DarkkOne writes: Though it won't be included in their upcoming 3.2 release (due in a week), Rockbox hackers have developed a patch to allow some players (those with software controlled USB) to answer the iTunes SCSI inquiries and convince it they're an iPod that can be synced with. Among other things, this currently allows Rockbox to tell iTunes we can support WAV files recorded at frequencies not normally able to be synced to an iPod. This comes on the heels of (and as an extension to) the new USB stack inside Rockbox. The image in the article may not prove anything, but the code is available on the Rockbox patch tracker for any to play with. This, among other things, allows iTunes to sync to players without specialized scripts. For those who wish to use the iTunes music store to buy their newly DRM-freed music but want a little more choice in the hardware department, this could soon be the answer.
DarkkOne writes: Rockbox version 3.0 is out. 3 years in development, it marks the introduction of many new players since the 2.5 release and offers software-based playback allowing audio of nearly any commonly (or uncommonly) used format on a list of MP3 players by Apple, iRiver, Cowon, Archos, Toshiba and Sandisk. Beyond this it if FLOSS under the GPL v2 license (or later) and includes a variety of plugins such as games and simple apps. Found at http://www.rockbox.org/ 3.0 is the first official release for any players not made by Archos and more or less marks the beginning of a much more regular release cycle for the software.
DarkkOne writes: "One week ago, I purchased a new 6 megabit DSL connection, after having moved. Once it was working, I immediately performed a test to see how much bandwidth I really seemed to be getting, expecting something in the 4.5-5.5 range. Much to my dismay, I discovered I was getting the appropriate upload, but a mere 1.5 down. I called AT&T, my provider, and was given the runaround about their servers needing to communicate with my modem, and requiring a week or so for things to show full speed. Being a kind hearted soul, I assumed they just didn't want to confuse my feeble mind with technical details like "we have to actually set up your account properly now that the modem's on" and that I would be getting full speed in the next day or two, as they assured me it usually didn't take the full week. Several days later, my speed still isn't full, and I talk with a friend who has AT&T DSL. They reveal they weren't getting their full 6 mbit connection until they called AT&T and complained, at which time their line was immediately enabled even thought they'd been paying for 6 mbit for some time. Being less of a power user, they hadn't noticed the problem as being significant until they finally got around to testing it. When I contacted AT&T again, I managed to get through to someone with a clue, who told me that yes, my line was set to 1.5, and after a mere few minutes on the phone, I was getting speeds above 5 mbit on every bandwidth test I felt like trying. He told me it's been a problem recently in Texas. So I'd like to know, any experiences like this outside Texas with AT&T/SBC/Yahoo? Further experiences in Texas? Lack of clue, or something sinister, or an ISP merely trying to keep from overusing their own bandwidth, and only giving you what you pay for when you ask?"