Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 31st Dec 2009 01:41 UTC
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Just before Christmas Songbird 1.4.0 was released, and a new fix versions was released today as 1.4.3. Songbird now supports MSC storage devices and CD ripping, bringing the app one step closer to replacing iTunes for some users. What's particularly interesting is that Songbird now specifically pushes their product against users of Android, Nokia and Palm smartphones -- which is something I also suggested a few months too. Hopefully Google, Nokia, and Palm will get behind the small team in San Francisco to help out the cause, since it's also on their best interest too.
Thread beginning with comment 401740
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Awful
by kev009 on Thu 31st Dec 2009 02:47 UTC
kev009
Member since:
2006-11-30

I can't pinpoint any singular reason, but I find Songbird to be awful. I was really excited when the project was first announced, a xulrunner media player sounded awesome because Firefox was a FOSS darling. Fast forward to today and it now just sounds silly. I just installed it on a Pentium M laptop with 1.5GB RAM and it really makes things crawl. Not really sure where they are trying to go.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Awful
by kaiwai on Thu 31st Dec 2009 02:55 in reply to "Awful"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

I can't pinpoint any singular reason, but I find Songbird to be awful. I was really excited when the project was first announced, a xulrunner media player sounded awesome because Firefox was a FOSS darling. Fast forward to today and it now just sounds silly. I just installed it on a Pentium M laptop with 1.5GB RAM and it really makes things crawl. Not really sure where they are trying to go.


What I find awful about it is the fact that a feature will appear on the Windows version and it'll take at least a year before it finally appears on the *NIX or Mac version. Yet again the non-Windows platforms are seen as the bastard red headed step children of the operating system world.

Edited 2009-12-31 02:55 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Awful
by kev009 on Thu 31st Dec 2009 02:57 in reply to "RE: Awful"
kev009 Member since:
2006-11-30

Have you tried Banshee? It is a first rate media player in my mind. Amarok 2 is slowly recovering as well, though it may be a while before old timers are truly happy.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Awful
by Eugenia on Thu 31st Dec 2009 03:00 in reply to "Awful"
Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

It IS slow (P4 at 3Ghz here). But then again, iTunes doesn't fly on Windows either.

And besides, that's why I wrote that Palm, Google and Nokia should HELP these guys. Because they already have done the bulk of the work, and they have the framework, all it now requires is polish.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Awful
by kaiwai on Thu 31st Dec 2009 03:05 in reply to "RE: Awful"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

It IS slow (P4 at 3Ghz here). But then again, iTunes doesn't fly on Windows either.

And besides, that's why I wrote that Palm, Google and Nokia should HELP these guys. Because they already have done the bulk of the work, and they have the framework, all it now requires is polish.


I second that; if Palm, Google and Nokia each contributed 2 full time programmers each; and dedicated to getting across the board feature parity and support for my iPod Touch - I for one would be more than happy to leave the iTunes world; the unfortunate problem that as a Mac user I am treated like a second class citizen when it comes to features when compared to the Windows version of songbird.

Edited 2009-12-31 03:12 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Awful
by lemur2 on Thu 31st Dec 2009 04:41 in reply to "RE: Awful"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

It IS slow (P4 at 3Ghz here). But then again, iTunes doesn't fly on Windows either.

And besides, that's why I wrote that Palm, Google and Nokia should HELP these guys. Because they already have done the bulk of the work, and they have the framework, all it now requires is polish.


Why would Nokia want to help Songbird?

There are already the following very capable players that run purely on Nokia's platform (which is Qt):

VLC
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/

SMPlayer
http://smplayer.sourceforge.net/

qmmp (like Winamp, lightweight)
http://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/index_en.php

cuberok (like Amarok, no KDE dependency, works on Mac)
http://code.google.com/p/cuberok/

Quasar (for handhelds)
http://freshmeat.net/projects/quasar-media-player

and the following which also require kdelibs as well as Qt:

Amarok (the most capable, works with iPods)
http://amarok.kde.org/

Juk (KDE 3.x)
http://developer.kde.org/~wheeler/juk.html

All of these media players (some of them are also music collection managers) work far faster than Songbird.

