Why I push Rockbox.

[mnhnhyouh]

I guess there are at least a couple of people around here that have noticed me pushing Rockbox.

I thought I should explain why.

Firstly, I fundamentally support opensource programs. I believe that they often work better than paid for versions of the same thing. Rockbox is opensource.

Secondly, I also think that there are others out there who would like to be free of the restrictions that iTunes puts on the use you put an iPod to. I dont like the way it hides music, changing the filenames, and directory structure. I like to be able to drag my music on and off, on whatever computer I am connected to without needing to install software on that computer. I want those people who feel the same way to know about Rockbox, to offer them the choice.

iTunes restrictions caused me to buy an iRiver H320 as my first DAP. I still have a soft spot for that lovely old brick. But 20Gb is not enough anymore, and the battery was dying. I was using Rockbox on it, and when Rockbox was ported to the iPod I considered the iPod and the iAudio X5 as replacements. I would not have bought an iPod without Rockbox.

There is a thread over at the Rockbox forum at the moment where the OP was wanting Rockbox made more simple to attract more users. He is not going to get his way, though Rockbox being opensource, he can make his own version.

Most of the Rockbox users are those who want more from their player. The more options that the firmware allows you to set, the more complex the interface between that firmware and the user becomes. Apple recongnise this, and have appealed to a wider market base by restricting options. For instance the Wolfson chip on the 5G has a 5 band equaliser on board. This is a hardware equaliser, not software. Yet the Apple firmware does not allow you to exploit its potential, just some presets. Presets are the more simple option.

This complexity does not appeal to most. I dont think those who want it all simple should even try Rockbox. Lets face it, the installation instructions are long, and you have to either open the Terminal on a Mac or use a DOS prompt in Windows. Few under 35 have ever done so.

But if you want options, fully customisable screen when your music is playing, full access to the equaliser, crossfeed, crossfade, gapless, drag and drop both on and off, tons of games and other plugins, constant development, and a 100 page manual, which you should read, then Rockbox is for you.

If you like it easy and simple, then stick with the Apple firmware, it was designed for you.

Lastly, there is one other selfish reason I am touting Rockbox. I am hoping that the more users there are, the more beautiful skins there will be and maybe some will become more active in the Rockbox community. People are needed to help test for and report on bugs. If I convinced one person to take up Rockbox, and they wrote some more code, then I have done a very good thing

h

[VipFREAK]

I am on board with you 100% but unfortunately I cannot embrace Rockbox fully untill they get Video support.

[mnhnhyouh]

Yep, I guess there are a number of people using Rockbox for music playback and booting to Apple firmware for video.

Video is progressing, but slowly. Its development is not a high priority for the main Rockbox crew. Their main focus is on music playback.

Personally I find watching video on such a small screen to be a little frustrating, so I dont use it at all. I had video on my H320 in November 2004, and only watched one movie.

h

[Derek McNelly]

See, I wouldn't say you push RockBox so much as you bludgeon it into everyone's head.

[VipFREAK]

Originally Posted by Freddy_Ramone

See, I wouldn't say you push RockBox so much as you bludgeon it into everyone's head.

Seems like what Religion does too sometimes.

[fuzzyhair]

I am all for open source, but Rockbox has to boot up every time. It is kind of annoying when you get used to the Apple iPod firmware.

[LukeA]

I can't support Rockbox until Apple Lossless files play back acceptably.

[mnhnhyouh]

Originally Posted by LukeA

I can't support Rockbox until Apple Lossless files play back acceptably.

Are you talking about ALAC files encoded by iTunes? If so I think they play fine?

h

[bzavala]

I'm with you, mnhnhyouh. I also support Open Source.

To be able to play videos is a nice feature, but an mp3 player is mostly for music. I rarely watch videos on the iPod.. Never even thought about putting a whole movie in there.. what a waste of time and space.. (how many times are you gonna watch a movie on the iPod?).. I only have a few music videos and a couple video-clips I've made with my camera, but that's about it; and if I ever need to play them (i.e. to show them to somebody), I can always boot with the apple firmware; in fact that's what the only stuff I synched to the itunes db; all my music files are now organized by subfolder just like on my PC.

Then again... that's just me!


Ben

[mnhnhyouh]

There is one other unique thing Rockbox offers that I think no other firmware offers.

Rockbox has the ability to speak the menus. Why you may wonder? For blind users. This way a blind user can use a Rockbox enabled player, and be able to make full use of their DAP.

h

[mrdantownsend]

it's like the jahovas witnesses, lol

but I cant talk either, I kinda do the same thing

[762x51]

I bought my Nano with the intention of loading Rockbox immediately. Didn't even boot the Apple firmware.

To me, the ability to drag and drop folders of MP3's onto the player and not have to entrust my rather large music collection to some other program is priceless. Add the click wheel and looks of the ipod, and you have the ideal MP3 player.

The Rockbox crew just needs to simplify their website a bit so it's easier to find information (like a direct link to the WPS gallery for instance). A customizing tutorial for dummies would be great, and easier patching would be a much welcome addition too.

Overall though, I love it and will not be installing itunes anytime in the near future. I couldn't care less about viewing pictures or video on my tiny little screen.

[toothpaste]

mnhnhyouh

I have been supporting open source since 96, but over the years I have learned that people (most people) want technology to be transparent to them. They don't care how it works as long as it works. So until open source becomes easier for the laymen, full adoption by the masses is not going to happen.

Choice is the spice of life, not when it comes to DIY technology. Again, most people don't care what it can do if they have to go thru a lengthy process in order to get it to possibly work.

Every camp, be it windows, os x or linux have their zealots. They are annoying and people don't like to preached be to. Save your strength. Instead post some screen shots of what rockbox looks like on the ipod, all those customizations you speak of. ipodwizard people posted tons of pictures of what the customized interface looks like. You should do the same to spark interest, and let rockbox speak for itself.

[baggss]

I'd install it on one of my iPods if the installer for OSX were a bit more user friendly. Using the terminal is not that hard, but maybe a GUI driven installer would would get more converts.

[LukeA]

Originally Posted by mnhnhyouh

Are you talking about ALAC files encoded by iTunes? If so I think they play fine?

h

Nevermind, I was thinking of iPL. I never tried Rockbox+ALAC.