Nobody shares knowledge better than this
-
@Xyro said:
Please be descriptive and OnTopic.
Been there, tried that, given up. Close thread. Case closed.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@Xyro said:
Hm. Oh great SwamPie, in your own words, what is MetaData? Please be descriptive and OnTopic.
MetaData is royal pain in the ass unless you have control over it like SSDS gives me. MetaData is a word that shouldn't exist. Info or text or Catalog data is what it really is. Grep MetaData BooGalooo who cares if all the name does is confuse. re genre should be spelled jaundra. Misleading names only confuse the issue more for the non techie. MetaData SmetaData &%#*
The grep tool and metadata have nothing to do with each other. And either does boogaloo. And that's absolutely not how you pronounce genre. My god.
@SpectateSwamp said:
3 things are required to free metadata from the icy grips of the record companies and the software sellers. 2 already exist.
(1) SSDS to get the info/MD out of the mp3 files, to a text file. Ready to play from or update.
(2) Notepad a simple editor to allow you to encode more info in the above text file.
(3) Still looking... A simple uploader that would take the above text file and change the associated .mp3 file info
What ever their data format requirements are for text data, we could easily accomodate
ETL and SSDS what a combo
But what happens when you transfer the mp3? Under your scheme, you lose the metadata. Please pay attention to how that is a problem. If I wanted an mp3 from you and I also wanted the title, artist, etc with it, you would have to give me two files: the mp3 and a document with the requested information. Do you understand how that is inconvenient? Why not just bundle both the binary encoding data with the text metadata into the same file? If it's done in a simple and standard way, search utilities should have no problem handling the metadata.
Mind you, when I say "search utilities", I mean the kind that can search for files on the filesystem.
PS, you did not answer my original question. To you, what is metadata?
Please directly answer in complete sentences at least two of my questions in this post.
-
MusicFolksData not MetaData
@Xyro said:
But what happens when you transfer the mp3? Under your scheme, you lose the metadata. Please pay attention to how that is a problem. If I wanted an mp3 from you and I also wanted the title, artist, etc with it, you would have to give me two files: the mp3 and a document with the requested information. Do you understand how that is inconvenient? Why not just bundle both the binary encoding data with the text metadata into the same file? If it's done in a simple and standard way, search utilities should have no problem handling the metadata.
Sorry You must have misunderstood. First some dump program SSDS or otherwise creates a text dump of the genre artist year .... on the first line of text, with the path of the song on the 2nd line. then you take a simple editor to add miscellaneous info on line ONE etc. Then this is dumped back into the associated mp3 fields. Using a simple uploader. Then if you go back to the mp3 music file you have the updated MetaData. How can that be more difficult to understand that what now exists. The music folks control your metadata if you can't Export Translate and Load it easily.
As far as the word metadata goes why use latin ? Why don't use what it really is "MusicFolksData"
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
First some dump program SSDS or otherwise creates a text dump of the genre artist year .... on the first line of text, with the path of the song on the 2nd line. then you take a simple editor to add miscellaneous info on line ONE etc. Then this is dumped back into the associated mp3 fields. Using a simple uploader. Then if you go back to the mp3 music file you have the updated MetaData. How can that be more difficult to understand that what now exists.
How on earth can this be easier than just using mp3tag where you can edit mp3 metadata directly on the file? You can even do it in bulk, based on some simple rules.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
As far as the word metadata goes why use latin ?
I'm sure that the word meta is derived from Greek, not Latin. The first example of this Wikipedia article on the use of meta in English is "metadata".
-
@bjolling said:
How on earth can this be easier than just using mp3tag where you can edit mp3 metadata directly on the file? You can even do it in bulk, based on some simple rules.
You poor sob. Of course, Notepad is easier to use then another PerfectPerfect's tool. For Non-Techies. Just jam it noodle random random SSDS gee-haw! Spaghetti.
-
MetaData is the Greeks fault
@bjolling said:
@SpectateSwamp said:
As far as the word metadata goes why use latin ?
I'm sure that the word meta is derived from Greek, not Latin. The first example of this Wikipedia article on the use of meta in English is "metadata".Thanks for the correction I can't stand or understand Greek either.
-
@bjolling said:
How on earth can this be easier than just using mp3tag where you can edit mp3 metadata directly on the file? You can even do it in bulk, based on some simple rules.
Watch out SSDS! mp3tag is the DesktopSearch
taking the world by storm! DumDum features can't compete! With Mp3Tag, you can access all your MusicFolkData without
prompt #2. It can even provide useless Random Data as long as you beam stray radiation at your RandomAccessMemory.
Sharing knowledge is about sharing truths, not PR or BS. With mp3Tag you can take your .MP3 files with you on a USB
drive. Show them off to your family, friends, etc. Take up the Desktop search Engines challenge. mp3tag could put on quite a
show. It's even compatible with every search Desktop on the market, including the ones built in to windoWs. Jam those mp3
files! Other random grep slow video random randoms can't compete!PS, you have still yet to address a single question I have put forward. You're not one of those Chicken Scared Afraid NoGuts dumbAsses are you?
-
Mp3tag and SSDS what a combo
@bjolling said:
How on earth can this be easier than just using mp3tag where you can edit mp3 metadata directly on the file? You can even do it in bulk, based on some simple rules.
Woo Hoo you are now my Fav, even more fav than SpenkSwamp. I'll see what is needed for a bulk upload and change SSDS to accommodate Thanks again.This is much easier than digging this up myself.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
So if I ever move the mp3 to another location or device then I also need to update the text file containing this meta data? If I want to use the mp3 with a device other than a computer (phone, mp3 player, Squeezebox etc) I would need the device to understand the SSDS way of doing things as well? Why not just leave the meta data in the mp3 so it is always associated with the mp3, we then do not have to maintain two sets of data (the file and the mp3) - far easier than you convoluted way of doing things. If you then extend this to include mp3, png, jpeg, xls, doc, ppt, pdf and so your way is a monstrous amount of work. A simple search tool would index this meta data and maintain this index automatically, an mp3 player would use this data, a slide show program would use the data and so on.Sorry You must have misunderstood. First some dump program SSDS or otherwise creates a text dump of the genre artist year .... on the first line of text, with the path of the song on the 2nd line. then you take a simple editor to add miscellaneous info on line ONE etc. Then this is dumped back into the associated mp3 fields. Using a simple uploader. Then if you go back to the mp3 music file you have the updated MetaData. How can that be more difficult to understand that what now exists. The music folks control your metadata if you can't Export Translate and Load it easily.
