Philip Meyer;505578 Wrote: > >but alphabetical is ALWAYS going to be purely arbitrary, whereas the > >others have a much higher chance of getting it right. (in other > words, > >more likely to be desired behavior in most cases) > > > Disagree - there's no evidence that filesize/resolution would be a > higher chance of being right. All methods are arbitrary.
thats just a dopey thing to say. I ALREADY SAID THAT IF HIGHEST RESOLUTION WAS USED I WOULDN'T EVEN NEED TO ENTER A FILENAME. THAT PROVES RESOLUTION ISN'T \"ARBITRARY\" CRITERIA. I HAVE THOUSANDS OF ALBUMS, AND IT WOULD GET EVERYONE OF THEM CORRECT. YOU CALL THAT \"CHANCE?\" however, if alphabetical is used i DO need to provide a filename (in SBS settings). it would get almost all of them wrong. that means that IS arbitrary. CLEAR DIFFERENCE. my case would not be unique. Philip Meyer;505578 Wrote: > > >this whole thing is for unsophisticated users who are unaware. > > > I think your case is flawed. Will unsophisticated users have multiple > artwork images in a folder? i.e. How will unsophisticated users get > more than one file in their folders? Unsophisticated users will either > not have artwork, or will use a ripper that retrieves one image and puts > it into tags, or will create a single file, or use WMP that may produce > several images but one will be folder.jpg. does SBS use Folder.jpg ahead of AlbumArtSmall.jpg now? b/c it didn't used to and i haven't tried since setting Folder.jpg explicitly in the settings. regardless, a user could EASILY have multiple apps putting multiple files into the folder... they could rip with WMP, (which might get the wrong art) and add correct artwork later with winamp, which uses the albums tag name for the art filename. there could be other apps grabbing art and sticking it in there, who knows? you can't anticipate all possibilities... the point is to come up with the most robust, dummyproof system possible. Philip Meyer;505578 Wrote: > SBS already goes a long way to choosing artwork, and if it gets it wrong > and the user cares, they can fix it by tagging or renaming files (or > changing settings). Other media player apps don't do half of what SBS > scanner does, eg. iTunes doesn't find any file artwork. so what? that has nothing to do with anything. if SBS is going to use an arbitrary method of alphabetical as a fallback, and thats already done, then my point is that a better way to provide a fallback is by resolution, and i PROVED why. if you want to argue different, then you simply want to argue. Philip Meyer;505578 Wrote: > I'd much rather developers worked on more useful functionality, rather > than fall-back situations like this. I'd also prefer less complex code > - your suggestions could be slower, would need to be made to work > cross-platform and therefore the scanner could be more prone to errors. you always say this about anything someone else suggests but never about your own suggestions. its a red herring and its getting old. you have no proof that going by resolution or filesize is any slower or more complex than going by alphabetical. now, if it was, depending on the degree, i already said i'd have np not using it, but i don't see it as likely, and as far as i'm concerned the benefit is worth the effort. anything that results in less support needed to the avg user is worthwhile. -- MrSinatra www.lion-radio.org using: sb2 & sbc (my home) / sbr (parent's home) - sbs 7.5b - win xp pro sp3 ie8 - p4(ht) 3.2ghz / 2gig ram - 1tb wd usb2 raid1 - d-link dir-655 - 35k mp3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ MrSinatra's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2336 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=71768 _______________________________________________ beta mailing list beta@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/beta
