Listener wrote: >> You found *one* software player, out of the hundred of hardware >> and software players on the market? I think that validates >> my point! > > No, it doesn't. Your point was > >> 2. Adapt how we use tags to work within the >> Track/Album/Artist paradigm. > >> I would suggest that option 2. is the only viable option.
My point was that there are many music players, hardware and software, on the market, all (OK, most) of which use a fixed Track/Album/Artist browsing scheme. Now, you can campaign against that if you like - feel free, go ahead. Or, you can be more pragmatic, and work within that limitation. > I gave an example of a software player that allowed full use of other > tags. That disproves your contention. No it doesn't. You pointed out *one* software player out of hundred that could be customised. I don't call that "viable". > I also said that Foobar could > be customized to support other tags with iTunes-like browser panes. I > described a reasonable compromise that uses the Composer tag on an > iPod. And I described browsing using a file folder hierarchy on other > portable players. Sure, you have those options. It doesn't get away from the fact that the vast majority of music players use a fixed Track/Album/Artist browsing scheme. > > I think my experience shows that there are viable alternatives. Even > one alternative offers the opportunity to do things the right way. I didn't say there *weren't* viable alternatives; I said that an idealogical campaign against the widespread use of Track/Album/Artist was not viable. Big difference. IMO, the best way forward here, i.e. the one that is most likely to be tractable and gain support, is the one that works within the existing limitations. R. _______________________________________________ ripping mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/ripping