How can the music folks control my data when the information is stored in an open and well documented fashion (id3, id3v2, exif, flac tags and so on) that are well understood by many tools and applications? Your way requires me to use a tool to extract this data, notepad to edit this data but with no validity checking whatsoever and another tool to then update the metadata again - alternatively I can edit nearly all the types I use either direct from windowsor from the application that creates the file anyway.
@SpectateSwamp said:
As far as the word metadata goes why use latin ? Why don't use what it really is "MusicFolksData"
For starters MetaData is not just applicable to music but to potentially any file type, the term meta data is generally assumed to mean "data about data" i.e. a text file is the data while information such as creation time is data about the data. A more sophisticated file structure such as mp3, avi etc. can contain further information (or metadata) such as author, keywords, subject and provides additional information about the file - a simple enough concept to understand really.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@bjolling said:
How on earth can this be easier than just using mp3tag where you can edit mp3 metadata directly on the file? You can even do it in bulk, based on some simple rules.
Woo Hoo you are now my Fav, even more fav than SpenkSwamp. I'll see what is needed for a bulk upload and change SSDS to accommodate Thanks again.This is much easier than digging this up myself.
Not that I'm surprised, just for clarification: Until now you thought that metadata in MP3 files (aka ID3 tags) is entered by the "music industry" and can't be changed by the user, or at least, that there's no program yet that can do it? Windows Media Player has been named too many times in this thread, as I believe it's rather poor, but the point still stands, this thing is fricken included in fricken Windows and can edit the tags, and I believe that you can also change them by right-clicking and selecting properties. I'm not sure about WMP, but every decent media player can also change tags of multiple files at once (Winamp, to name the most popular one). There's also an open source project called EasyTag which seems to be similar to MP3Tag. Well, whatever, you won't read this anyway.
-
MusicFolksData restricts comments
@derula said:
Well, whatever, you won't read this anyway.
I looked around for code to update mp3 files tag info. I'll upgrade SSDS putting in the tag field descriptions eg "gendre=" "artist=" "year=" "comments=" that will make it easier for me to upload those specific fields back to the mp3 after any changes. The first part should be easy. Most of it is done. The comments field is only 28 characters long. With SSDS it will be a gazillion times bigger than 28
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/vb/mp3id3v1.aspx
They banned me for 10 days at Channel9 so I have more time to listen. Derula I did read your comments. and I thank you again.
If it is that easy to update mp3 records.. then I don't need to do the upload just yet. But I'll make the above changes to SSDS. Extracting this data from the mp3 doesn't deminish it or anything. It just takes seconds. And RRR can happen here.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
I looked around for code to update mp3 files tag info. I'll upgrade SSDS putting in the tag field descriptions eg "gendre=" "artist=" "year=" "comments=" that will make it easier for me to upload those specific fields back to the mp3 after any changes. The first part should be easy. Most of it is done. The comments field is only 28 characters long. With SSDS it will be a gazillion times bigger than 28
genre would be a better option instead of gendre :) I still fail to understand why I would use SSDS to extract the meta data, notepad to edit it and then upload it back into the mp3s though - I can either just use windows itself or a tool like tagclinic to update the data in place which prevents me having to maintain it in two places. WDS will still happily index it without me having to manually keep the index up to date.Realistically you would want to also support Id3v2 as it is far more common and useful then the older id3v1 tag format (which only allows 28 (or 30 depending on it being a 1 or a 1.1 tag) characters for comments - increasing this will just result in a corrupted tag, if you are going to follow standards you need to accurately follow them after all. @SpectateSwamp said:
If it is that easy to update mp3 records.. then I don't need to do the upload just yet. But I'll make the above changes to SSDS. Extracting this data from the mp3 doesn't deminish it or anything. It just takes seconds. And RRR can happen here.
It really is that easy, perhaps you should consider trying things out before assuming you are correct and the rest of the planet is wrong. I still fail to understand why I would need to extract the data though as this simply means everytime I edit a file's meta data I need to remember to re-extract it, leaving it in the file makes far more sense unless the extraction is automatic (you know - like every other desktop search tool does).RRR is a totally stupid idea, randomly playing songs is fine, playing the intro and skipping to the next if the user doesn't select the song to play is fine but randomly playing random bits of random songs is an utterly crap idea.
-
No MetaData SSDS will fix that
@spenk said:
I still fail to understand why I would use SSDS to extract the meta data, notepad to edit it and then upload it back into the mp3s though
Me neither. Unless all your metadata was a rip off and had no Id3v2 MD SSDS would be very handy then. Say you were the biggest music thief of all time 0% tagged...Just load the simple text fields layed out by the first SSDS pass and turn that text file around and update with the new uploader. Any swampie want to be the hero and write that part.
@spenk said:
- I can either just use windows itself or a tool like tagclinic to update the data in place which prevents me having to maintain it in two places. WDS will still happily index it without me having to manually keep the index up to date.
Like I say I don't do much music and there is no way I'd update my songs.txt file. I just run the 'gf' option that puts the metadata and the file/folder info into the output file. If all my mp3 files were rip-offs then the file and folder would have to be very descriptive. Even with non descriptive folders and names. Random would find and play songs for you. But you could update the songs.txt quite easily or at least take a quick check to see just how much doesn't have data. SSDS allows for that. Check the MetaData with SSDS. Another Wooo Hooo moment.
@spenk said:
It really is that easy, perhaps you should consider trying things out before assuming you are correct and the rest of the planet is wrong. I still fail to understand why I would need to extract the data though as this simply means everytime I edit a file's meta data I need to remember to re-extract it, leaving it in the file makes far more sense unless the extraction is automatic (you know - like every other desktop search tool does).
