Propose your solution
Attachments
No attachments.
Duplicates
Comments
|
tomd123
wrote on the 27 May 09 at 18:57
|
|
|
|
Definitely not alone here. I love rhythmbox, I've been using it for at least 2 years and I can't move away from it. I like it especially for large libraries since it doesn't slow down the machine to a crawl when handling such libraries.
|
|
bryonak
wrote on the 28 May 09 at 17:58
|
|
|
Another voice of support... but mainly against Banshee.
I think that either Rhythmbox development should be accelerated again, or that we should help improving Listen and Exaile, two very promising yet not really stable/mature music players.
I currently use Rhythmbox on my two machines, but I'd prefer Listen if it didn't crash so frequently and had better performance.
|
|
IbaChris
wrote on the 29 May 09 at 14:49
|
|
|
|
i love rythmbox too, the perfect player to leave running in the background whilst doing other things. MEMORY MEMORY MEMORY, why use more of it? i wanna listen to music, not bog down the pc! this is a perfect reason for my idea i just posted saying u should have options for popular programs & drivers during install - making everyone happy
|
|
|
@AndrewLuecke:
"I also personally believe its resource consumption and large library support is overrated"
My music library is 23000+ songs, 133+ GB. This does not include podcasts, of which I currently have 13+ GB.
I still have several cases of CDs to rip.
Large library support is not overrated as far as I am concerned. :)
@nand:
"The developer of Rythmbox does not plan to continue developing Rythmbox: "
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/rhythmbox-devel/2009-March/msg00042.html
"I think people have read too much into my earlier statement about my plans regarding rhythmbox development, or perhaps I overstated things a little. Earlier I listed several limitations inherent in rhythmbox. I'm mostly going to stop working on those and let rhythmbox be what it currently is. There's still a lot of room for improvement,
and there are still many useful features that can be added.
"
So, please stop spreading the notion that Rhythmbox is dead or dying. It is under current, active development and continues to improve. If anything development has picked up because people became concerned about the state of the project.
I'd also like to point out that Rhythmbox is the only player I know that stores podcasts on my iPod so they work right in my car. Some other players store podcasts which I can play from the iPod, but not through the fancy GPS-extension the car has. I assume this is because they are not doing things exactly the right way?
Another thing is that Rhythmbox handles podcasts feeds better than other players I have tried.
And, honestly, the only reason this is even coming up is because certain people want to push a mono application into the default desktop of Ubuntu. Rhythmbox just got runner-up to Amarok in the Linux Journal 2009 Readers' Choice Awards. 3rd place was XMMS. Banshee? - a no-show.
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/10451
So why is this DNF mono application payer even being suggested as the default?
|
Biornus
(Idea reviewer)
wrote on the 31 May 09 at 09:18
|
|
|
Development pace on Banshee is so much greater and Rhythmbox is falling behind.
Being against the insertion of Banshee into Ubuntu just because its based on mono, is idiotic, you are happily running Gnome Do, F-Spot etc.
|
|
ge0ffrey
wrote on the 31 May 09 at 10:41
|
|
|
Rhythmbox doesn't allow me to put the "artist" column before the "song name" column in the lists. Does Banshee?
I like Amarok 1.4 a lot because that does everything. Amarok 2.0 isn't worth the name Amarok non-beta at this time.
|
|
|
|
It looks like they have no plans to switch as long as Rhythmbox is more featureful then Banshee, so I don't see what the problem is.
|
|
|
@ge0ffrey
RB can't reorder columns? That's dumb. Yes, Banshee can do that.
|
|
|
The issue is Mono. There are two points to consider:
1) Why would we clutter up Ubuntu with an incomplete imitation of a bad technology from a failed company (and if you think I'm kidding, read Microsoft's financial reports at sec.gov).
