Renaming Zip Files

To many ads? Support ODJT and see no ads!
Ah Professor, you're over my head again. You seem to be talking about the need to bundle file formats which don't yet exist. Now wait a minute, they did exist in the quadraphonic wonder of the 70's that no one liked.

End user don't deal with files. They press play.

I believe you are confusing containers such as AVI with bundlers such as Zip. There was a reason for AVI having audio and video in the same file. Microsoft engineers didn't just get together and say "Let's make this more complicated than we have to." There was a reason for bundlers like ZIP particularly when hard drives were 10MB ande cost two grand. But now? Okay, it still makes sense over a network but we're talking about a stand alone computer here.

These days we don't need the extra disk space afforded by zipping. An MP3 file is already in a container (for those of you who just tuned in a container contains data bytes and formatting information which may or may not be related to a single function) and CDG is ALL data and garbage bytes.

So, when you rip you take the extra time to zip the files and when you play you take the extra time to unzip and increase the chance of error as any extra process does (with all due respect to Drs. Reed and Solomon) and all to gain exactly what?

That's the question Prof. The disadvantage to zipping karaoke files is time, extra processing and attendent complications. The advantage is the saving of disk space which we don't currently need and WHAT???
 
who the heck said we use zip to compress.... that's not the use for it in this case... you gain very little as you have mentioned and disc space is cheap.

This is all about containing multiple files used in a karaoke hoster to simplify a file system.... the time taken to unzip for play back is in the milliseconds at worst. If you are still running a pc that this is an issue for, my friend it is time for an upgrade.... come into the 90s at least.

Now sir if you'd kindly stop stirring the pot we would be ever so greatful... your point is dually noted and dismissed.
 
who the heck said we use zip to compress.... that's not the use for it in this case... you gain very little as you have mentioned and disc space is cheap.

This is all about containing multiple files used in a karaoke hoster to simplify a file system.... the time taken to unzip for play back is in the milliseconds at worst. If you are still running a pc that this is an issue for, my friend it is time for an upgrade.... come into the 90s at least.

Now sir if you'd kindly stop stirring the pot we would be ever so greatful... your point is dually noted and dismissed.

Must stir the pot just a bit more. How does having one file name rather than two simplify a file system? You don't deal directly with the file system. Second, those miliseconds represent about eight million bytes of information that have to be re-written for no purpose. Computers do not work perfectly. Joker did you ever consider that your ability to dismiss things out of hand might have some relationship to your objection to the word "Stupid?"


I shall now end my stirring of the pot.
 
Must stir the pot just a bit more. How does having one file name rather than two simplify a file system? You don't deal directly with the file system. Second, those miliseconds represent about eight million bytes of information that have to be re-written for no purpose. Computers do not work perfectly. Joker did you ever consider that your ability to dismiss things out of hand might have some relationship to your objection to the word "Stupid?"


I shall now end my stirring of the pot.

I will not even dignafy your comment with an answer... you my friend obviously think to highly of yourself... go program something and show us how it's done.
 
Gladly, what would you like? It was my profession for many years.

You say that all the time.... but I have yet to see any sort of product.... so here it is create an all around KJ/DJ package that incorporates all of the best features of AutOKdj, RoxBox, Compuhost, MTU Hoster, OtsAV, VDJ, Rockit make it easy to use and cheap.....
 
You say that all the time.... but I have yet to see any sort of product.... so here it is create an all around KJ/DJ package that incorporates all of the best features of AutOKdj, RoxBox, Compuhost, MTU Hoster, OtsAV, VDJ, Rockit make it easy to use and cheap.....

And what would these "Best features" be? Exactly? Opinions vary. Here's some karaoke freeware I whipped up for a friend http://www.winsite.com/bin/Info?30500000036644. Aside from that Sacks-O-Nuts ShowHoster had video bits, kiosks, rotation, autoplay, built-in song books maker, file renamer, song recording, on and on before most of those folks you named got into karaoke at all. And, you could still use it when you were drunk. I know, I did. Often. I gave up on karaoke software because of AutOkdj. It really isn't a bad hoster and you can't beat the price. Compuhost and MTU seem to still be in the market but don't ask me how. I started on another hoster but couldn't come up with a key canger that didn't suck. But, what has this to do with the zipping karaoke files or not?
 
