Prev: WORLD FAMOUS SCORES GENTELMENS CLUB HAS JUST GONE ONLINE! REAL LIVE STRIPPERS ON WEBCAM!
Next: Pre-failure spin-up time
From: Geoffrey Clements on 29 Nov 2008 18:46
Will Kemp wrote:

> Geoffrey Clements wrote:

>>
>> I agree with your sentiment about software coming and going but not sure
>> what you find unusable about Amarok, I suppose it's down to what you like
>> and don't like. I'm using the latest version on Lenny - 2.4.10.
>
> Huh? I guess you mean 1.4.10

Duh! - yeah - once again trying to post whilst being chivvied from my
computer to go ... ugh ... shopping.

--
Geoff Registered Linux user 196308
Replace bitbucket with geoff to mail me.
From: Daniel James on 30 Nov 2008 11:17
In article news:<slrngj2at5.2rt.justin.0811(a)satori.local>, Justin C
wrote:
> I agree, I *like* xmms, and I've never had any problem with it.

I liked XMMS, too -- it had a reasonably no-nonsense and pleasantly
uncluttered GUI, unlike many of the alternatives. Gentoo seems to want
me to use noatun, which seems to respond in exactly the way I don't
want it to at every turn!

I gather, though, the codebase was not well thought-of by those who
might be called to work on it.

See what http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xmms has to say under "Forks".

Cheers,
Daniel.


From: Nix on 30 Nov 2008 12:10
On 29 Nov 2008, Sheridan Hutchinson said:

> Nix wrote:
>> Isn't Audacious maintenance-dead?
>
> Hi Nix,
>
> I have no idea about this although I'm sure a google would easily answer
> this question.

The Audacious website was hacked for a month and served up only
Trojans. Now it's an Apache new-installation page. (Neither mention
Audacious at all, so Google won't find them.)

Not a good sign.

> All I can really explain is why XMMS was pulled from Debian and the
> alternative the XMMS developers recommended at the time.

XMMS was pulled because it's an unusable pile of hyperskinned
maintenance-dead shite with a user interface designed by someone who had
never heard about user interface design but only wanted osmething that
looked cool, that is just about the last application in Debian that
depended on an incredibly obsolete widget set that isn't getting
security fixes?

(I don't much like XMMS. Can you tell?)

--
`Not even vi uses vi key bindings for its command line.' --- PdS
From: Nix on 30 Nov 2008 13:56
On 30 Nov 2008, Daniel James outgrape:

> In article news:<slrngj2at5.2rt.justin.0811(a)satori.local>, Justin C
> wrote:
>> I agree, I *like* xmms, and I've never had any problem with it.
>
> I liked XMMS, too -- it had a reasonably no-nonsense and pleasantly
> uncluttered GUI

I want to live in your alternate universe. In mine, XMMS had a GUI
cluttered with obscure widgets with zero affordance (what will happen
when I click *this*? Will anything happen? Who knows?) and with no
resemblance to any widget set I've ever seen anywhere else, before or
since. (Apparently it's derived from winamp, which I've never seen, and
if it's anything like XMMS never want to see.)

What's worse, it was incredibly unresponsive and would frequently make
you wait before you could tell if your mouse click had done anything, or
even miss clicks entirely (which takes talent given the X event model).
There was no indication what the keybindings were, if indeed there
were any.

To misquote Peter Gutmann (originally talking about SSL/SSH):

'Whenever someone thinks that they can replace an ordinary widget set
with something much better that they designed this morning over coffee,
their computer speakers should generate some sort of penis-shaped sound
wave and plunge it repeatedly into their skulls until they achieve
enlightenment.'

(I believe this misquotation, or something very like it, originates with
JWZ.)
From: Folderol on 30 Nov 2008 14:50
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 18:56:04 +0000
Nix <nix-razor-pit(a)esperi.org.uk> wrote:

> On 30 Nov 2008, Daniel James outgrape:
>
> > In article news:<slrngj2at5.2rt.justin.0811(a)satori.local>, Justin C
> > wrote:
> >> I agree, I *like* xmms, and I've never had any problem with it.
> >
> > I liked XMMS, too -- it had a reasonably no-nonsense and pleasantly
> > uncluttered GUI
>
> I want to live in your alternate universe. In mine, XMMS had a GUI
> cluttered with obscure widgets with zero affordance (what will happen
> when I click *this*? Will anything happen? Who knows?) and with no
> resemblance to any widget set I've ever seen anywhere else, before or
> since. (Apparently it's derived from winamp, which I've never seen, and
> if it's anything like XMMS never want to see.)
>
> What's worse, it was incredibly unresponsive and would frequently make
> you wait before you could tell if your mouse click had done anything, or
> even miss clicks entirely (which takes talent given the X event model).
> There was no indication what the keybindings were, if indeed there
> were any.

It always 'just works' (tm) for me. Never had any problems. Tiny
little window that doesn't get in the way. Simple add-on so that I can
use it under jack or not (automatically sensing).

--
Will J G
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: WORLD FAMOUS SCORES GENTELMENS CLUB HAS JUST GONE ONLINE! REAL LIVE STRIPPERS ON WEBCAM!
Next: Pre-failure spin-up time