digg

Needs some more work. But its getting better.

Not-yet-0.2, see the release notes for details on bugs etc at http://publicsvn.songbirdnest.com/trac/wiki/ReleaseNotes_02ny20060626

While it isn't version 0.2, this "Developer Preview" should tide me over in the meantime.

Nice to see that they finally have binaries available for OS X.

I've heard alot about this thing but I still don't understand what makes it so good or useful.

Looks like itunes, sounds like a 'firefox with a bunch of extensions included'. I'll look into it, but if it ends up as bloated as itunes for windows, then i'm sticking to foobar2000.

why would someone want an iTunes ripoff when in OS X and everything is integrated with iTunes

i just tried the mac version, it looked like hell. the install was also very cryptic. it wanted to install extensions, but wouldn't say what they were or where it would put them

the text was everywhere as well. the title bar text was halfway out of the title bar for one, this was a general theme in the app. the menu drop downs weren't complete, even the basic stuff that Xcode throws in for you wasn't right somehow

I tried it earlier this year, but it was slow, and I didn't really like it. It was like Firefox and iTunes only worse. I don't need to have eeverything built in.

I've tried all of the Windows releases to date and all but the latest have failed to open after installation. The most recent release opened, but the XML runner executable crashed soon after.

I have, however, used a 'working' version on a friend's computer, and my advice is to stick to whatever you're using now, be it iTunes, Winamp et al. There is nothing that special about Songbird. I'll admit, I love the way it looks (which is what drew me to it in the first place) but the thing just isn't worth it. It's clearly a glorified rip-off of iTunes and if that's the sort of interface you're after, use iTunes. Whilst I hate the monopoly Apple try to enforce with it (what with DRMs and the iTunes store), it works wonderfully with all my copied CDs and downloaded music.

I'll be interested to try the Mac version at home, but only out of curiousity. And it seems that I'll be disappointed. Obviously this is just my two cents and I know it's still in early development, but unless miracles happen, I can't ever see me going back to download any more releases.

It keeps offering me a 'Download Songbird 0.1.1b for Windows (English, 8.6MB, XP/2k)'. Where are the linux binaries, sources?
iPod support would be cool.

I tried using songbird, but it crawls. I listen to podcast/mp3's all day at work. I have tried numerous mp3 players mainly because I am a programmer, and compiling sucks up my CPU time so I need a mp3 player that is lightweight. I have used iTunes(ridiculous resource hog), Windows Media Player, VLC, flash based players, winamp, mplayer, etc. The best player I have found is winamp lite, on average it uses 15-20% while all the others use around 40-50%.

Musikcube, MediaMonkey are 2 really much better applications.

In ubuntu it didn't seem to want to play any music -- and I couldn't find any engine preferences. I'm sticking with Amarok for now, but it looks promising!

I'll probably try out the Linux binaries but to be honest Amarok and iTunes pretty much have it sewn up.

Doesn't run... Crashes before it even comes up...

Maybe in a few builds. Hopefully I can replace iTunes with this (if it will support my 5th gen iPod) because iTunes is just terribly bloated!

People, please. The whole idea of Songbird is so completely differeny from iTunes or Winamp...
Songbird wants to tie into ALL the web, not just a business. They want you as a user to have choice and be empowered to use the services you like. Just this difference is very important; the freedom of choice.

So naturally if you don't like it, you just stick with itunes or winamp or amarok. And all will be well.

Does anyone else think it's funny how when running on Mac OS X, Songbird uses QuickTime for it's playback? Basically on the Mac it uses iTunes' playback engine.

no interface for iPod, won't play video. I'll stick with Winamp, thanks!

Songbird iPod extension: http://www.songbirdnest.com/node/476

And yes, Songbird plays videos.

Songbird is a lovely bt of would-be software, hope is 'takes off'. I'm liking the farting bird logo.

Rock On! Chirp. Chirp.

Yeah, I think I'll wait for the first developer preview or two. I know it's in it's early stages, but it crashed on me 3 times in a matter of ten minutes with it using 46% CPU at one point. This is on a G4 Powerbook with 1gig of ram, only having songbird and safari running.

Kudos to the developers! Thanks for this software. As for the rest of you whiners - get over it. Some of us would never use itunes even if Apple did offer a Linux version because we like to be in control instead of the other way around. ;) And for you KDE/Amarok lovers well believe it or not some of us don't like KDE either. (yes i know you're all in shock) So.......if you're happy with your current media player stfu and rock on. But if you'd like to contribute something useful (instead of whining) test the builds and send in good bug reports. At least songbird is crossplatform. Can you say that about itunes or Amarok? Nope I don't think so.

If CPU worries you, try Streampad http://www.streampad.com. Its very similiar to Songbird but completely web based and extremely light-weight. It also allows you to listen to your songs from any web browser (something neither Songbird nor iTunes can do)

well, look at the title bar in OS X..
and what? 49.2MB? Goodbye.

people people people... Songbird is a music browser. No one is doing this. Apple would never do this. Look into it a bit more before you call it a rip-off. This is a totally new way of organizing, playing, and grabbing music. Sweet, independent services can be built explicitly for songbird. MP3 blogs take on a whole new meaning with songbird. Songbird has the potential to change the way you find and experience music....

"If you run a music service, you can leverage Songbird's APIs to create deeply integrated stores and user features."

How many of you run your own music service?

I've been using this for a few weeks and I really like it. The red skin is awful, and it is definitely not a finished product, but it has a lot of potential. I like how the browser is integrated into the player so you can look up lyrics and such. When this project matures I see it becoming a very good player. I have downloaded the early builds of firefox (before it was even called firefox) and it was pretty bad. Now it is (arguably) the best browser available. Give songbird some time and I could see the same thing happening here. For the people who love their macs and their ipods and their itunes and their osx and anything else that drops out of Apple's asshole, this is probably not for you. Stick to things that start with the letter i and maintain your false sense of superiority. For people with an open mind, give this software a try. Even if it doesn't replace whatever you currently use as your main music software, you will probably discover some aspects of it that you like.

I liked it, but it defintely was a memory hog. I thought Itunes for Windows worked better(not that its too effective on Windows-since it was built for Mac).

For some reason (probably drm) songbrd wont let me get songs i bought in the music store on to songbird. I scan for media and it either says that no media exists or just doesnt transfer it. will this ever be fixed, because it not ill just stick with itunes?

This has lots of errors on my Ubuntu Dapper Distro. =/ Pity, I'd like it

don't forget to post your bugs in bugzilla.songbirdnest.com and join us for idle or chat about your problems you are having at irc.landoleet.org and join #songbird. This is the offical songbird channel.

Works great!

I can definitely see this program succeeding in the future. The programmers are definitely pointing it in the right direction.