Say you worked real hard and added more free format info to your mp3 files. Then all of a sudden you had another huge glut of songs come available. Don't ever get rid of the original hand manipulated search info and coded however you like. JUST append the new mp3 extract info. to it. There isn't a problem having more than 1 reference to the same song with SSDS
@spenk said:
RRR is a totally stupid idea, randomly playing songs is fine, playing the intro and skipping to the next if the user doesn't select the song to play is fine but randomly playing random bits of random songs is an utterly crap idea.
RRR without the rapid is ok. Like 15 seconds of random can be interesting. Not 2. Give it a try you'll like it
The REAL advantage for using SSDS is the "video" cataloging / MetaData populating. And If you were creating a lot of audio files yourself. mp3's that would never need metadata could be cataloged with SSDS.
-
More than gee-hawing and Jammin with SSDS
@derula said:
@bjolling said:
How on earth can this be easier than just using mp3tag where you can edit mp3 metadata directly on the file? You can even do it in bulk, based on some simple rules.
You poor sob. Of course, Notepad is easier to use then another PerfectPerfect's tool. For Non-Techies. Just jam it noodle random random SSDS gee-haw! Spaghetti.And some screen re-shoots to show off the jammin and gee-hawing. Can't forget those horrible horrible screen reshoots.
Talking of reshoots. I might have to dig up some of my old old stone dances. There is a vob file kicking around. (Screen Reshoot) I'll show you the medicine stones. Took some pictures of what looks like a grinding bowl / large stone. today. I should upload that somewhere too.
-
Random is the Key to SSDS music play - You need an extract for that.
I can see why some of you can't stand RRR. Because your player can't do it. There has to be an exract file, of all your music to do this. If your player doesn't have an extract it can't match the RRR capabilities of SSDS. All you music lovers could be taking advantage of this option TONIGHT operators are standing by. I guess I'll leave the MP3 extract where it is. I forget how important that was. I'd be losing this MD discussion badly without it.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Me neither. Unless all your metadata was a rip off and had no Id3v2 MD SSDS would be very handy then. Say you were the biggest music thief of all time 0% tagged...Just load the simple text fields layed out by the first SSDS pass and turn that text file around and update with the new uploader. Any swampie want to be the hero and write that part.
So we agree that I shouldn't use SSDS then - excellent. However if the mp3s hadn't been tagged then ssds couldn't extract the data anyway so what benefit is there in using it - it would be easier to use another tool to populate the mp3 tags. Also mp3s and tags are nothing to do with music piracy they are a standard way of storing meta data in mp3 files.@SpectateSwamp said:
Say you worked real hard and added more free format info to your mp3 files. Then all of a sudden you had another huge glut of songs come available. Don't ever get rid of the original hand manipulated search info and coded however you like. JUST append the new mp3 extract info. to it. There isn't a problem having more than 1 reference to the same song with SSDS
Not exactly working hard as any legit music bought online as mp3 will already be tagged, if I was ripping a purchased CD then most tools will populate the tags automatically as well. In either case why would I hand maintain a file of meta data when I could just manage the meta data directly and ignore the need for this random .txt file SSDS uses?@SpectateSwamp said:
The REAL advantage for using SSDS is the "video" cataloging / MetaData populating. And If you were creating a lot of audio files yourself. mp3's that would never need metadata could be cataloged with SSDS.
Just because you have recently heard of meta data doesn't mean SSDS uses it properly, admittedly it will extract id3v1 tags but that is only a single format for a single file type - if you are serious about meta data based searching you would need to cover a whole lot more files types. In any case it is still easier to put the meta data into the file in question rather than being required to maintain two seperate files, it isn't as if creating or editing meta data in place is difficult anyway.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Nope, RRR is a totally shit idea I have never once in my life wanted to listen to random sections of random length of random songs, or the same for video. No other music player offers this functionalit because nobody but you actually wants this functionality. Extracting data is just another description of creating an index (it is just that your index needs to be generated by a person and maintained by a person rather than in the background) and has nothing to do with shuffle functionality anyway.I can see why some of you can't stand RRR. Because your player can't do it. There has to be an exract file, of all your music to do this. If your player doesn't have an extract it can't match the RRR capabilities of SSDS. All you music lovers could be taking advantage of this option TONIGHT operators are standing by. I guess I'll leave the MP3 extract where it is. I forget how important that was. I'd be losing this MD discussion badly without it.
-
MOre extracts to SSDS format needed - More uploaders too
Yup I wouldn't have to do a thing. And I Really like that.
For the extract / downloader (Mp3 extract existing SSDS option)
just put "photo " at the beginning of line 1 and the file/folder along with the metadata in a format easy to reload
on line #2 put "xxx." and the path to the music file "c:\search\songs\me_singing.mp3"
and SSDS will search and random this stuff like crazy. You don't have to worry about SSDS screwing up your files either. Knock on wood. All the opens are read only. so no locking either / meebe.
For the Uploader:
Use the info from the above file to change the designated mp3 data or do an initial initial load of empty fields.
Uploaders for mpg video would be handy, if they are even encoding that stuff? SSDS does do video MD. External file mind you. The only way to keep MetaData for the long run is in simple text files with SSDS. Nobody does Video MD like this. Go Swamp Search.
Damn those guys at Channel9 are going to miss out on all this MD knowledge.
Randomize your audio collection tonight. Listen like never before.
Do you need instructions to proceed my NEW Swampies. If the longtime Swampies had been listening. I'm sure I've told them about the "gf" option prompt #2 and then jammin it with random random. No random music in your life?
-
So ... okay ... wait, HUH?
WHAT ARE YOU SAYING!?
I never thought I'd have a physical reaction to internet nonsense but the persistance of our beloved troll is making my mind reel. Oh the giddiness. This must be what it feels like to go insane. Ok, ok, calm down. Let's just keep going.
So, ShaMan, remind me again, what's the point of extracting all this MetaData? It's so SSDS can search it, right? Would you call that ... indexing? If not, how is it different, and how is your way better?
-
Re: More Buttar.
