Posted by: edsmiata
developers software - 09/02/2006 23:13
is there any reason why i would not want to leave the developers software on the player rather than the consumer version?
developers software
Posted by: RobotCaleb
Re: developers software - 10/02/2006 00:11
None that I am aware of.
Posted by: StigOE
Re: developers software - 10/02/2006 00:35
Normally you're recommended to install the developer version instead of the consumer version, as it will let you get a bash prompt in case you have to do some troubleshooting, amongst other things.
Stig
Stig
Posted by: tfabris
Re: developers software - 10/02/2006 00:46
If I recall correctly (someone correct me if I'm wrong), the developer version, with its shell prompt available, uses slightly more RAM, therefore leaving slightly less RAM for song caching. The difference (if it really exists) is small enough so that you wouldn't notice anything.
Posted by: edsmiata
Re: developers software - 10/02/2006 11:14
the reason why i asked is that i just installed a new hard drive...once again kudos to the tutorial...where the tutorial states to install the developer version...but never really says to reload the consumer version...so i guess i will just leave the developer in then...
Posted by: Roger
Re: developers software - 10/02/2006 12:44
Quote:
the developer version, with its shell prompt available, uses slightly more RAM
If the developer version uses more RAM (and I don't think it does), it's not because of the shell prompt -- bash is not resident in RAM at the same time as the player.
Posted by: tfabris
Re: developers software - 10/02/2006 15:18
Okay, gotcha. So then, why two separate versions?
Posted by: pgrzelak
Re: developers software - 10/02/2006 15:29
I would guess that it was specifically made for the "user" population that did not want to hack. By having no shell to fall to, a player application error would simply restart the player application. Granted - this could lead to the boot loops that we see with bad files, etc. But for a user with no idea about computers (and no desire to find out), this could be a self-protecting feature for the mass consumer.
Granted, hindsight shows a rather small mass consumer market for the empeg (and similar devices). But if it ever had caught on to the scale of the iPod (random example), you would want to have that kind of self-healing feature in case of crashes, while, uh, locking out those who have no business in shell.
Granted, hindsight shows a rather small mass consumer market for the empeg (and similar devices). But if it ever had caught on to the scale of the iPod (random example), you would want to have that kind of self-healing feature in case of crashes, while, uh, locking out those who have no business in shell.
Posted by: edsmiata
Re: developers software - 10/02/2006 16:11
Quote:
But for a user with no idea about computers (and no desire to find out), this could be a self-protecting feature for the mass consumer.
...seems to be the most logical explanation Spock