2008-02-15, 17:20
"coverJuke" and "PictureFlow", are using two other different ways of doing Cover Flow than the current method used in XBMC.
Are those methods any better (more effective/optimized) or worse (less effective/optimized) than XBMC existing code?
coverJuke
http://sourceforge.net/projects/coverjuke
PictureFlow
http://code.google.com/p/pictureflow/
just asking
Are those methods any better (more effective/optimized) or worse (less effective/optimized) than XBMC existing code?
coverJuke
http://sourceforge.net/projects/coverjuke
PictureFlow
http://code.google.com/p/pictureflow/
just asking