I see a lot of jam in this thread. Perhaps we should add some peanut butter. I'm sure we can get a peanut out of SpectateSwamp's skull.
But seriously.... What the hell does the word "jam" mean in these contexts? what does it mean to "jam" SDSS? If it involves jamming a floppy with the BASICA source code down spectateswamps throat I'm all for it.
.
-
@BC_Programmer said:
I see a lot of jam in this thread. Perhaps we should add some peanut butter.
And maybe some honey?
@BC_Programmer said:
But seriously.... What the hell does the word "jam" mean in these contexts? what does it mean to "jam" SDSS?
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Yup I wouldn't have to do a thing. And I Really like that.
Apart from extract the meta data and then maintain it by hand that is.@SpectateSwamp said:
but why should I do this when every other desktop search tool will do all of this for me and more importantly do it automatically as well, you are effectively requiring me to build and maintain all the indexes by hand - quite frankly I have better things to do with my time.@SpectateSwamp said:For the extract / downloader (Mp3 extract existing SSDS option)
just put "photo " at the beginning of line 1 and the file/folder along with the metadata in a format easy to reload
on line #2 put "xxx." and the path to the music file "c:\search\songs\me_singing.mp3"
and SSDS will search and random this stuff like crazy. You don't have to worry about SSDS screwing up your files either. Knock on wood. All the opens are read only. so no locking either / meebe.
Normally random music and video is called "shuffle" and every single media player on the planet can do this.Randomize your audio collection tonight. Listen like never before.
Do you need instructions to proceed my NEW Swampies. If the longtime Swampies had been listening. I'm sure I've told them about the "gf" option prompt #2 and then jammin it with random random. No random music in your life?
-
SSDS makes MD Bigger and more better
@spenk said:
but why should I do this when every other desktop search tool will do all of this for me and more importantly do it automatically as well, you are effectively requiring me to build and maintain all the indexes by hand - quite frankly I have better things to do with my time.
Come on a simple text file is as easy as it gets. Do you think people want to remember the right mouse, gendre select tab tab select 1 of 70 Plus crap groupings set up by the MusicFolksData group. Just look at the file layout. It's all about their way of cataloging things. A tiny contents field. With SSDS the 90 characters before that would be free format and searchable. What crap the MFD layout is. Let SSDS free your MetaData or at least make it BIGGER
@spenk said:
Normally random music and video is called "shuffle" and every single media player on the planet can do this.
Yeah with some MFD group with their ICY grip on the tiny little metadata offering they have allowed you. Not so with SSDS. Way more freedom, way more MetaData
@spenk said:
Apart from extract the meta data and then maintain it by hand that is.
By hand you dumb sob is the fastest and bestest there is. I'm screen capturing my posts and cataloging them with SSDS without taking my hands off the keyboard. Enter into SSDS and type in 2 (get that two) lines of code. The first one has "photo scapture0179 thedailywtf bla bla bla" on it and the 2ND line has "xxx.c:\search\webscreens\scapture0179.jpg" on it I then immediately check the search and display. Same with songs, very easy to catalog. way easier than your method. Just what was that set of instructions?
Some of you should quit yapping and get over to Channel9 and speak up for SSDS and Free Range MetaData. Or I'll BAN you from this thread. I can you know.
Pisses me off when they yap and yap and I can't respond.... Mad mad mad
-
Free Range MetaData better than store bought
Just think with one simple little bulk uploader. You could have a completely new set of metadata that you can jam into your MP3 files. Catalogue your music your way. Change the MD completely (with a 2nd or 3rd control list) and change it right back if you want. The MFD group won't like it you know. But so what. for Free Range MetaData the risk is worth it.
Has anybody started on that uploader. Or do I have to go to one of my FAV VB sites for that?
-
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
You are wrong, not having to do anything is easier than editing the text file. WDS, GDS etc. will build this index automatically and requires me to do nothing more than have the files tagged correctly. SSDS requires me to have the files tagged and then I must create the file with the gf thing and then if I add more music or change the tags I am required to redo or edit the text file. Letting the computer do this indexing automatically is far easier. Using Id3v2 which is the established standard you can store a lot more information than the simple Id3v1 but still keep it in a structured fashion so SSDS and a text file offers nothing extra. Stop claiming SSDS is the best way when you haven't researched the alternatives properly.Come on a simple text file is as easy as it gets. Do you think people want to remember the right mouse, gendre select tab tab select 1 of 70 Plus crap groupings set up by the MusicFolksData group. Just look at the file layout. It's all about their way of cataloging things. A tiny contents field. With SSDS the 90 characters before that would be free format and searchable. What crap the MFD layout is. Let SSDS free your MetaData or at least make it BIGGER
@SpectateSwamp said:
Yeah with some MFD group with their ICY grip on the tiny little metadata offering they have allowed you. Not so with SSDS. Way more freedom, way more MetaData
You are claiming the meta data is tiny because you only support the older Id3v1 tag which is small and simplistic, modern software should support the ID3v2 standard which removes this restriction and therefore SSDS offers nothing more than is already available but SSDS requires more effort.@SpectateSwamp said:
By hand you dumb sob is the fastest and bestest there is. I'm screen capturing my posts and cataloging them with SSDS without taking my hands off the keyboard. Enter into SSDS and type in 2 (get that two) lines of code. The first one has "photo scapture0179 thedailywtf bla bla bla" on it and the 2ND line has "xxx.c:\search\webscreens\scapture0179.jpg" on it I then immediately check the search and display. Same with songs, very easy to catalog. way easier than your method. Just what was that set of instructions?
Nope you are simply wrong again with window I click on the image and enter the data directly into the explorer window, my camera will already have set up some meta data including date and time while if I used my phone it would have also set the geotag information. Using explorer I can easily provide structured data such as keywords, subject etc to make searching even easier. As soon as the data is entered it is searchable without the need to do any 'gf' rubbish or edit index files by hand. You are happy with your wacky way of doing things but stop claiming it is the best for everyone.If I had to convince my parents to use your method compared to what they do now they would think I was retarded. If my father has taken photos while on holiday he gets home, plugs the camera into his PC and a wizard offers him the chance to copy the photos, as part of this he can give the entire batch a subject and set of keywords which windows automatically writes into the meta data and they are seachable straight away.If he sends a copy to me then as soon as I save the file I can search based on this meta data with no further effort on my part.
