MrSinatra;174327 Wrote: > i apparently have to explain this in painstaking detail...
Well this is my last post. Feel free to rant and have the last word. > > ipod will work with other software, NOT ONLY itunes. Bull. The only reason it works at all with other software is because other vendors have reverse-engineered the structure of data on the disk. It is not simply using a USB_Storage driver. > > if it ONLY worked with itunes, it wouldn't be as popular as it is. > thats "so what." Again, Bull. I would venture over 98% of iPod owners only use iTunes to load software and playlists on their iPod. > > try reading everything i wrote again. > > i am NOT pissed about EITHER free, nothing you just wrote there above > applies to me. Yes, you are: you keep blaming everything you dislike about Slimserver on the fact that it is (in caps, your style) "FREE". Then you won't explain what your problem with it is other than that you hate MySQL.... ok... whatever. > > SD makes NO MONEY or revenue out of developing SS. there is no revenue > in it for them. i would also venture to guess that the costs > ofdeveloping it far outweigh any partnerships they have with rhapsody > and so on, if indeed those generate revenue at all. > > they MAINLY make their money out of selling the hardware. > Again, what differs there between Slim and ... um, Apple? Your logic sucks. > > since that is the case, why FORCE us to use their free software? why > not make the hardware able to be used by any audio app, like winamp or > itunes or musicmatch or whatever? And here is where you are flat out wrong: No One Is Forcing You To Use Slimserver. NO ONE. You could write: "It sucks that even though SlimProto is documented and pretty damned simple to implement that no one else has bothered to write anything using it". That would be true. You could write "Wow, Slimserver has a command line interface -and- and method of using HTTP commands, so people can write things like Moose.. I wish more people would write neat things like that, that would be cool." Nope, you blame Slim because no one has taken the publicly documented and simple-to-implememt protocols and done anything with them. Do you not understand why you are blaming the wrong people? Slim does not have source code to every other music player on the planet: they have, however, documented their API, and even have source code available so that you can study the API. If you really really hate the API, then you can write a pluging that -replaces- the CLI and does it all via whatever command set you want. > > if they still wanted to develop and use SS they could, but it should > not be the only way. It is NOT the only way. If you want the Widgetmaster XYZ MusicJukebox to work with your squeezebox: Talk to the people at WidgetMaster. Explain to them that the protocols are open and documented. If they don't bite, then don't blame Slim... blame Widgetmaster. > > what confuses me, is why they FORCE is to use this ONLY way, when they > give it out for free and make no money from it, and incur headaches and > costs from it. No one is forcing you to do anything. > > in my case, DRM has nothing to do with anything i'm doing. i make my > own mp3s and listen to mp3 streams. Then for christsakes.. Your music is in mp3 now. You like Winamp. Set up shoutcast. And... tell Slimserver to "tune in" to http://localhost:something/listen.pls... And guess what? You are using winamp! You can queue stuff up in winamp, you can play with it all day. You never have to scan a thing into Slimserver but can use Winamp for all your needs! > > i don't think that this should preclude the development of a windows > driver for SB, to replace SS as the only method of using a SB. The DRM chain in Vista does. All sound drivers must be signed. I am sure that is somehow Slim's fault, too in your world. Analogy: You buy a brand new Porsche, but because this is a hypothetical world, in this magical world Porsche gives out complete schematics to their car. No, wait, not just schematics: the CAD documents they used on their production floor. They figured "what the heck, if we go out of business we arent screwing our customers and they may be able to suggest tweaks to the cars for future revisions" You then complain to them: "Why are you giving away schematics, you should make this car take a Chevy engine, because I like my old '327... and you have no right to force me to use your engine!" The Porsche engineers look at you confused: they say, "If you want a different engine here are all the schematics and you can either change our engine around or figure out how to change the Chevy so it fits." But then you rant at them that if they charged more for the manuals instead of giving them for free, they would have the money to make it work with a Chevy engine. Get it yet? Well, that is a rhetorical. I don't care if you don't get it. You would rather argue and I have better things to do. -- snarlydwarf ------------------------------------------------------------------------ snarlydwarf's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=1179 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=31324 _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/discuss
