why an MP3 player would allow me to put more files on it when I reduce the size of the filenames?
This is an Insignia 1GB Model from a while back. basically, since I got it, I noticed I can't quite get the full 1GB on there, even though it says 400MB are free. I just put up with it since I don't really have that much music, but occasionally, renaming the file something else would work. ("Rise - Origa (GITS:2nd GIG Theme Song)" would not fit, but if the filename was "Rise," it would fit. Remember the song isn't changing at all.)
This brings up two good questions:
1. What the fuck?
2. If I changed ALL the filenames to be as short as possible, would it make room for a lot more?
I forget when, but Alex pointed out a program called "Bulk Renaming Utility" that you can use to change all the filenames of a certain kind to be uniform. Since the information about the song is in the mp3 format itself, I can just change them all to the lowest numbers possible and, theoretically, make more space on the MP3 player.
And it worked.
Thus, my first question:
What the fuck?
...
I hate computers.
Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
- Elomin Sha
- Posts: 15774
- Joined: 22 Feb 2008, 05:14
- First Video: Max Effect
- Location: Woodford Green, England
- Contact:
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
Rough guess from me, I think the data for the file location takes up something else within the memory store (I can't remember exactly, my lecturer told me this 6 years ago and I've forgotten)
Nice choice of song by the way (have you listened to Origa's personal discography?
Nice choice of song by the way (have you listened to Origa's personal discography?
The most unique, nicest, and confusing individual you will get to know. Don't be stupid around me, that's my job.
https://displate.com/elominsha/galleries
If you need art, I take commissions, PM me.
https://displate.com/elominsha/galleries
If you need art, I take commissions, PM me.
- Heathen
- Posts: 143
- Joined: 03 Mar 2008, 02:36
- First Video: Installation Anxiety
- Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
It's a stab in the dark, but is your media FAT16/32? If it is, there are a slew of issues with the way windows attempts to maintain compatibility between that filesystem in XP (LFN mode) and, potentially, a DOS system.
It might not even be that the file takes up more (real) space, it might just be a cock up resulting from the multiple directory entries required to accommodate as egregious a filename as Rise - Origa (GITS:2nd GIG Theme Song).
On that note, you can't have a LFN-compatible filename with ":" in it, so it might just have been spitting out the wrong error for a genuine issue.
It might not even be that the file takes up more (real) space, it might just be a cock up resulting from the multiple directory entries required to accommodate as egregious a filename as Rise - Origa (GITS:2nd GIG Theme Song).
On that note, you can't have a LFN-compatible filename with ":" in it, so it might just have been spitting out the wrong error for a genuine issue.
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
My guess would also involve the file system the storage device is using. But The syntax of the file names could be an issue as Heathen pointed out.
It is possible as well that the flash media inside that mp3 player is starting to die with age. Not entirely sure if a chkdsk works the same on flash as it does with traditional hard drives, but I suppose its worth a shot to chkdsk /r the volume.
It is possible as well that the flash media inside that mp3 player is starting to die with age. Not entirely sure if a chkdsk works the same on flash as it does with traditional hard drives, but I suppose its worth a shot to chkdsk /r the volume.
Matt wrote:Lorithad, you should be ashamed of yourself. You are bad, and you should feel bad.
- King Kool
- Quality and Quantity
- Posts: 5987
- Joined: 28 Jan 2008, 19:22
- Location: Rhode Island
- Contact:
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
I'll say with certainty that it's not age. This has been like this since I bought it.
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
I would consult Al Gore, as he is the father of the interwebs.
The hardest part of being me? The mustache.
- Genghis Ares
- Posts: 3630
- Joined: 28 Feb 2009, 22:09
- First Video: ArmEGAddon
- Location: Texas
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
Longer filenames take up more 1's and 0's.
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
It perturbs me that GA's answer is not only the least technical, but also correct.