Doing it your way he would need to copy the photos to a location by hand, then create a text file by hand, for every single photo he would need to then type out
photo uniquephotoname unstructured comments here
xxx.<path to photo here>and then have to update this file by hand if he renames a phote, deletes a photo, adds a photo or moves a photo. He could now only search using SSDS and it's mad syntax and would get no nice previews or similar. If he wanted to send these photos to someone else he would now have to cut and paste the relevant sections of this text file into the email along with instructions for the other person on how to use SSDS and which bits of the text file needs updating!
I know which is easiest and less effort, I know which way would have him wondering if I had taken to using drugs and worrying about my mental health (clue - SSDS way = worrying answer, WDS way = easy and less effort)
@SpectateSwamp said:
Perhaps you are getting no support because you are totally ill informed, arrogant, rude and generally behaving like a moron? Nobody will support you when you obviously have no idea what you are talking about. The fact you are banned is such an obvious consequence of your attitude you really shouldn't be surprised. Stop claiming to now be superior on meta data with terms like "Free Range MetaData" when you have no understanding of the various structures and are simply trying to lock people into SSDS' way of storing meta data (i.e. another proprietary mechanism).Some of you should quit yapping and get over to Channel9 and speak up for SSDS and Free Range MetaData. Or I'll BAN you from this thread. I can you know.
Pisses me off when they yap and yap and I can't respond.... Mad mad mad
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Just think with one simple little bulk uploader. You could have a completely new set of metadata that you can jam into your MP3 files. Catalogue your music your way. Change the MD completely (with a 2nd or 3rd control list) and change it right back if you want. The MFD group won't like it you know. But so what. for Free Range MetaData the risk is worth it.
Has anybody started on that uploader. Or do I have to go to one of my FAV VB sites for that?
There are plenty of tag editing tools out there, stop claiming you have just invented the idea. The existing standards allow you to provide as much or as little information as you desire but in an open and standard way - you are simply suggesting a method that means every other tool apart from SSDS would now stop working with mp3 meta data - how is this free range? (shit name by the way)
Also there is no MFD group as the formats are a completely open and independently developed set of standards. These standards are a good thing as it means the meta data can be shared and understood on a variety of platforms and devices, your method would only work on a platform the understood your specific meta data format - this being the exact opposite of what you are claiming.
-
@spenk said:
and then have to update this file by hand if he renames a phote, deletes a photo, adds a photo or moves a photo.
I don't think SpectateSwamp understands file systems enough to make sense of that. Why copy, rename or delete anything? With SSDS, you're in total control of your data. All in one place. C:\search. No need to change anything. Besides, the only reason to rename/move, or worse, delete anything is to cover up crimes. Boo too the all too perfect SpenkSwamp here. Just make the photo. Add a MetaData noodle and jam it. Imagine how fun it will be like when the photo will be randomly displayed some time in future! You will probably already have forgotten it ever existed!
-
SSDS MetaData tracks your files
@derula said:
@spenk said:
Not a problem if someone deletes a photo or song or video. I periodically run a Rapid Sequential Check using SSDS. Go right through each catalog playing the first few seconds of music and video. Pictures can be shown at 10 per second. When one has been moved or deleted SSDS stops in its tracks. What would you do Spenk if someone deleted 500 of your pictures or a part of disk went bad. You would never know if you lost something without an external MetaData file and SSDS. Misplacing stuff isn't a problem. I keep it all in 1 folder. Not losing it is far more important. SSDS saves your MD and files with its RSC abilities. Yaaa Hooo SSDS Can't touch this search. They just can't you know.and then have to update this file by hand if he renames a phote, deletes a photo, adds a photo or moves a photo.
I don't think SpectateSwamp understands file systems enough to make sense of that. Why copy, rename or delete anything? With SSDS, you're in total control of your data. All in one place. C:\search\. No need to change anything. Besides, the only reason to rename/move, or worse, delete anything is to cover up crimes. Boo too the all too perfect SpenkSwamp here. Just make the photo. Add a MetaData noodle and jam it. Imagine how fun it will be like when the photo will be randomly displayed some time in future! You will probably already have forgotten it ever existed!
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Not a problem if someone deletes a photo or song or video. I periodically run a Rapid Sequential Check using SSDS. Go right through each catalog playing the first few seconds of music and video.
So this means you need to check for changes and then update the index yourself? How is this better than an index that is automatically managed?@SpectateSwamp said:
Pictures can be shown at 10 per second. When one has been moved or deleted SSDS stops in its tracks.
This would still mean I had to update the index by hand. What happens if I deleted the files on purpose - would your random stop if it encountered a missing file?@SpectateSwamp said:
What would you do Spenk if someone deleted 500 of your pictures or a part of disk went bad.
I would either restore them from a backup with all meta data intact or copy them from another pc they have been syncronised with also with meta data intact, thank you for asking.@SpectateSwamp said:
You would never know if you lost something without an external MetaData file and SSDS.
I would tend to notice without needing an external copy of the meta data - I would notice by the files going missing!@SpectateSwamp said:
Misplacing stuff isn't a problem. I keep it all in 1 folder.
I choose to organise my data in a way that suits me, not in a single folder and I would still noticefiles going missing.@SpectateSwamp said:
Not losing it is far more important. SSDS saves your MD and files with its RSC abilities. Yaaa Hooo SSDS Can't touch this search. They just can't you know.
SSDS does not prevent data loss, it does not save meta data, it does not allow you to search for files, it does not fit with any other person's way of doing things or provide any justifiaction for existing. RSC is another fucking made up term that actually has no point and isn't fucking useful at all.
-
Hold the boat. Why is Swampy talking about Mandatory Fun Day? And why does that hillariously godawful comic have its icy grip around metadata..? And why would MFD get upset if you changed metadata on an mp3..?
