[wolfen68]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot It doesn't take a hack... it just takes third party software. I use PodWorks. A great Mac program that will run right off the iPod's hard drive, so you don't need to have iTunes installed to upload or download files. It also uses the tag database, so your files come out properly tagged. See ya Steve

I agree there are many programs to achieve this, but using a third party software to circumvent a DRM feature is essentially "a hack".

Using Rockbox eliminates the need for any additional software to perform the most basic feature of an external harddrive (putting data on and taking it off with the freedom to copy it where you wish) . Plus your original file names remain intact and don't need to be recreated from the tags.

 

[wax4213]

You can use an iPod as an external hdd without any extra software and the Apple OS, just set it to disk use. Granted, you won't be able to get your songs and whatnot off without more trouble, but you can still store whatever files you want there.

Saying that, I'm a Rockbox fan, despite its instabilities.

 

[Febs]

Quote:

Originally Posted by krmathis Rockbox cons: ... * Shorter battery time.

Note that this is true for iPods, but it is not true for Archos players, iriver H100 and iriver H300, where Rockbox has exceeded the battery life of the original firmware.

 

[krmathis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Febs Note that this is true for iPods, but it is not true for Archos players, iriver H100 and iriver H300, where Rockbox has exceeded the battery life of the original firmware.

I did not know!

There are two possible reasons for this:
1. Apple have developed a better firmware, when it comes to power consumption, than Archos and iriver.
2. The Rockbox developers have a some work to do to surpass the original iPod firmware.

 

[mnhnhyouh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by krmathis I did not know! There are two possible reasons for this: 1. Apple have developed a better firmware, when it comes to power consumption, than Archos and iriver. 2. The Rockbox developers have a some work to do to surpass the original iPod firmware.

Given their record, I am betting on number 2.

h

 

[3X0]

Rockbox is also about 90-95% battery efficient with the X5 versus the standard firmware at the moment.

One of the main reasons the iPod has battery issues in Rockbox is because it is a dual-core-processor-based device. Developers have not figured out how to throttle both cores or disable either when idle; thereby both cores are usually running even when not necessary, thus needlessly draining battery life. The fact that only one core is capable of tasks (as of now) only complicates things.

Rockbox is awesome. The battery life really does it for me (I get more with Rockbox than I do with the official firmware for whatever reason; ~26 vs. ~22), as does the crystal-clear sound quality on flat settings. It's absolutely amazing. The WPS and plug-ins also impress anyone that isn't familiar with my player.

 

[RotAtoR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3X0 One of the main reasons the iPod has battery issues in Rockbox is because it is a dual-core-processor-based device. Developers have not figured out how to throttle both cores or disable either when idle; thereby both cores are usually running even when not necessary, thus needlessly draining battery life.

No, no, no, this is not true at all. Rockbox already disables the second core by putting it to sleep and implements CPU scaling. Normally the main core runs at 30MHz, boosts to 75MHz, or runs idle at 24MHz under Rockbox

The battery life problem can come from several issues: 1) The audio codecs are not necessarily as optimized as best they could be for the ARM architecture. 2) There is little to no documentation on the hardware, which means they don't know the best way to initialize the hardware. There could be bits of the hardware running that don't need to be, drawing power unnecessarily. 3) Anything I may have forgotten or is not known yet, as I said, the hardware is poorly documented.

 

[flecom]

Quote:

Originally Posted by krmathis Rockbox cons: * Does not support Mac formatted iPods (HFS+). * Is not even it beta stage yet, so might be unstable. * Does not support charging (inside the firmware). * Does not support all iPods. * Does not support DRM (media purchase from iTunes Store). * No, or very limited, video support. * Harder to install (especially for Mac users). * Shorter battery time. Rockbox pros: * Support more audio codecs. * Drag and drop files in Finder. * Open source.

uh, i have rockbox and i can charge from usb inside rockbox? just hold the menu button while you are plugging the usb cable into the ipod

 

[3X0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RotAtoR No, no, no, this is not true at all. Rockbox already disables the second core by putting it to sleep and implements CPU scaling. Normally the main core runs at 30MHz, boosts to 75MHz, or runs idle at 24MHz under Rockbox.

Ah, sorry, I've been out of the loop. I hadn't seen the optimizations for CPU throttling for iPods under CVS (mainly because I don't use that hardware).

How recent was this development?

 

[RotAtoR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3X0 How recent was this development?

Looking at the CVS logs:

17 March 2006 for the nano and 5g
30 March 2006 for the mini 2g
7 April 2006 for the 4g and mini 1g
24 July 2006 for the 3g

So it's been a little while.

 

[3X0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RotAtoR 17 March 2006 for the nano and 5g

Affirmative, way after I last checked the CVS.

 

[mnhnhyouh]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RotAtoR There could be bits of the hardware running that don't need to be, drawing power unnecessarily.

IIRC this is what happened with the H3xx. A developer used a thermal image camera to look at the circuit board when RB was running and noticed that the USBOTG chip was drawing power when it wasnt needed. He shut it down and power consumption improved makedly

h