2) Even if we think that imitating Microsoft is a good idea, then we have to consider the legal implications, which are basically the same implications that prevent the inclusion of the excellent VLC player in Ubuntu, or shipping Ubuntu with a complete set of codecs. Due to patents that Microsoft holds on the core technologies in Mono, and their statement that the only legal way to get it is for the user to download it from Novell, including it in Ubuntu is inviting a lawsuit.
Whether or not Banshee is better than Rythmbox is irrelevant to the legal considerations. Unless you can get Microsoft to sign an agreement that Lawrence Lessig is willing to sign off on, Mono has to be removed from Ubuntu,
|
|
|
"
Being against the insertion of Banshee into Ubuntu just because its based on mono, is idiotic, you are happily running Gnome Do, F-Spot etc. "
I am not.
Ok this is not a duplicate, it was not a duplicated, it was approved and all, and considering the other idea is a complete opposite to what this one suggests, it is rather crazy that this is marked as duplicated.
It is also very dissappointing the solutions got removed. Why was it? To hide the fact a lot of people prefer Rhythmbox and do not like Banshee?
This is a disgrace for brainstorm and Canonical, shielding Mono apps. Fedora keeps going forward while Ubuntu seems to go one step backward after another in the regards of setting us free from mono dependency in the default. This is truly a disgrace.
"The developer of Rythmbox does not plan to continue developing Rythmbox: "
And why does it matter? It is FOSS, everyone can continue developing it.
--
To sum up
- This is not a duplicate.
- Removal of solutions to hide how people voted them is not appreciated.
- According to the - now removed - votes the community prefered Rhythmbox but ubuntu prefers making the Mono zealots happy.
At least the "Bring RB development back solution" in the other idea stays, that's as long until someone decides to censor it as well.
|
|
mpt
(Ubuntu developer)
wrote on the 9 Jun 09 at 13:24
|
|
|
|
I have removed the mistaken duplicate marking.
|
|
|
Mono is not Microsoft Technology :D please stop misunderstood!
Mono is a free implementation of a standard.
Mono applications DO need more resource than a native application BUT you may create more complex, complete and modern application with the half of the effort.
By the way, most of you like python apps that require the same resources than mono ones if not more:)
|
|
diegoj
wrote on the 9 Jun 09 at 15:54
|
|
|
Why not leaving Rythmbox and giving the user the option to install Banshee??
Mono has patente-related issues that I think MUST be solved by Canonical/Ubuntu developer team.
In the same way, Ubuntu not install restricted-codecs by default, Mono should not be installed by default.
|
|
|
|
My vote is to keep RBox or use Exaile. Banshee is pure garbage.
|
|
|
|
Please STOP this pro-Microsoft madness with Mono. I'm really DO NOT want to use "yet another Windows". I'm pretty sure, Linux and software around it are self-sufficient WITHOUT M$ technologies and all associated caveats and dangers. You can't win if you will play using enemy's rules of the game. Remember bug#1 then.
|
|
|
> In the same way, Ubuntu not install restricted-codecs by default, Mono should not be installed by default.
That's exactly what I want to tell. Remember, FAT has been "free" to use for years. But when everyone depends on it, you have to pay for it. Same will happen if there will be success in putting everyone's everyday usage dependencies on Mono. When it will be hard to discard Mono, MS probably will require to pay for it. As they're doing with FAT filesystem. I'm pretty sure M$ never changes.
|
|
se2009
wrote on the 14 Jun 09 at 15:23
|
|
|
Nowadays a MS sales representative got more pressure when to explain advantages over GNU/Linux even in the desktop field. But when in future Mono is heavily used in GNU/Linux and it is even the basis for the default multimedia applications, than the MS sales representative will be completely happy again. He can point to fact that MS technology like Mono is even favored in the tech-savvy GNU/Linux community over their own framework possibilities.
The normal user is, appart from web browsing, office functionality and social communication, highly focused on multimedia consumption with playing music, videos, organizing photos. He can be most impressed by shiny multimedia applications. And there could be the danger that this topic get exclusively related to MS.
