__/ [ Da'Punk-A ] on Monday 05 June 2006 14:06 \__
>
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> PS - What's the deal with XMMS anyway? It is no longer maintained judging
>> by a message that I once posted to the mailing list. We still have
>> SongBird, AmaroK (XMMS successor?), Banshee (and maybe Rhythmbox, which I
>> don't fancy).
>
> I quite like Rhythmbox myself. I tried a few music players, but
> decided to stick with Rhythmbox (the player that came default with
> Ubuntu).
>
> As for comparing the various Linux players with Winamp - what's the big
> deal? As long as they can play my .mp3 and .ogg collection, who cares?
> The wintrolls must be getting desperate when they start harping on
> about how a music player /looks/. Dunno about the rest of you, but I
> mostly play tunes while I'm doing something else. That is, I'm looking
> at web pages, or a document I'm typing, not staring at my music player.
Same here. But to me, XMMS and AmaroK both have killer (yet basic) functions:
* One is global keyboard shotcuts. I don't need to player in sight in order
to control volume, tracks, or even physical deletion of unwanted songs (I
use a simple Perl script to achieve the latter).
* Another is on-screen display (OSD), which allows me to know what is going
on when the player is out of sight, but some unknown song begins to play.
* Lastly: jump to track. When I know what song I wish to listen to, I can
slice and filter the playlist with just a few keystrokes. I find this
function irreplaceable. Winamp has had that for several years, too.
The rest are details and/or flash. Memory consumption is a factor. AmaroK 1.2
scores badly in that department.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | $> unzip; ping; mount /usr; grep; umount& sleep
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
3:25pm up 38 days 20:58, 11 users, load average: 3.06, 2.67, 2.49
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
