Philip Meyer;504964 Wrote: 
> >not necessarily...  looking for biggest filesize is no different than
> >looking for first alphabetical filename.  i suspect thats also true
> of
> >resolution, as thats known to the OS as well, but i'm not positive on
> >that.
> >
> You are making assumptions about the OS.  I don't think it can be
> assumed that every OS that this runs on can get the filesize or image
> resolution as easily as you think.

regarding filesize, i think it can be assumed, and further it really
has nothing to do with the OS.  what i am saying is that when SBS looks
for first alphabetical filename thats no different than looking for
biggest filesize.  its the same "additional logic" already, only
filesize would be smarter than alphabetical.

Philip Meyer;504964 Wrote: 
> Other ways to select would be to find the image with the squarest image
> aspect ratio, or produce a montage image from all the images that it
> finds in the folder.

sure, but thats not what i'm suggesting.  those ways would take longer
and not be as simple as filesize, (or resolution).

in other words, SBS already is doing the alphabetical thing, i am
merely suggesting a one for one swap with a different/better method.

Philip Meyer;504964 Wrote: 
> What if the songs on an album come from different folders?

than due to greatest hits logic they would all get their own art
anyway, whatever is in (or missing in) each respective folder.

Philip Meyer;504964 Wrote: 
> 
> >> And the file with the largest resolution isn't necessarily the right
> one
> >> anyway.  eg.  I have a few albums with the booklet pages scanned
> (i.e.
> >> front and back joined as one image), which would have a larger
> >> resolution than the cover art.
> >
> >for the very few who do anything like that, they can and already do
> >specify the filename, so no difference.
> >
> Exactly what I meant.  I think additional logic would over complicate
> it unnecessarily.  Ultimately, if the wrong image is automatically
> selected, the user can correct it.

the decision is already made to have "additional logic," thats what the
alphabetical sorting/selecting is.  i am merely suggesting an
alternative sorting/selecting method that is no more cpu intensive.


-- 
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
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/beta

Reply via email to