I can imagine such conversations under casual software users not highly into tech details:
"Do you want good multimedia OS? Than go with MS, they are multimedia experts, even Linux prefer them."
The timing for MS is perfect. Since Ubuntu is accelerating in desktop usage, and MS Mono is already involved, MS can claim that they have contributed to this momentum or even better Mono was an initial force for this. The casual user will be open for such arguments.
And when the MS patent bomb explodes who will explain to the everyday user he cannot use his loved Banshee app freely anymore which was being strongly hyped before. The user will avoid such legal uncertainties by buying Win or Novell OS.
Concerning patent issues:
There is a good comment on the patent issues in following thread http://www.osnews.com/thread?304661 - it is the first comment titled "Myths about ECMA 'Safety'".
Even when the community and company developers share common enthusiasm regarding tech details and community, this won't affect the business decisions of MS CEO, CIO and shareholders. And these will be mainly money and market share decisions apart from the alpha male thing. :)
|
|
se2009
wrote on the 15 Jun 09 at 01:29
|
|
|
@AndrewLuecke
I agree that not every discussion in the Linux community is result-oriented. But in several cases the people simply talk at cross-purposes.
To No. 1) Another example - we assume that the default multimedia applications of the new Windows 7 are based either way on Linux software. My father would ask me:" There is a new Windows version. I am thinking about installing Linux Ubuntu instead of upgrading Windows. What do you think?" Answer: "Great decision. Linux Ubuntu is such a awesome software that even Windows 7 uses Linux Ubuntu for all of its multimedia application." Of course this answer would not be correct with regards to content, but it would the right sales blah blah to give someone the feeling to make the right decision. :)
To No. 2) Yes, you are right usability is important but more features doesn't automatically means better usability. :) On the other hand people make easily emotional trade-offs. For example: "Oh, I have sometimes annoying problems with program X, but it looks so much better than the alternative Y. So I keep it. Sigh."
By the way, what Mono applications that are better than GTK/C/C++?
To No. 3) How do you measure "falling behind"?
The rise of GNU/Linux is a common effort of socio-political motivated activities, enthusiasm for technology, academical and governmental contributions and business investment. GNU/Linux is a joint effort of all these stakeholders and in return has to meet the different demands of them. At the moment there is a well-balanced coexistence of interests.
Ubuntu is part of GNU/Linux and therefore partly a socio-political movement. Ubuntu takes care of the socio-political goals. Whereas old MS is not used to respect a socio-political movement and has repeatedly proved to be diametrically opposed to it.
Under the current circumstances Mono is more appropriate for sole business usage and do not match the private usage in sense of digital freedom.
P.S. How Apple for example is bending over developers I can imagine when I can read about disgruntlement over developing IPhone apps. ;)
|
|
se2009
wrote on the 15 Jun 09 at 12:51
|
|
|
@AndrewLuecke
There a lot of points I can disagree once more again. But I want to take the other way around and look what we have in common.
You said: "All I want is for the ubuntu team to properly determine user needs first, before making a choice."
In general I agree with you. But in detail we don't know if we talk about the same user profile. And therefore I stated some comments above, that in several cases the people simply talk at cross-purposes.
It would be better to discuss the Ubuntu philosophy beforehand -
http://www.ubuntu.com/community/ubuntustory/philosophy.
... For Ubuntu, the 'free' in 'free software' is used primarily in reference to freedom, and not to price - although we are committed to not charging for Ubuntu. The most important thing about Ubuntu is that it confers rights of software freedom on the people who install and use it. It is these freedoms that enable the Ubuntu community to grow, continue to share its collective experience and expertise to improve Ubuntu and make it suitable for use in new countries and new industries. ...
|
|
se2009
wrote on the 17 Jun 09 at 00:38
|
|
|
@AndrewLuecke
I can underline that you are very productive. A lot of ideas. But did you read the intro of this idea? I find it frustrating when you comment in the end that you prefer songbird and do not like Banshee anyway. Are you really an user of Ubuntu? When yes, than the best music program for user AndrewLuecke is songbird. And for user se2009 it is Rhythmbox. And for user XY maybe what he get persuaded. And for user Z what has the most bling-bling.