Must stir the pot just a bit more. How does having one file name rather than two simplify a file system? You don't deal directly with the file system. Second, those miliseconds represent about eight million bytes of information that have to be re-written for no purpose. Computers do not work perfectly. Joker did you ever consider that your ability to dismiss things out of hand might have some relationship to your objection to the word "Stupid?"


I shall now end my stirring of the pot.

Pot stirred. There are several advantages to keeping files in a zipped container format:
  1. When syncronizing a library, It takes less time to copy less bytes, plus less files to copy.
  2. Renaming files is as simple as renaming the zip. If you have a well-behaved program that renames the unzipped files to the name of the zip, then there is no need to rename the contents of the zip.
  3. Only one file to search for, instead of two.
  4. The file system only has to keep track of one file.
  5. Zipping / Unzipping takes milliseconds to a second or two to process. Especially with today's processors.
  6. For future programs, storing the metadata for the track can be as easy as including a file into the zip, say an xml file, containing metadata and album art.
  7. Simplicity.
 
Pot stirred. There are several advantages to keeping files in a zipped container format:
  1. When syncronizing a library, It takes less time to copy less bytes, plus less files to copy.
  2. Renaming files is as simple as renaming the zip. If you have a well-behaved program that renames the unzipped files to the name of the zip, then there is no need to rename the contents of the zip.
  3. Only one file to search for, instead of two.
  4. The file system only has to keep track of one file.
  5. Zipping / Unzipping takes milliseconds to a second or two to process. Especially with today's processors.
  6. For future programs, storing the metadata for the track can be as easy as including a file into the zip, say an xml file, containing metadata and album art.
  7. Simplicity.

1. I cannot respond to point 1 because I don't know what "syncronizing" a library does.
2. Why would you search for both file names?
3. If you had a "well behaved program" it would automatically rename all associated files without zipping.
4. True, decreasing the total number of files in a directory decreases the total search time. However, once the zip file is found the program then either has to read the file names from within the zip or simply unzip (Unzip: uncompress and copy) and hope that the two file names match, usually to a tempory directory and then search that directory for the files again using the fully quallified path. Whatever you do to it there is more work involved in zipping than not zipping.
5. Zipping is fast? True again. Not zipping takes no time at all.
6. Metadata is just another file, one more thing not to zip.
7. Simple for whom? Not for the computer and not for the developer.

A little insight into modern programming: The vast majority of us don't know how our code works. The commands have to get from a semi-english language down to billions of bits of binary and for that we depend on the programming that has gone on before. That's the work of perhaps hundreds of people that I have no way of checking. Fifteen years ago somebody could have been careless because they were mad at their great aunt Zelda over something she said at little Debbie's birthday party and that's why your computer crashed in the middle of a gig.
 
A little insight into modern programming: The vast majority of us don't know how our code works. The commands have to get from a semi-english language down to billions of bits of binary and for that we depend on the programming that has gone on before. That's the work of perhaps hundreds of people that I have no way of checking. Fifteen years ago somebody could have been careless because they were mad at their great aunt Zelda over something she said at little Debbie's birthday party and that's why your computer crashed in the middle of a gig.

"Syncronizing" a library is copying file for file from one drive or folder to another, making sure the contents are the same. Always good to have a backup.

And, it's simple for the fact of having to keep track of one file, not two, for both the end user, the program, and the file system.

It's obvious that we have differing opinions, and that's what makes debates great, and also makes us knowledgable of both sides of the coin. But... What does Aunt Zelda and computers crashing at gigs have to do with the pros and cons of zipping or not? I'm not here to start a flame war, and I certainly don't appreciate the tone and subtle dig at me. You don't know me. :sqconfused:
 
Ok for the sake of argument... lets use AutOKdj and Winamp as an example and this may actually lead to proving Exweeds point.... here it goes.

Winamp reads meta tags (ie the ID3 tags of mp3's) first then in the absense of those it looks to the directory and file structure for the name and any other information is pretty much made up if it don't find what it needs in the order in which it needs it.

So to that.... in order for AutOKdj to display the song search and entry screen correctly you have to do one of 2 things:

A) Use a mp3/cdg files and be sure that you have completed all of the ID3 Tag information correctly for DiscID/Album, Artist, Song Title and Track.

B) Use a file structure such as this: c:\Karaoke\SC8888\01 - Artist - Songtitle.zip

Pros for A:
No lyric screen hicups while enqueing from the host computer. Translation less time to process the files during the enque process.