Most of them require only Nokia's Qt platform (which includes Windows, Mac and Linux).

Edited 2009-12-31 04:43 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Awful
by segedunum on Sat 2nd Jan 2010 22:21 in reply to "RE: Awful"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

It IS slow (P4 at 3Ghz here). But then again, iTunes doesn't fly on Windows either.

iTunes is being used by people now, comes with every iPod and has a massive installed base. Quite how you figure people are going to use a cheap knock-off that has all the performance and arcane issues of any XUL application I don't know. We also have a ton of other media players, particularly on Windows, such as Winamp should people wish to use them. Sync? People are already using iTunes for that.

No one is terribly interested that it is just as slow as iTunes. It will make no one switch, not that they would anyway.

And besides, that's why I wrote that Palm, Google and Nokia should HELP these guys. Because they already have done the bulk of the work, and they have the framework, all it now requires is polish.

Palm, Google and Nokia don't give a shit because it's not quite that important to them and the framework is a pile of dog turd that is trying to compete with a firmly entrenched existing application in iTunes. The thing choked on getting through a quarter of my music collection that Winamp has happily imported in for years. I don't know why you think it would be important to these companies since it's all been done before. If they want to create such a player then I'm sure they can make a better job.

There is very little point to Songbird. We have applications like Winamp as alternative players and there have been many, many efforts to create alternative iTunes knock-offs and iPod sync alternatives.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Awful
by FunkyELF on Sun 3rd Jan 2010 23:42 in reply to "RE: Awful"
FunkyELF Member since:
2006-07-26

And besides, that's why I wrote that Palm, Google and Nokia should HELP these guys. Because they already have done the bulk of the work, and they have the framework, all it now requires is polish.


I would rather Palm, Google, or Nokia help XBMC get syncing support since it already has polish.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Awful
by WereCatf on Thu 31st Dec 2009 06:45 in reply to "Awful"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I've always found it silly to integrate a full freaking web-browser with a music collection manager/player. It's a whole lot of unneeded stuff, especially since I doubt anyone actually uses it for browsing the web, instead opting for a separate browser.

I still use Songbird, it's less of a memory hog than iTunes, but it's still awfully slow and seems to actually be more of a CPU hog, especially scrolling the list of songs you've got almost hurts.

I'd ditch it if I could, but I haven't found any other player with a similar UI. They all try to look like Winamp and I hate the Winamp UI. I like having a clear view of all of my songs, a search for whenever I want to listen to a particular song, and so that I can sort my songs by the score I've given them.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Awful
by Eugenia on Thu 31st Dec 2009 06:50 in reply to "RE: Awful"
Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

I personally use iTunes. It has 3-4 small bugs, but other than that, it does the job perfectly for me.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Awful
by UltraZelda64 on Thu 31st Dec 2009 20:33 in reply to "RE: Awful"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

I'd ditch it if I could, but I haven't found any other player with a similar UI. They all try to look like Winamp and I hate the Winamp UI. I like having a clear view of all of my songs, a search for whenever I want to listen to a particular song, and so that I can sort my songs by the score I've given them.

Winamp was one of the major losses I was forced to deal with in my switch to Linux back around 2006. I never did like the idea of a media library, that's what my damn file system is for--it's all nicely organized by genre, band, year/album, and finally song.

I don't know how Winamp's UI is not clear, as you load files (typically, in my case, an album) into a playlist and don't have to worry about a bunch of useless metadata all over the screen about all the songs in your collection. Of course, since WA5 Windamp does provide that pointless "library" functionality, so you can have it either way.

Winamp is, IMO, the best. Though Audacious seems to be the next best thing.

Reply Parent Score: 2