Krobar
Junior Member
Posts: 96
Registered: 12-10-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
posted on 5-8-2004 at 06:13 PM
|
|
|
Image Caching Bug
EJs image caching (Within the Temporary Internet Files Folder) in Win98 seems to have some issues.
1) It seems to cache all the images at full resolution which takes far more space and time than necessary as they might as well be cached as
compressed and resized.
2) The Files are invisible to Windows Explorer/My Computer. They are registered in the folder properties but when you open the folder there are none
shown. I can see all hidden system files so its not viewing options doing this although it may be a bug in win98 explorer.
3) They arent deleted by using delete all offline content in the internet option within control panel. To delete them you must switch to the directory
and use del with wildcards from the dos box.
4) They ignore the max internet temporary file folder size in Internet Options.
2, 3 and 4 arent a huge problem provding the bug is know to win98 users. Would it be possible to fix bug 1 or at least let me know what res and other
details EJ likes the files in so at least the temporary internet folder doesnt get clogged.
|
|
|
junk
Member
Posts: 480
Registered: 5-10-2003
Location: Norway
Member Is Offline
|
|
posted on 5-8-2004 at 06:21 PM
|
|
|
Hmm..? Sorry, but you don't completely make sense to me on point 1, because a cache is supposed to be the quickest possible way between needing a
file and allocating it - and if you were to compress and decompress the image in this process, it would take a lot more time.
In a cache, the image should always be "ready to go"- in this case, a BMP is the fastest graphical format for Windows to load, as it has
little or no compression.
|
|
|
Krobar
Junior Member
Posts: 96
Registered: 12-10-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
posted on 5-8-2004 at 10:30 PM
|
|
|
Junk,
"A cache is supposed to be the quickest possible way between needing a file and allocating it "
Exactly, so why store a file that must be resized smaller every time when you could reduce disk activity and remove the processing required to resize
it by storing it at EJ's smaller "Native" image size.
I dont think EJ caches the images as bitmaps but then I cant check because of problem 2.
|
|
|
Audiosoft
|
|
posted on 5-8-2004 at 10:47 PM
|
|
|
The images are all resized and stored in the cache at the resolutions used in eJukebox. They are not resized after being cached. So there really are
no bugs with the cache.
Also, there used to be 3 sized image files for each cover in the cache...but with v3.8 we got rid of the smallest size (80x80) as it doesn't need
to be used in eJukebox. So eJukebox now just sizes a large (140x140) and medium (105x105) image file for each cover and saves it to the cache. The
images are also compressed and stored in the eJukebox database so that they can be extracted and sent to the cache if the file no longer exists there.
Having the files always in the cache allows eJukebox to skip this extraction process and makes eJukebox function faster.
 Audiosoft |
|
|
Fishy
Senior Member
Posts: 960
Registered: 10-19-2003
Location: Norway, Trondheim
Member Is Offline
|
|
posted on 5-9-2004 at 02:22 AM
|
|
|
Sorry if I break into a discussion around another topic now, but as a sidenote. What does audiosoft think of a 300x300 (large) image as well? To use
in the now playing panel at least. Would allow us to see some more details on the coverart, which in many cases could be interesting 
And when I think of it. Wouldn't it be darn cool to have the backside of the cover available too, with a way to mouse between the frontside and
backside. But I guess that ID3V2 defines the limits in this area. Anyhow: 4.0 material?
-----------
Fishy
|
|
|
Krobar
Junior Member
Posts: 96
Registered: 12-10-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
posted on 5-9-2004 at 11:26 AM
|
|
|
Audiosoft, Is 250mb cache use normal for a 450 album collection?
Edit: I have since move my temporary internet folder to a Win2K share and the problems listed above still occur but the Win2k system can see and
delete the files normally. I can only assume its a bug in Win98 explorer.
The thing that worries me though is that EJs memory usage under Win98 is out of control, it needs more than 256mb ram to display the album list on my
system and version 3.8 seems to refuse to use virtual memory. For the moment I have disabled "Show Pictures" in Internet Options and this
allows the system to run (Ram usage is about 180MB for EJ in this mode).
Is there any chance of reducing the memory usage of EJ under Win9x?
|
|
|
Audiosoft
|
|
posted on 5-9-2004 at 05:51 PM
|
|
|
Well we could possibly make the "Now Playing" panel display a 190x190 (the width of the Now Playing panel) image but only for songs with
images encoded in the ID3 tag or with a cover.jpg file in the song's folder as eJukebox's auto looked up images are not that big. Or instead
of doing that we could just keep the 140x140 image how it is and add a little icon button to view the FULL resolution of the ID3 encoded or cover.jpg
image in a resizable popup window.
Krobar,
Unfortunately the reduction of RAM usage is only possible on Win2K and XP systems. Win98 is too old and handles memory too inefficiently for it to
work.
Audiosoft |
|
|
Fishy
Senior Member
Posts: 960
Registered: 10-19-2003
Location: Norway, Trondheim
Member Is Offline
|
|
posted on 5-9-2004 at 06:19 PM
|
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Audiosoft
Or instead of doing that we could just keep the 140x140 image how it is and add a little icon button to view the FULL resolution of the ID3 encoded or
cover.jpg image in a resizable popup window.
|
This sounds like a good idea
-----------
Fishy
|
|
|
Pirk
Posting Freak
Posts: 3976
Registered: 3-11-2003
Location: France
Member Is Offline
|
|
posted on 5-9-2004 at 07:03 PM
|
|
|
Ah! Audiosoft, i'm glad you consider our request for larger images in eJukebox...
Your first proposition of a maximized image in the now playing panel is interesting, even if that will be still a bit too small... The pop up window
will be better concerning the image appearance, but as that will not be integrated to the eJukebox interface... i don't know...
And why not to add the now playing album image, in fixed size (300x300), to the home page?
Or else create a completely new page, in the right panel, devoted to the now playing album with all its details: cover art in 300x300, artist name,
album year and name, genre, list of songs (maybe with the now playing song high-lighted), album statistics, and everything clickable of course... ?
Well... as a first step, the pop-up image would be already not bad!
|
|
|
junk
Member
Posts: 480
Registered: 5-10-2003
Location: Norway
Member Is Offline
|
|
posted on 5-10-2004 at 07:46 AM
|
|
|
Great, glad you'll give us the optiion to define the size of the "now playing" cover. Like the double-click pop-up as well. Why not
have both options?
While we're at it, it would be great to soon be able to define the lenght of the now playing panel ourselves. That way we could see the covers in
their original 300x300 size, and create more varied skins as well.
|
|
|
Pirk
Posting Freak
Posts: 3976
Registered: 3-11-2003
Location: France
Member Is Offline
|
|
posted on 5-10-2004 at 11:48 AM
|
|
|
| Quote: | Message original : junk
While we're at it, it would be great to soon be able to define the lenght of the now playing panel ourselves. That way we could see the covers in
their original 300x300 size, and create more varied skins as well. |
Of course, that would be the ideal solution... I also may hope we will have the eJukebox left part resizable in the immediate future.
|
|
|