Cons for A:
Dual file system... easy to mess up one file and have the whole file not work because they have to match. One little goof can cause a whole slew of problems. No two singers can sing the same song in the same playlist if singer A is singing New York New York and Sing B enques that very same song... it will put Singer A in as the singer of the second one...

Pros for B:
Single file system... easy to rename with proper utilities... can be more than one file for other program compatibilites...

Cons for B:
When encueing from the host computer the lyric screen can pause causing problems for the singer...


Bottom line here is using a dual file system as far as AutOKdj is concerned causes some problems that are not tolerable to some KJ's

While using Zip can cause problems too that singer's don't like....

So your choice I choose mp3/cdg because of the lyric screen issue and just watch my playlist for duplicate songs/singers and modify... as needed.

I don't use zip because of the lyric screen hicups... which still occure even though I'm running a dual core processor and loads of memory... however, if you use the singer kiosk (ie AutOKfe) in conjunction with the host PC this hicup is less pronounced if not apparent at all.
 
big_gun;153851. said:
But... What does Aunt Zelda and computers crashing at gigs have to do with the pros and cons of zipping or not?
Essentially it is that the con of zipping is that it increases the likelyhood of a computer crash. In your explaination of sycronizing (which is illegal in the US but that's another topic) you express the need to check the copy to make sure it is correct. Good idea. Zipping is at best a copying process and is there a check on the copy process? I don't know, I didn't write the zip library and in all likelyhood neither did anyone else who wrote karaoke software. With zipping you're not dealing with one file as opposed to two you're dealing with five as opposed to two assuming that you already have the zip file. To wit: 1. the zip file is read. 2. the CDG file is expanded and written. 3. the MP3 file is expanded and written. 4. the CDG is opened and read. 5. the MP3 file is opened and read. Without zipping you only have steps 4 and 5.

I don't think the idea of one file being easier that two is going to fly. If the CDG and MP3 file names do not match a bulk zipper is not going to work so you have to do it manually. If you have to do that you might as well just make the file names match.
 
And the truth comes out. Quit being sour grapes exweed.
Well, yeah..... AutOkdj took money out of my pocket but that has nothing to do with zipping. If you were charging money for AutOKdj I could compete. You have the low end of the market cornered and I can't out advertise MTU and Compuhost in the upper end so further development is pointless. That's not so much sour grapes as I see it but a decision based on reason. Just like not zipping.
 
Well, yeah..... AutOkdj took money out of my pocket but that has nothing to do with zipping. If you were charging money for AutOKdj I could compete. You have the low end of the market cornered and I can't out advertise MTU and Compuhost in the upper end so further development is pointless. That's not so much sour grapes as I see it but a decision based on reason. Just like not zipping.

Ok, enough baiting and low blows.... if AutOK were the bottom of the barrow why do thousands of KJ's use and swear by it? That's a rhetorical question so just think before you post, alright.
 
Ok, enough baiting and low blows.... if AutOK were the bottom of the barrow why do thousands of KJ's use and swear by it? That's a rhetorical question so just think before you post, alright.

He means bottom of price, e.g. free. And he's right I have to say. AutoKDJ is a nice program. With that being said, I can see how he is priced out of the market due to the autoKDJ program having more features than the bargain basement cheap hosters (You know which ones), and not having enough money or clout to throw out to advertise against the big ones. People would always say "Yeah, yours does xxx features, so does AutoKDJ, and it's free!". How do you compete with that?

My $0.02 without nasty shots or jabs at anyone.
 
He means bottom of price, e.g. free. And he's right I have to say. AutoKDJ is a nice program. With that being said, I can see how he is priced out of the market due to the autoKDJ program having more features than the bargain basement cheap hosters (You know which ones), and not having enough money or clout to throw out to advertise against the big ones. People would always say "Yeah, yours does xxx features, so does AutoKDJ, and it's free!". How do you compete with that?

My $0.02 without nasty shots or jabs at anyone.

If I misunderstood so be it.... but I've read his posts on this board and other boards to know better.... this is a classic baiting post... if I'm wrong then I'm sorry...

Thing is hands down AutOKdj is the best I've seen and that includes being better than the so called big guns.... if Toqer were to start charging $200.00 for his plug in I'd be first in line with a fist full of dollars to get my copy... so it's not all about the money a product costs it's what it can do.... I was "" this close to purchasing another well known product that cost nearly $200.00 but was swayed to AutOK based on features not price...

I call 'em as I see 'em.

Now can we get back to renaming zip files?