But above these tiny preferences there is the biggest common user advantage at all the community spirit you have to deliver.
You asked if Ubuntu has tried to communicate to MS. Do not ask try it out. Here some guys who need help in communicating with MS: http://www.osnews.com/story/21586
Apart from the developer life there is the business life in old style. Here something to read and think about:
http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958
And after reading this you should be happy that Ubuntu + GNU/Linux exists and a new sense of business. Do you really think Steve Ballmer would invest so much money and community spirit in a project like Mark Shuttleworth is doing.
Here and now there is the possibility of a new business model where social behaviour and making money do not exclude each other. Take advantage of it, support it and defend it against business in old style.
|
|
se2009
wrote on the 17 Jun 09 at 11:36
|
|
|
@AndrewLuecke
I assume you have already a MSDN account. So do not rant, make it better than the "bunch of internet journalists". ;)
And please relax. You take this too personally. It is good that you keep your eyes open on different technology including this from MS.
But you must understand a lot of people have a problem with MS business ethics as a whole not with the MS employees per se.
And when you give statements like "..why would Microsoft respond to developers who probably weren't even part of MSDN..." than it looks like arrogance. You won't get any sympathy with that behaviour.
|
|
diegoj
wrote on the 7 Jul 09 at 13:26
|
|
|
False. Mono is safe if implements only ECMA standard, Microsoft hasn't said anything about Winforms (which I know is in Mono).
Source (Miguel de Icaza)
|
|
bryonak
wrote on the 7 Jul 09 at 16:24
|
|
|
The "interesting" parts of Mono are not covered by the promise...
I do hope they can achieve complete coverage, otherwise Mono is only slightly less of a danger today than it was yesterday.
While "dangerous" parts like AppDomain, WinForms, ASP, ADO, etc are not _yet_ used by Tomboy or FSpot, can we rely on every developer carefully picking which parts of Mono they may use without entering dangerous waters?
Sure the upcoming differentiation will help, yet a framework you can only use partially is no fun at all.
About Microsoft suing...
As has leaked several times, they perceive GNU/Linux as a threat.
As history has shown, they are very experienced in destroying competition.
I think that if Microsoft comes to sue, Mono and it's fate would be completely insignificant to the parties involved (Microsoft, Canonical and/or other distributors).
They would only care how good a tool it is for destroying competition.
That's at least my attempt at extrapolating history ;)
|
|
|
It is my understanding Banshee relies on non-standard bits:
http://mono-nono.com/2009/07/08/this-doesnt-fix-everything/
This is a good chance for mono to show it doesn't need those non-standard bits and re-do the parts of Banshee that are relying on it.
If they can do that, then I think Banshee is an acceptable inclusion.
If they can not, then I think that brings into question how useful only the standard parts are.
If I am wrong that Banshee relies on non-standard bits, then I apologize and think Banshee is an acceptable solution.
|
|
rgz
wrote on the 8 Oct 09 at 21:23
|
|
|
Until the legal status of mono is cleared (which it is not)
Mono alone is a sufficient reason to avoid Banshee as default.
And yes, legality is relevant.
And no, F-Spot, Tomboy, Bracero and Do inclusion, don't mean mono is safe, it just means F-Spot, Tomboy, Bracero and Do are also unsafe dependencies.
Like I've always said, if only we could get an open source compatible license from MS the entire issue would be resolved overnight, the fact that there isn't one is the entire reason of this argument.
Go ask MS we are barking at the wrong tree.
PS: IMHO Rythmbox == JuK > Listen > Exaile > Banshee > Amarok, but that's beside the point.
|
Post your comment
|