And what happens if the SSDS text file of metadata extracts gets corrupted by that hypothetical unfortunate cosmic ray..? Manually rebuild the index, I guess. Same thing you have to do when you delete a file; manually sweep it out of the index with Rapid Sequential Check TechNology
I have to say though, I do like the concept of free-range metadata. It's very green. I only search locally grown, free-range metadata. No antibiotics or pesticides to make it safe, no weirdo fertilizers to allow it to be grown in bulk cheaply, no postmodern existential guilt. Are you doing your part to save the planet? Use SSDS! BigBig AgraBusiness can't compete!
Shaman, what if you wanted to share your knowledge hoard with someone who isn't running Windows? The externally documented metadata wouldn't be easily accessible, as SSDS isn't available. However, all the metadata internal to the hoarded files would be accessible; i.e., the ID3v2 tags in an mp3 or the Exif info in an image. If you're just going to "upload" the external metadata back into the data file, why store it externally in the first place?
We can all answer that question using the word "index" if you like, but I want your thoughts on it.
-
By the way, Swampie, you don't pronounce "genre" similar to "jaundice", do you? Because that's not how the word is pronounced. There is no D, hidden or otherwise, in genre. Say it more like this: "jshawn ruh". There are audio files at the above link.
-
@Xyro said:
Shaman, what if you wanted to share your knowledge hoard with someone who isn't running Windows?
SSDS is for the NonTechie. No NonTechie doesn't run Windows. (Note that SpectateSwamp hasn't heard about the Apple trend that's going on lately.)@Xyro said:
The externally documented metadata wouldn't be easily accessible, as SSDS isn't available.
BullShit. SpectateSwamp already pointed out that SSDS isn't dependent on the language really. It can be easily ported to C. And once it is, it can be compiled for any platform. Just because us SwamPies are too lazy to do it doesn't make it less possible.
-
Who's MetaData is it anyways?
@Xyro said:
If you're just going to "upload" the external metadata back into the data file, why store it externally in the first place?
I might just want to store some of my passwords or otherwise secret data there from time to time. Then switch back to the regular MD in the MP3's after I do a backup. If it is my MetaData then I should be able to do with it; as I please.I must say that I love this group a lot lot more than those Sneaky Sneak idea banning SOBs at channel9. Go get em Swampies. But not you DerulaSwamp; until you calm down. I'll put DerulaSwamp on defence. Good going Swampies.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
I might just want to store some of my passwords or otherwise secret data there from time to time. Then switch back to the regular MD in the MP3's after I do a backup. If it is my MetaData then I should be able to do with it; as I please.
WTF? You are planning on storing your passwords in the meta data??? You really are a confused individual. Nobody is disagreeing with you having the right to do what you want, it is your insistence that your way is the only true way and everyone else is wrong despite such obviously idiotic ideas as storing passwords in meta data!
-
I'm torn, is this a WTF or an OMG? I can't wait to download his hoard, I'm sure there will be more than a few me_singing.mp3 files with an artist of "bankAccountNumber: 99032481-34123" and a genre of "wHiTeRaVeN2012". Come on Swampy, share it with us!
But really, are you really saying that the reason you extract metadata and store it externally is to use it to store passwords? Is that really what you're saying? Do you really do that? May I ask why, or is that a silly question?
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
I might just want to store some of my passwords or otherwise secret data there from time to time. Then switch back to the regular MD in the MP3's after I do a backup. If it is my MetaData then I should be able to do with it; as I please.
That is the most hilariously ass-backwards explanation I've heard since someone defended Al Gore's energy use by saying, "He's got a lot of eco-friendly devices in his house he's gotta power"
@SpectateSwamp said:
I must say that I love this group a lot lot more than those Sneaky Sneak idea banning SOBs at channel9. Go get em Swampies. But not you DerulaSwamp; until you calm down. I'll put DerulaSwamp on defence. Good going Swampies.
It's really more because we've got a better sense of humor than the folks at Channel9. Us "Swampies" don't really care enough about Channel9's lack of sense of humor for us to really give a shit if they banned you or not, so don't expect us to defend you over there.
-
"metadata cleanup" who needs it?
@RHuckster said:
That is the most hilariously ass-backwards explanation I've heard since someone defended Al Gore's energy use by saying, "He's got a lot of eco-friendly devices in his house he's gotta power"
Don't equate me with a politician. That hurts. I'm way more honest than that.
I googled for:
"metadata cleanup"
Seems there is all kinds of things that need to be cleaned up. SSDS makes cleanup a lot simpler. I never really thought about saving passwords in the metadata. But if it makes them mad over at channel9 (when I'm back in) I'll tell them that is how I use it. Rolling Stones for my "medicine stone safety deposit number". It would be nice to have a number of MetaData formats. I'm sure the real audiophiles might find some use?
@RHuckster said:
It's really more because we've got a better sense of humor than the folks at Channel9. Us "Swampies" don't really care enough about Channel9's lack of sense of humor for us to really give a shit if they banned you or not, so don't expect us to defend you over there.
Way more humor and much nicer Moderators. And if they cause you any problems over at Channel9 RHucksterSwamp I'll come to your defence. Maybe even call on the power of the Stones. Naaah
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Seems there is all kinds of things that need to be cleaned up. SSDS makes cleanup a lot simpler.
SSDS does nothing to remove, clean, change or alter meta data in any way - so how can you claim it makes clean up simpler other that by making an outright lie?@SpectateSwamp said:
I never really thought about saving passwords in the metadata. But if it makes them mad over at channel9 (when I'm back in) I'll tell them that is how I use it.
It will just make you sound like a moron (as it did when you pretty much claimed that in your last post)@SpectateSwamp said:
It would be nice to have a number of MetaData formats. I'm sure the real audiophiles might find some use?
If we are dealing with mp3s then the ID3v2 system of meta data covers just about all the information an audiophile would require and is extensible (of a fashion) if further information needs to be included - the more different and competing formats that exist will simply cause more confusion and worse overall support. Currently an mp3 file can be used on windows, macs, linux, iPod, Squeezebox, just about any generic mp3 player, mobile phone, dvd players and so on - why would adding more standards and formats hel if the existing ones are working just fine and have a very good degree of support.
