Slashdot Mirror

Sounds like something a few people from my college did... wonder if that's where they got the idea...?

I have approximately 1000 CDs. I don't have any trouble finding the one I want.

I store them in their original packaging (usually jewel cases or digipaks) on Boltz cd racks, in alphabetical order (by artist, obviously).

Here's a picture. (please to excuse slow load times)

Magical Drop is "ok". But MPE has the same potential for chains (that is, you can extend an existing chain by throwing more stuff together, but the potential for regular chains is greater, because of the introduction of the extra coin (though to really be able to use this effecively you have to figure out the rules for where it will appear).

My biggest complaint about MD3 is that the controls feel sluggish to me. I think that's because you can't move until you're done grabbing or dropping a piece (in MPE you can drop (or actualy grab) something and then scoot over while it falls). Which means that you just can't be as fast.

I actually wrote a game similar to both of these, but with a color mixing theme - Magic Crayon Conundrum. In the process I studied MPE and MD3 pretty carefully. It needs a lot of work before it's on par with them, in terms of features or production quality or so (in the middle of a rewrite), but if you like this kind of thing, by all means, check it out.

I have over 800 cds (811 at the time of this posting). I use a 1 disc player in my office, a 1 disc player in my bedroom (plus another cd player in my alarm clock!), and a 5 disc changer downstairs in the living room, and a 1 disc player (well apex dvd player) in the kitchen. I do NOT use a 200 disc changer, because I hate them. I hate them because unless you actually want to store your music in them and never remove them, they're a huge pain in the ass. If you have more than 200 cds, they're not a viable option (you could get multiple changes are use S-Link or something to connect them, but $$$). If you have more than one listening location, they're not a viable option (centralized audio is not a solution in a house with roommates). If you listen in your car cd player, if you bring them into the office, if you like the liner notes & packaging, ...

For actual storage, I use shelves. Boltz makes some truly great cd racks that hold about 600 jewel cases. Run out of room? You can expand it to 1200, though it takes up a fair amount of wall space in this configuration.

I have several pieces of furniture by these guys, and they're great. Sturdy, attractive, and their customer relations policies can't be beat - They've actually changed their product line because of someone I know's feedback. Their prices INCLUDE shipping and tax. And so on. They're not dirt cheap or anything, but they're worth more than what they cost. I don't work for them or anything, but they get the highest recommendation I have.

If you really are strapped for space, you could use those caselogic books, but they're a big pain if you want to keep your music sorted (with shelves with a little extra room, insertion is basically O(1) rather than O(n) ).

I bet they didn't fully index my random link page.

The elegance and power of the unix command line is due the fact that a whole bunch of tools all communicate with each other in a fairly standard way - the interchange of flat text through standard in/out. This is what gives me the ability that lets me find out how many different IPs visited my web server in August without (somebody) writing a utility specificially for that purpose.

With GUI stuff, flat text is no longer what programmes are taking in or putting out. Composing capabilities of multiple X programmes is difficult. The answer to this, IMO is a broadly used and supported componentisation. If the two most popular environments COULD agree on a sufficiently rich component object model, we might start to finally see GUI programmes not merely co-existing, but actually using and communicating with each other, giving REAL flexability and power.

I think that would be kind of cool.

That is the distinction between 'linking' and 'deep linking'.

Basically deep linking allows me to pass off other people's content as my own. I can do it by using their graphics from my own <img> tags, or by linking to files directly, or perhaps even by including one of their HTML pages in my frameset.

My opinion on this is that it's only okay to do this normally. If you don't want this to happen, there are plenty of technical ways to avoid it, and it would be appropriate to employ them. (If I feel that you should only be able to go to here the long way, well, it's my server and I have every right to decide which requests I honor. It is CERTAINLY not my responsibility to maintain my site such that without-permission deep links to it continue to work.

People really don't mind if others know what CDs they listen to - often quite the contrary. Hell, many people (myself included) spend a fair ammount of time publishing a database of their music collection.