A virtual community
Posts from Mastodon users, featured natively in a community, so you can view them without the need for them to be re-hosted or screenshoted, and reply to the original author and Mastodon respondents if you wish.
Has so far included content from Warsandpeas, Mr. Lovenstein, SMBC, Loading Artist, Low Quality Facts, nixCraft, ElleGray, and other interesting or provocative stuff I've random'd across on Mastodon.
Supported:
Comments & Upvotes
Unsupported:
Posts, Downvotes, & PD's Automod
The iPod server was a powerful first iteration music sharing device. While not designed for convenience, its internal RAID can still be expanded with modern compact flash cards for 1.25TB of on-the-go storage.
Image transcription: A photo of an early iPod with colour display running macosx server 1.2. It looks cumbersomely thick, but also desirable.
(Originally published earlier today on bitbang.social)
cumbersomely thick, but also desirable
Go on…
ITT, it’s unclear if people realize the image is a joke.
Man, I thought I was crazy for a minute and just never heard about this abomination.
I think the thing that's throwing everyone off is the kernel of truth that you can upgrade iPods internal storage with modern flash cards
ETA: Obligatory DankPods
That's the most unrealistic thing about this post.
Compact flash cards work great on the iPod minis
What?!
I once had a Mac guy turn up at my workplace and tell me 'the document you need is on this iPod'.
I plugged it into a Linux machine and it mounted the filesystem just fine.
The horrors I saw in that filesystem, how it was laid out and how the iPod needed to use its database to present real names to the user ....
I never want to see that again.
how the iPod needed to use its database to present real names to the user
I mean in Apple’s defense you wouldn’t want a media player to show filenames to the user anyways, you would want to display the artist/track name from the mp3 tags. The 4 letter filenames are a hash table presumably due to length restrictions in the firmware and/or performance reasons
The track data and everything is stored in the file, the file name is irrelevant.
Iirc thats what OP is referring to, they would strew the files stripped of meta data across the partition in various folders with little discernible structure, track data was written to the database and would be queried on song plays. I believe the advantages were faster bootup (Scan db instead of thousands of files) and the random file names were to ensure unique keys in db and help the “random” algorithm.
iPods didn't even strip the files of metadata, it just renamed them on disk
I hate that I love this.
a sudden austrailian audiophile would love this
If made a rackmount studio version of tangara, it could look like this.
I really liked that art installation where they used the brick-like shape to build a literal audio library.
you are using alt text for evil
Best feature was its ability to stream locally over either wifi or bluetooth to nearby devices without requiring an internet connection.
250,000 songs in your (large) pocket
...i could actually see this being useful as like, a music player for house parties and such; think bluetooth speaker without the speaker
Maybe an unpopular opinion, but I preferred the prototype version with Rhapsody and the ClickBall™ trackball in place of the wheel.
the fact that you used OS X Server 1.0 was the *chief's kiss* o this one.