of wireless USB
> may ultimately be more practical. Further, you can restrict access
> to only a wired connection, or a single uniquely keyed dongle. The
> downside is, if you lost the dongle, you could only access the
> player with the wired connection. No big deal. The other problem
> is, the dongle. It would add to the cost of the player and require
> implementing. Bluetooth does have the advantage that there are
> already some fairly generic adapters available.
>
> However, Bluetooth is encumbered a bit by IP issues. I believe a
> goal of this project should be to use as much off-the-shelf free and
> open source hardware as possible. It may come to pass that wireless
> USB will be similarly encumbered. In that case, the choice might
> come down to whichever solution is cheapest. Right now, that would
> be Bluetooth, because wireless USB is so new. I am prepared for
> that to change in the future. Perhaps the player V1 will not use
> wireless, V1.5 will use Bluetooth, and V2 will use something else.
>
> Nuclear powered Bluetooth in-canal earbuds would be great. Add a
> battery and a radio, and Bluetooth is less appealing to me. I don't
> need wireless computer connections, they would be nice to have.
>
> Whatever the developers decide, I'm in, as long as the thing doesn't
> cost an arm and a leg. I think another goal for the first model
> should be a reasonable cost. They will almost have to be made in
> China to be within budget. And, they will need to order quite a few
> in order for it to scale up well. So, it needs to be a player that
> you would consider getting at Best Buy, or Ciruit City, or Tesco.
> [British grocery store chain, is that the right name?]. I mean a
> player that you would seriously consider, Rockbox or not. $US800.00
> apiece won't fly.
>
> --Mark Allums
>
>
>
>

--
Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
Phone: (814) 746-4502 or 888-75-BUDDY
Harnessing the power of Online Spending and Everyday Shopping to  
Change Lives: See how, Together, We Can Change the World: http://www.powermall.info

Received on 2008-02-18