What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
Who Gets To Use Unsold Cruise Cabins at Huge Discounts view!
howlifeworks.com - How to access once-in-a-lifetime trips at significantly less than full price
44 Comments
- DNAspark99, on 10/01/2009, -1/+24All I want for xmas is an official OSX port, I'll be good, I promise!
iTunes is like the coal in my stocking... - DreadKnight, on 10/01/2009, -2/+18Looking forward to have playlists ditched, because I just wanna listen to music and not make lists everytime...
- ferai, on 10/01/2009, -0/+14It's true, we could have not had a release for five years. And not gotten any feedback or bug reports from users.
- balloonenstein, on 10/01/2009, -2/+11It looks like they are finally filling the gaps they made in their transition from 1.4.1 to 2.0. They should have left 2.0 and 2.1 as beta versions because so much was still missing. Maybe 2.2 will be a competent music player? Either way, I'm still going to stick with 1.4.1 because I see no reason to upgrade as it does everything I need it to, and it does it well.
- lewkus, on 10/01/2009, -0/+8hands down the best mp3 player around
- leinir, on 10/02/2009, -0/+7Well, we /would/ have used PG, but we needed something which was able to do both the embedded thing (that is, run without a server) and work with a server. At the time of writing, only MySQL supports this. Yes, PG has more features and is a nicer product overall - but with that rather vital feature missing, there's no way we can use it. And if you remember back to 1.4 where we supported multiple backends, nope, that was not as easy as it might seem to the uninitiated, the amount of problems we had with that was mindboggling. So, sure, PG is nice and stuff, it simply does not fulfil our requirements, and multiple backends - been there, done that, got the scars ;)
- Chakat, on 10/01/2009, -1/+8If you're going to have a database backend, might as well do it right. Especially if you've already got a postgres install for other things on the system.
- MWeather, on 10/01/2009, -1/+8The Vista development strategy.
- Chakat, on 10/01/2009, -1/+7Spiffy. The only drawback I can see is the close ties to MySQL. Older versions could use PostgreSQL and SQLite, which is very nice, especially considering the lack of trust I have in Oracle to really do anything with MySQL now that they own it. Proper ODBC support, which is fairly trivial in a qt application, would be even better.
- enantiodromia, on 10/01/2009, -1/+6I would guess we are getting dugg down by the Amarok nerds. How dare we like something else!
- nhnFreespirit, on 10/02/2009, -0/+4Then just switch to the alternate main toolbar which has small, non overlapping buttons and is a lot smaller in general.
- socceroos, on 10/01/2009, -0/+4Oracle have finally committed to MySQL. Regardless, it is open source - for the uninitiated, this means that unless everyone loses interest then it will never die.
- Witchdoktor, on 10/02/2009, -1/+5Songbird is just as bloated as iTunes and is still a library music player.
- balloonenstein, on 10/01/2009, -11/+15Songbird FTW!
- darkNiGHTS, on 10/01/2009, -5/+8Why is he being dugg down? Songbird is great, and they are headed in the right direction with the last few releases.
- bartcerneels, on 10/02/2009, -0/+3It's working. No action needed provided your install is not messed up (if the iPod shows up in dolphin it will work in Amarok).
- Frostek, on 10/02/2009, -0/+3What's the ipod support like in this version?
- balloonenstein, on 10/02/2009, -2/+5Let me clarify:
Linux: Amarok 1.4.1 > Songbird > Amarok 2.2 > everything else
OS X: Songbird > Vox > everything else >>>>>> iTunes
Windows: Foobar > Songbird > Winamp > everything else >>>>> iTunes - DigitalDaiquiri, on 10/02/2009, -0/+2This is a valid question, for a version or two back I was unable to enable iPod support within the application as well.
- marioestrada, on 10/02/2009, -1/+3Light mp3 player for OS X: Ecoute* - http://ecouteapp.com/
* uses itunes library, but does not requires itunes to be running - WoollyMittens, on 10/02/2009, -1/+3Yeah... let's pay for a music player. How practical is that?
It's not that I don't think good software deserves a donation, but keeping track of serials, paid updates and re-activations is balls and I won't do it. Certainly not for a small utility. - explodingzebras, on 10/02/2009, -0/+2I tried Songbird, but it did feel bloated, like firefox with a media player bolted on. I used to use Amarok 1.4, but i use the Gnome desktop, and it was becoming increasingly buggy. I 've tried Amarok 2 on linux but its missing several features atm. It is however good on OSX - i found a .dmg of an older beta. i use Exaile now, it's like a Gnome version of Amarok but much better! On Windows, whenever I occasionally have to use it i prefer Winamp and Foobar. I use Foobar in wine on linux for transcoding purposes.
- socceroos, on 10/01/2009, -0/+2True, and we all know how that turned out.
- explodingzebras, on 10/02/2009, -0/+2indeed on large collections, after my collection was >6000 tracks, i found mysql to be much faster.
- Rememberthe0511, on 10/02/2009, -1/+2I'm still useing 1.4 because 2 and up, the sound won't work, it won't play any tracks. So... I would say that being able to play tracks or not is a pretty big deal.
- canthraxp, on 10/02/2009, -0/+1I used Amarok extensively, the only thing I didn't like was the KDE look of it (on gnome). In fact, I don't like anything about the look of KDE 4.x. Then songbird came and filled that gap, with the firetray plugin and other plugins (equalizer presets), it works great.
(And now I will get double buried by KDE fans and Amarok fans) - Chakat, on 10/02/2009, -1/+2Yes, but they also committed to BerkeleyDB when they bought it out, and turned what was once a nice project site with easy-to-reach documentation into a twisty maze of webpages, all alike. Postgres is more free than MySQL, is faster in most cases, and the group behind it doesn't throw a ***** if you try to use it for commercial purposes without giving them their tribute.
- cathbard, on 10/05/2009, -0/+1Ah. now I understand you, maybe you aint on drugs after all. ;) If you use the dynamic playlist it will update as you add stuff to your collection because it is continuously building it from the collection (which does update). You can set the parameters of the dynamic playlist to whatever you like and it will build the playlist on the fly accordingly instead of having to load a huge playlist into memory. Perhaps that will cater to your needs? That playlist will always be a random selection based on your parameters but it will stay up to date and only play what you want.
I wasn't too keen on amarok2 at first after so many years of using amarok1 (I have used a LOT of players btw) but I've really come to appreciate the dynamic playlist setup. 2.2 seems to have sorted a lot of the probs of 2.0-2.1 too, seems fairly stable.
PS: I have tried banshee, was ok I guess but it runs on mono so there's no way that's going on MY pc even if it was better (which I don't think it is.) - DreadKnight, on 10/05/2009, -0/+1If I make a huge playlist, it wont update itself with the latest tracks from my collection, which defeats the purpose of an up-to-date music collection, which people brag about Banshee not being able to do! So Amarok does it, but it's useless to me anyway...
Why do you imply I have the very same music in my collection for ever?
You clearly never used some other music players and you think your workflow fits all sizes... and btw, my music collection is HUGE! - jonnyfatman, on 10/01/2009, -2/+3Because ODBC support is the most important thing in music playing software ...
- marioestrada, on 10/02/2009, -2/+3Try ecoute! http://ecouteapp.com/
Uses the itunes library but does not require itunes to be running - thejynxed, on 10/09/2009, -0/+1It depends on which audio subsystem you have installed, and what you are trying to play.
There is a huge mess right now between PulseAudio and ALSA. One will play CDs, the other won't, and one will play all types of music filetypes, while the other chokes. - leinir, on 10/02/2009, -1/+2Each to their own - not personally a fan, but if you happen to like iTunes' UI, yup, Banshee's certainly an option :)
- abhishektux, on 10/03/2009, -0/+1Here is a feature review of Amarok 2.2 http://www.abhishekrane.com/2009/10/amarok-2-2-fea ...
- BedPost, on 10/02/2009, -1/+1yeah... I just use banshee
- dkla, on 10/02/2009, -1/+1Ecoute rocks. It's light and quick and doesn't slow down your entire system like iTunes does...
- kelchm, on 10/02/2009, -1/+1Honestly people? You are going to bury me for that? Amarok used to have a great UI. I think they've ruined it.
- cathbard, on 10/05/2009, -1/+1You can either use the dynamic playlist to select any mix (including everything) or just drag your collection into the playlist and save that as a playlist - ONCE.
I really don't know what the hell you are talking about. You don't have to make a heap of different playlists unless you want to but you can if you want to. I just want to listen to music too and to listen to the music I want I create playlists. Damn, you must have a small collection if one size fits all. And if you want to just listen to one album or artist or something you just drag that over to the playlist - wtf are you on? - Drazzard, on 10/02/2009, -2/+1can somebody please inform the developers that the oversized/overlapping media buttons are ridiculous?
- shuukiru, on 10/02/2009, -2/+0i like ecoute.
- enantiodromia, on 10/01/2009, -7/+1Try "Vox". It's as simple and lightweight as WinAmp 3.
- kelchm, on 10/02/2009, -7/+1wow. That is one fugly UI.
- svensksvamp, on 10/01/2009, -21/+7that's one ugly player
- NotSarcasm, on 10/01/2009, -21/+2wth this? This isn't iTunes Media Player, how does I buttons it? ***** this learning a computer is hard what is
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is