-
Clean MetaData with SSDS
@spenk said:
SSDS does nothing to remove, clean, change or alter meta data in any way - so how can you claim it makes clean up simpler other that by making an outright lie?
You bet it makes cleaning up metadata easy. To do that I display the pictures with the captions overlaying the pictures. If I notice a name or reference that is not correct I fix it with NotePad. How simple is that.
@spenk said:
It will just make you sound like a moron (as it did when you pretty much claimed that in your last post)
What me worry. This forum has been calling me the stupidest man on earth. Far sooner be that than an arrogant know-it-all tit.
@spenk said:
If we are dealing with mp3s then the ID3v2 system of meta data covers just about all the information an audiophile would require and is extensible (of a fashion) if further information needs to be included - the more different and competing formats that exist will simply cause more confusion and worse overall support. Currently an mp3 file can be used on windows, macs, linux, iPod, Squeezebox, just about any generic mp3 player, mobile phone, dvd players and so on - why would adding more standards and formats hel if the existing ones are working just fine and have a very good degree of support
Dim strTag As New String(" ", 3)
Dim strTitle As New String(" ", 30)
Dim strArtist As New String(" ", 30)
Dim strAlbum As New String(" ", 30)
Dim strYear As New String(" ", 4)
Dim strComment As New String(" ", 28)
Dim bytDummy As Byte
Dim bytTrack As Byte
Dim bytGenre As ByteWhat a useless pile of crap the above ID3v1 format is. More characters for album than comments. Being able to change this field would be a definite improvement over what the MusicFolksData group assigned us.
With a simple uploader the metadata could be changed right back.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
You bet it makes cleaning up metadata easy. To do that I display the pictures with the captions overlaying the pictures. If I notice a name or reference that is not correct I fix it with NotePad. How simple is that.
This is only true if you are using SSDS and an external tool to store meta data - it will not help with any other file type or format though! Therefore SSDS is useless in this regard for any existing format of embedded meta data.@SpectateSwamp said:What a useless pile of crap the above ID3v1 format is. More characters for album than comments. Being able to change this field would be a definite improvement over what the MusicFolksData group assigned us.
Hence I said Id3v2, the Id3v1 is an old standard and not one that is really used now, Id3v2 is far more comprehensive and supported everywhere - how will using your method improve over Id3v2. There is no MusicFolksData group you moron as the Id3v2 standard is an open standard and is not controlled by this group you have just made up. Read about Id3v2 and then give some reasonable arguments about why SSDS and an external text file is better than the Id3v2 way of doing things.
With a simple uploader the metadata could be changed right back.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
To do that I display the pictures with the captions overlaying the pictures. If I notice a name or reference that is not correct I fix it with NotePad. How simple is that.
Or, I could keep to the defaults, do absolutely nothing, and it's all done automatically.
That is simpler.
-
Defaults do nothing.
@dhromed said:
Does your viewer display the captions? What if they were entered wrong by mistake? It happens you know. Defaults won't do anything for you.@SpectateSwamp said:
To do that I display the pictures with the captions overlaying the pictures. If I notice a name or reference that is not correct I fix it with NotePad. How simple is that.
Or, I could keep to the defaults, do absolutely nothing, and it's all done automatically.
That is simpler.
Show me how?
-
Id3v1 no good - Id3v2 not much better
@spenk said:
This is only true if you are using SSDS and an external tool to store meta data - it will not help with any other file type or format though! Therefore SSDS is useless in this regard for any existing format of embedded meta data.
Haven't you been reading. The metadata is in a simple text file with the file location on the following line. How difficult is it to look up names etc in a text file. Not very difficult for the average person. As far as embedded meta data. SSDS does make use of the mp3 info. A simple extract for each different file type is all that is needed. Oh yeah I don't use anything other than Mp3 and mpg files.
@spenk said:
Hence I said Id3v2, the Id3v1 is an old standard and not one that is really used now, Id3v2 is far more comprehensive and supported everywhere - how will using your method improve over Id3v2. There is no MusicFolksData group you moron as the Id3v2 standard is an open standard and is not controlled by this group you have just made up. Read about Id3v2 and then give some reasonable arguments about why SSDS and an external text file is better than the Id3v2 way of doing things.
How about showing what the new id3v2 looks like, there might even be a id3v3 or v4 out by now. They did a miserable job on Id3v1 that's for sure.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Don't equate me with a politician. That hurts. I'm way more honest than that.
But, you were a policitican. Remember, Yellowhead, Yellowhead, Yellowhead? The sad fact is, you blow more hot air than all the politicians combined... besides maybe Blago. No, actually, you're even nuttier than Blago, and that really says something.
-
Dumbest forum users - even worse than SpectateSwamp
@RHuckster said:
@SpectateSwamp said:
Don't equate me with a politician. That hurts. I'm way more honest than that.
But, you were a policitican. Remember, Yellowhead, Yellowhead, Yellowhead? The sad fact is, you blow more hot air than all the politicians combined... besides maybe Blago. No, actually, you're even nuttier than Blago, and that really says something.
My only promise back in 1993 was that I would never run again. I'm keeping my promise to the people.
This forum is truly my spot. The only place where I can find people dumber than "the stupidest man on earth" Thank G** you are here. Makes me feel sooo superior.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Haven't you been reading. The metadata is in a simple text file with the file location on the following line. How difficult is it to look up names etc in a text file. Not very difficult for the average person. As far as embedded meta data. SSDS does make use of the mp3 info. A simple extract for each different file type is all that is needed. Oh yeah I don't use anything other than Mp3 and mpg files.
The point I am trying to make is that to use your method I need to extract all meta data from all files that support meta data and then maintain it in the original file and inyour text file, I would much rather store the data in the file rather than in two places so I never worry about the two getting out of sync.Just because you do not use anything other than mp3 and mpeg doesn't mean that suits everyone (by the way you also use jpeg files - they have their own meta data format called exif) and you are forcing your ideas and methods on other people.