H̼̮̖͓̻ͮ̀ͬ̓e̟̦͉̾̔̀ͣ͆̄ ͚̤̈̉ͦ̎ͭ̚c̰̠͚̜̹ͪ̐̎̃ͅo̗͌͛ͥ͑m̍ͬͥ̚e͍̱̲̤͚̹͔͛s͚̱̤͚̲̭̗̃̎ͭ̚.̘̫̖̮̠͒̔.̝̹̟̳͚̂̆̋͌̐̚.̬͓̰̃̑
- ExtraSensory
- Posts: 301
- Joined: 01 Aug 2008, 02:37
- First Video: 3 PS3s
- Location: Michigan, USA
- Contact:
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
Nanomachines.
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
..except that while yes, a longer file name takes up more 1's and 0's, the difference in the file size would be so small you'd never notice it.
For example, I have a file on my computer called
"scout_-_bat_-_bonk.rar"
Going to the proporties of the file, it shows it's using 65,536 bytes of hard disk space.
However, I made an exact copy of the file and named it this:
"This is a super duper long file name and there shouldnt be any difference in the file size apart from maybe a kilobyte here or there but just to make sure i will continue typing the longest file name of all time ha.rar"
The file used the exact same number of bytes on the hard disk.
For example, I have a file on my computer called
"scout_-_bat_-_bonk.rar"
Going to the proporties of the file, it shows it's using 65,536 bytes of hard disk space.
However, I made an exact copy of the file and named it this:
"This is a super duper long file name and there shouldnt be any difference in the file size apart from maybe a kilobyte here or there but just to make sure i will continue typing the longest file name of all time ha.rar"
The file used the exact same number of bytes on the hard disk.
Matt wrote:Lorithad, you should be ashamed of yourself. You are bad, and you should feel bad.
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
I'm guessing his MP3 player neither runs off of DOS nor Windows.
The Windows LFN system gives 255 bytes to filenames, regardless of how short it is. But, when transferred to another medium, the LFN no longer applies. So, unless it is transferred to something running Windows, the filesize will be (data+filename) rather than (data+255) as it is on Windows based machines.
The Windows LFN system gives 255 bytes to filenames, regardless of how short it is. But, when transferred to another medium, the LFN no longer applies. So, unless it is transferred to something running Windows, the filesize will be (data+filename) rather than (data+255) as it is on Windows based machines.
H̼̮̖͓̻ͮ̀ͬ̓e̟̦͉̾̔̀ͣ͆̄ ͚̤̈̉ͦ̎ͭ̚c̰̠͚̜̹ͪ̐̎̃ͅo̗͌͛ͥ͑m̍ͬͥ̚e͍̱̲̤͚̹͔͛s͚̱̤͚̲̭̗̃̎ͭ̚.̘̫̖̮̠͒̔.̝̹̟̳͚̂̆̋͌̐̚.̬͓̰̃̑
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
I was just about to make a post arguing how the file size remained the same when stored on a FAT file system. But apparently FAT includes LNF.
In any case, I would suggest that King Kool reformat the drive and use a different file system to test stuff out. If he has 400mb on there that says its free, even having the max size name on every file on there would not account for that.
I'm still putting my money on a dying drive. Maybe not from age, but dying none the less.
In any case, I would suggest that King Kool reformat the drive and use a different file system to test stuff out. If he has 400mb on there that says its free, even having the max size name on every file on there would not account for that.
I'm still putting my money on a dying drive. Maybe not from age, but dying none the less.
Matt wrote:Lorithad, you should be ashamed of yourself. You are bad, and you should feel bad.
Re: Can anyone come up with a technical reason....
The thing is that the MP3 player managed to get all the files on there when he renamed them.
So, depending on the setup, the MP3 player might have a limit on the list of filenames. Without the exact model, this is all academic.
So, depending on the setup, the MP3 player might have a limit on the list of filenames. Without the exact model, this is all academic.
H̼̮̖͓̻ͮ̀ͬ̓e̟̦͉̾̔̀ͣ͆̄ ͚̤̈̉ͦ̎ͭ̚c̰̠͚̜̹ͪ̐̎̃ͅo̗͌͛ͥ͑m̍ͬͥ̚e͍̱̲̤͚̹͔͛s͚̱̤͚̲̭̗̃̎ͭ̚.̘̫̖̮̠͒̔.̝̹̟̳͚̂̆̋͌̐̚.̬͓̰̃̑
Return to “General Discussion”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests