What is Digg?96 Comments
- BuzzLightyear, on 11/10/2008, -5/+58From the article:
"Songbird's experience broke down a bit, however, when it came to the heavy lifting required for some of its other features, such as iPod integration and concert ticket searches."
It's a RELEASE CANDIDATE, and if you read their site..
"Bloggers & Press: This release is not our final 1.0 product and is not ready to be reviewed. Since we’re still landing code we suggest postponing any review of the Songbird Player until our Final 1.0 product is released. If you’re interested in reviewing the 1.0 build feel free to contact us at: press [at] songbirdnest [dot] com. We’ll be more than happy to give you access to it prior to launch. Thanks for the care and attention you’ve shown Songbird over the past year. :) "
Sloppy work Ars. - paulsmith288, on 11/10/2008, -3/+49"While Songbird recognized our 4G iPod nano and could play songs from its playlists, the software bogged down after a couple of songs, and couldn't eject the iPod properly, which triggered a couple of hardware removal warnings from Mac OS X."
Apple are always changing the hash format of their iTunes database file. They have done it again recently with the jesus phone firmware update, so although I have mine jail broken I cannot sync music using anything apart from iTunes. The problem above MAY be related to this.
Do yourself a favour and stear clear of apple stuff. Unless you only ever want to use iTunes. (Prepares to be buried). Choice is what matters. - sockpuppets, on 11/10/2008, -0/+19Nerdfight!
- consonance, on 11/10/2008, -2/+21If it can replace Winamp, then I'm all for it. Foobar is great and everything, but if there were a fast Winamp then I would switch in a heartbeat.
- Fusi0n, on 11/10/2008, -0/+17I have to use "media library stuff" since I have more music then your average persons ipod
For people who actually build library's of 1000+ unique artists trust me
You need to use a program
Plus it's easier when your making playlists and stuff - rowjimmy, on 11/10/2008, -0/+11jesus christ people are stupid. the point with it being built off of mozilla is that you can automatically create playlists from the internet (eg, any page with links to m3us or music files, or embedded music auto-creates a playlist that you can manage). they aren't trying to "get a free ride from the mozilla bandwagon" - they are using a solid piece of FOSS to develop an interesting take on "media 2.0" or whatever you want to call it.
- drewcoll, on 11/11/2008, -0/+10I found Songbird to be bloated and redundant with other music players. Really, who needs a browser in the music player, I'd want more screen space and the universality of a standalone browser.
- EnderMB, on 11/11/2008, -1/+11I've been using Songbird for about a month now and it's one of those programs you want to be great, but isn't. It has some great skins and some useful extensions but it could use so much more. The default skin looks like ass so I use a black variant of the new one and it looks great. I also have a problem when the program first opens when it won't play a song the first time around, although double-clicking a second-time will let it play.
Once this media player has a better default skin with more skins (feathers) and extensions available, a fully working back-end and a Now Playing playlist (don't mention the extension for the playlist, it is terrible), then it would be the best music player, hands down. - Vegiemaster, on 11/10/2008, -2/+10That's the only thing I hate about my iPhone. iTunes sucks.
- MasonZombie, on 11/11/2008, -0/+8Rofl.
I love you. - Avian00, on 11/10/2008, -9/+16Huh? Why should people care about that? Why does that even matter? I'm so sick of people calling it the "Firefox of Media Players" just because it's built with XUL Runner. That is totally irrelevant. Firefox is successful because it is a quality product. If Songbird wants the same level of success, they need to bring the same level of quality and stop trying to get a free ride from the Mozilla bandwagon.
- Fusi0n, on 11/10/2008, -2/+9Yeah i've tried this out before, it's a very nice start
But no where near Winamp - jasmus, on 11/11/2008, -0/+5I didn't bury you, because you said you shouldn't' buy Apple products if you don't like their conditions of use (in this case, iTunes). Too many people buy an iPod then bitch about iTunes when they knew damn well they'd have to use it.
- JonLatane, on 11/11/2008, -0/+4I'm glad you recognize that choice is what matters. However, I'd also hope you recognize that a lot of people *choose* iPods for the software. I got an iPod years ago because iTunes (for Windows at that time) was, in my opinion, the best music player available for the platform, hands-down. Sure, it doesn't stream from Last.fm or do your dishes or whatever the new big thing is, but it's got the least cluttered interface of any media player I've seen while retaining the fairly robust organizational tools needed to maintain a large collection.
I've since switched to OS X, so I can't say much about the Windows version today (I only use the Windows box to stream music from my Mac at parties), but at this point I would never use an MP3 player that isn't compatible with iTunes. Having tried a few alternatives before the OS X switch (Creative's crap, MediaMonkey, WMP, Winamp, foobar, even Songbird long ago), I've simply come to the conclusion that a solidly-organized, easily-synchronized collection is worth whatever extra markup might come with an iPod.
And guess what? Every friend of mine who's bought an iPod bought it because they preferred iTunes's syncing and organization as well. So while I understand people's complaints about iTunes (if the Windows 720p issues are real, that really sucks for you guys), I figured I should throw in that a lot of people really do prefer iTunes, and it's a pretty big part of the reason iPods are popular (reality distortion field notwithstanding). - MrsButtersworth, on 11/11/2008, -1/+5It consumes resources like a *****.
- dcharti, on 11/10/2008, -1/+5Media management apps like Songbird, iTunes, Windows Media Player, and others offer many more features than an OS's own file and folder system. Many of these players integrate with social services where you can share your music and discover new artists, like Last.fm. Most of these players also allow for creating smart playlists that automatically arrange music in creative ways, and they also handle all the heavy lifting of organizing all these files in the first place. Let's also not forget automatically loading media players like an iPod or Zune. Toss a CD into any respectable media player, and it rips the music, names all the files according to song, organizes them into a folder for you, and perhaps even goes and grabs the album art and embeds it the files. The computer does all the heavy lifting, not the user.
- MrNewbie, on 11/11/2008, -1/+5Never forget your history: Phoenix (later Firebird, later Firefox) was mediocre in its first RC too.
May Songbird do to iTunes what Firefox has done to IE. - ptFoe, on 11/11/2008, -0/+4lol you mean 0.7 not 7.0
- saketome, on 11/11/2008, -0/+3What just happened?
- lovemorgul, on 11/10/2008, -7/+10you should be know that Songbird is a music player and organizer based on Mozilla technologies.
- XVampireX, on 11/10/2008, -0/+3It's a rather nice player to be honest. It works like firefox but for music purposes....
- inactive, on 11/10/2008, -2/+5If anyone is interested:
Songbird 7.0 Fedora RPM's are located here: http://www.digitalruin.net/node/42
Songbird 7.0 Ubuntu DEB's are located here: http://www.getdeb.net/app/Songbird
1.0 is right around the corner and we'll have the RPM's updated as soon as the full release comes out.
The Songbird Roadmap is located here: http://wiki.songbirdnest.com/Roadmap - chromerium, on 11/10/2008, -0/+3You miss the point. iTunes et al organise the folders for you, based on the tags. Then they go one step further and let you sort by artist, genre, album, whatever.
- Zero2aHero, on 11/11/2008, -2/+5"Choice is what matters"
I'd personally prefer quality over choice - diggtochina, on 11/11/2008, -0/+3it works with just about everything. i believe it integrates open code much like VLC does
- marioestrada, on 11/11/2008, -0/+3I know what you are saying, the app uncompressed is about 120mb on OS X, and took a whole night to import my itunes library and stalled at 99%. It really wasn't that fast and the interface looks funny.
It's good to see people trying to make a 'better' iTunes, but Songbird as of this version is not. :S - katana346, on 11/11/2008, -0/+3The whole point of Songbird is addons. There is a Nowplaying add-on, but it doesn't work with RC1 because... wait for it... its a release candidate! Just wait for the real 1.0.
- PhailQuail, on 11/11/2008, -0/+3I might give this a try, since Amarok 2 is looking like a huge bucket of fail.
- DarkJedi375, on 11/11/2008, -0/+2The main reason I cannot make the switch to this from iTunes is playlist folders. iTunes allows me to separate my playlists into folders that work on my iPod. I need them or I'd go crazy.
- computershack, on 11/11/2008, -0/+2It's *****. Offers nothing that the other FOSS media players do but manages to use far more resources to do it. The plugins that are available are for the most part broken and let it down even more. The Album Art manager will only let you select and get one at a time and constantly sits there doing nothing when you tell it to get art from Amazon. The "iTunes ripoff" horizontal scrolling album cover plugin is broken and doesn't display the album art you've just downloaded.
- dragazis, on 11/11/2008, -0/+2Looks like another ugly and bloated.
- cesclaveria, on 11/10/2008, -2/+4Time to test this, I have been putting it off for a long time.
any word on how does it compares to Amarok? - silfiriel, on 11/11/2008, -3/+5Three Songbird stories in a week, and the damn thing doesn't even have a Now Playing playlist by default? (and it's not even available to install the plug in for RC1)
Who's pushing this thing up? - sodade, on 11/10/2008, -3/+5The forced use of iTunes is exactly why I won't buy an Apple mp3 player. ***** THAT. If I can't plug an mp3 player into any system and transfer music to it then it SUCKS ASS.
- chinolofus, on 11/11/2008, -0/+2does it have an EQ yet?
- GarrettGrimsley, on 11/11/2008, -0/+2I tried it when it was at .2, it was ok but since it was .2 it crashed - a lot. I was impressed and it has come a long way since then :)
- malhombre, on 11/11/2008, -0/+2Nice. Can't wait for the next installment.
- inactive, on 11/11/2008, -1/+3It probably wanders who the hell has wma files and hates you
- lemur, on 11/11/2008, -0/+2What I want is for somebody to tell me straight what's awesome about Songbird and what sets it apart from other players. I've been inundated with audio players to the point of not being able to make heads or tails of them anymore. They all look the same, purport to do the same things, etc etc, and yet some are nice to use and some aren't. For example, Amarok is great. Banshee is OK. Rhythmbox sucks. Is Songbird great enough for me to stop using Amarok? I'm so confused!
- snotrokit, on 11/11/2008, -0/+2Last time I tried it, it seemed really bogged down by large libraries. Really bogged down. I will give it another shot.
- GangsterCompute, on 11/11/2008, -1/+3I've been using Songbird for about a month now ever since XP Service Pack 3 caused my favorite version of iTunes to crash on launch. It was definitely the next-best thing in terms of look and performance, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have weird quirks:
This is one of those players that puts my "Grateful Dead" music with the G's and my "The Grateful Dead" music with the T's, and some boolean strings in search of tracks don't work out the way they should. I haven't figured out how to turn playlists into burned cds, and its incompatible in connecting over a network with the iTunes running on my other computer. If I had the program open when I closed my laptop, when I open the laptop again it starts playing the next song down before all the windows even appear on the desktop. So, still some odd basic issues, but I'm glad to be running something that sorta works in light of the alternative. - inactive, on 11/11/2008, -0/+1That would be me being retarded, yes, thanks ;)
- dragon76, on 11/12/2008, -0/+1The simple lack of alternatives to iTunes, on any platform, kinda shows that people just want to use iTunes.
- fujikofujio, on 11/11/2008, -1/+2I truly wish songbird can live up to its hype, I like them cause it works on Ubuntu and on Windows, but so far it is no contender to MediaMonkey (http://lifehacker.com/software/music/download-of-t ... When the day comes that they can match MediaMonkey's speed and features then that's the time I'll switch. (mediamonkey also works on wine)
- MoClippa, on 12/02/2008, -0/+1This has been my favorite music player since .3. Not something I've used as my primary player mind you, it was rife with problamatic crashes and has been in beta forever, but now that its hit 1.0 I'm in the process of transferring my iTunes life to it. I hope they worked through all the major issues as this player has some serious potential with its extensibility and community. When it works, it is an absolute joy to use!
- SuperMoses, on 11/11/2008, -0/+1I believe that was addressed in version 0.7, but I could be wrong. Nonetheless, they took note of that and made it a top priority. I don't doubt that it's been fixed for version 1.0
- PhailQuail, on 11/11/2008, -0/+1The option to turn it off is really well placed and apparent, first checkbox in the "OSD" tab turns it off.
- SuperMoses, on 11/11/2008, -0/+1I really hope Songbird 1.0 is a big improvement (haven't had time to test the RC yet). Audacious is good for a clone of the old winamp. I never really like Rhythmbox. Amarok wasn't too great either and didn't really want it as a gnome user. MediaMonkey isn't platform independent, so the great hope is with Songbird. I look forward to their 1.0 final release
- KayIslandDrunk, on 11/13/2008, -0/+1Where is it wandering?
- hisean99, on 11/11/2008, -0/+1Songbird is pretty awesome except for the lack of reliable podcast support. Unfortunately this version didn't fix that.
-
Show 51 - 98 of 98 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is