@SpectateSwamp said:
How about showing what the new id3v2 looks like, there might even be a id3v3 or v4 out by now. They did a miserable job on Id3v1 that's for sure.
http://www.id3.org/ is the standard for id3v2 and before you start claiming it is too difficult for end users blah blah blah the users never need to know about this part - they just open the properties of the mp3 file in question from windows directly or their media player of choice or there favourite tag editing tool, or linux media player or mac media player etc. and edit simply named values. e.g. Media player exposes properties such as Title, Artist, Track and it maps these to the underlying tags - the end user never needs to know or care. Media players, iPods, phones, Squeezeboxes, CD burners and so on will all use this information because it is an understood standard. Your extra text file will be useless in this case and will just mean the end user has two places to maintain information only one of which is understood by every mp3 aware device and one that is only used by SSDS - how is this a good thing?
-
Extract needed for EXIF - and an uploader in SSDS format if you please
@spenk said:
The point I am trying to make is that to use your method I need to extract all meta data from all files that support meta data and then maintain it in the original file and inyour text file, I would much rather store the data in the file rather than in two places so I never worry about the two getting out of sync.
I don't change the mp3 data right now. Not until I get a simple uploader. I never update both places. Sync. How do you know your are in sync. Do you run a differences once in a while. The text file with its context will be around a lot longer than any EXIF format. Id3v1 didn't last. SSDS has the same open open format. Way to go SSDS
@spenk said:
Just because you do not use anything other than mp3 and mpeg doesn't mean that suits everyone (by the way you also use jpeg files - they have their own meta data format called exif) and you are forcing your ideas and methods on other people.
Suits everyone. That is the problem with software today. Changing and changing to suit everyone to the point it no longer works. SSDS has been chugging along since 1999.
My emails go back to 1996. I was keeping them in text files even before SSDS. Pretty smart for a stupid guy. How far does yours go back.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: July/Aug CC ad deadline May 31
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 09:50:52 -0700
From: bologna@hempbc.com (Mark Bologna by way of TELUS PLAnet Helpdesk
<helpdesk@planet.eon.net>)
To: stonedan@telusplanet.net
Dan,
I was wondering how you found the last issue, I thought your ad tied in
nicely with the Kaneh Bosm article. If you're planning on running your ad
again, I need to know by the end of the month to reserve the space. Please
advise as soon as possible.
Mark Bologna
Advertising and Circulation Director
Cannabis Canada Magazine
_______________________________________________________________
Suite 405, 21 Water Street, Vancouver, BC, V6B 1A1
phone(604) 669-9069(ext 15) ; fax(604) 669-9038
bologna@hempbc.com ; http://www.hempbc.com
________________________________________________________
Decriminalization favoured by Canadian Senators looking at Bill C7. Send
and email to cclist@hempbc.com with the subject of "subscribe" to get all
the info!!
_______________________________________________
Subject: More info
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 1996 09:50:54 -0700
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Come on show us something. All talk and no show. Id3v2 and exif and your earliest email would be a good start...
@spenk said:
http://www.id3.org/ is the standard for id3v2 and before you start claiming it is too difficult for end users blah blah blah the users never need to know about this part - they just open the properties of the mp3 file in question from windows directly or their media player of choice or there favourite tag editing tool, or linux media player or mac media player etc. and edit simply named values. e.g. Media player exposes properties such as Title, Artist, Track and it maps these to the underlying tags - the end user never needs to know or care. Media players, iPods, phones, Squeezeboxes, CD burners and so on will all use this information because it is an understood standard. Your extra text file will be useless in this case and will just mean the end user has two places to maintain information only one of which is understood by every mp3 aware device and one that is only used by SSDS - how is this a good thing?
This stuff seems hidden from the users. What you think people are as stupid as me? This is dirt simple. What if you don't know the track or cover for the song (or care). I may just look at extracting the EXIF stuff. No I'll wait till a swampie gets me the Extract and uploader in SSDS format. Go swampies. You don't have to be soo smart to help me you know.
Every Mp3 Aware device can't do random random sampling like SSDS
They still haven't reject the last one. Maybe me posting comments. Has it locked up..
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
I don't change the mp3 data right now. Not until I get a simple uploader. I never update both places. Sync. How do you know your are in sync. Do you run a differences once in a while. The text file with its context will be around a lot longer than any EXIF format. Id3v1 didn't last. SSDS has the same open open format. Way to go SSDS
I don't have to worry about my data being in sync as I only store it in the mp3 file, jpeg file etc. Only having it in one place means it can never be out of sync!@SpectateSwamp said:
The implementation details are hidden from the users, they do not need to know how it works behind the scenes to use it! You only need to provide the information you want you moron, you are not required to provide every single piece of information possible! No body but you wants random random sampling you idiot, sane people do not listen to random 13 second long snippets of music they listen to albums and tracks, possibly shuffled and may be skipping ones they do not like but never random snippets - you are the only person who has ever advocated this as if it was a mainstream feature users requested.This stuff seems hidden from the users. What you think people are as stupid as me? This is dirt simple. What if you don't know the track or cover for the song (or care). I may just look at extracting the EXIF stuff. No I'll wait till a swampie gets me the Extract and uploader in SSDS format. Go swampies. You don't have to be soo smart to help me you know.
Every Mp3 Aware device can't do random random sampling like SSDS
Yet again however you have failed to explain why your way is the best way and you can't even use SSDS to make changes to the file's meta data anyway.@SpectateSwamp said:
My emails go back to 1996. I was keeping them in text files even before SSDS. Pretty smart for a stupid guy. How far does yours go back.
In all honesty I generally only keep emails for any length of time if there is a reason to - personal ones are often amusing and then deleted or are acted on and deleted. Work ones will get saved till they are no longer of value or will have relevant information extracted and stored elsewhere. I still have access to work emails for the past 5 years or so as this is how long I have been with my current employer and have no need of emails from my previous employer. I can however search these easily, follow the thread of linked emails (replies and forwards) and see attachments in their original format - can SSDS do all that? (given SSDS will not store attachments I doubt it)
