PDA

View Full Version : Songbird To Drop Linux Support



victor9098
April 3rd, 2010, 12:57 AM
They have just announced that they will no longer be developing a Linux version of songbird! For the full blog post Click Here (http://blog.songbirdnest.com/2010/04/02/songbird-singing-a-new-tune/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+songbird-blog+%28Songbird+Blog%29)


After careful consideration, we’ve come to the painful conclusion that we should discontinue support for the Linux version of Songbird. Some of you may wonder how a company with deep roots in Open Source could drop Linux and we want you to know it isn’t without heartache.
 We have a small engineering team here at Songbird, and, more than ever, must stay very focused on a narrow set of priorities. Trying to deliver a raft of new features around all media types, and across a growing list of devices, we had to make some tough choices

I had been using it over the last 6 months and liked where they were taking it, so disappointed to see them make this decision. Good thing we have plenty of alternatives though! :D

dragos240
April 3rd, 2010, 12:58 AM
Well. I use moc/mplayer anyways.

oldsoundguy
April 3rd, 2010, 01:01 AM
I currently use Amarok (yes, it does work in Gnome) .. but Gudyadeque (being developed ON these forums) looks VERY promising.

victor9098
April 3rd, 2010, 01:04 AM
Personally I would be happy with Rhythmbox if it had better podcasting handing abilities. Otherwise Banshee is my preferred music player. Amarok was my favourite until they rebooted it and I never liked working with it after that.

NoaHall
April 3rd, 2010, 01:05 AM
Well. I use moc/mplayer anyways.

Yeah, cause it's impossible for someone other than you to use different software.


It's a shame, as Songbird is my favourite media player on Linux. Still, it's open source, I can edit the code to fix Linux if need be.

juancarlospaco
April 3rd, 2010, 01:06 AM
SongBird Web Browser R.I.P.

chriswyatt
April 3rd, 2010, 01:36 AM
It looked promising, oh well.

FuturePilot
April 3rd, 2010, 01:46 AM
Not surprising since it was best supported under Windows. Most of the addons were Windows only.

GMU_DodgyHodgy
April 3rd, 2010, 02:02 AM
This is too bad. I used to like it Songbird a lot, but it became too much.

Banshee is the one I have settled on for now.

Yvan300
April 3rd, 2010, 02:21 AM
It was never my main player but i loved it's powerful library of add on's. Why is linux neglected like the ugly step-child?

Psumi
April 3rd, 2010, 02:41 AM
I will use totem/parole anyways.

I really don't like playlist-based players.

victor9098
April 3rd, 2010, 02:46 AM
It was never my main player but i loved it's powerful library of add on's. Why is linux neglected like the ugly step-child?

More of the ugly-ducking of the OS world, but our time will come (once they fill the software center with fee apps)

ssj6akshat
April 3rd, 2010, 07:23 AM
http://blog.songbirdnest.com/2010/04/02/songbird-singing-a-new-tune/

They have already lost respect by many if you see in the comments.Ditched it months ago,never saw a player as bloated as Songbird.

Dobbie03
April 3rd, 2010, 07:25 AM
Well the Songbird team can go take a hike as far as I am concerned.

arnab_das
April 3rd, 2010, 07:33 AM
WTH are they thinking? in that blog post of theirs they gave absolutely no valid reasons whatsoever for stopping the linux counterpart of the app.

i fell really disgusted. being an open source software, it really makes no sense whatsoever to ditch the most open source friendly platform for proprietary/closed source ones.

i feel like removing songbird right now and switching to rhythmbox. what a shame.

AllRadioisDead
April 3rd, 2010, 08:12 AM
WTH are they thinking? in that blog post of theirs they gave absolutely no valid reasons whatsoever for stopping the linux counterpart of the app.

i fell really disgusted. being an open source software, it really makes no sense whatsoever to ditch the most open source friendly platform for proprietary/closed source ones.

i feel like removing songbird right now and switching to rhythmbox. what a shame.
Grrr!

Flimm
April 3rd, 2010, 08:20 AM
I don't Songbird myself (I couldn't get Flash to work) but I'm sad to see them giving up on Linux.

PryGuy
April 3rd, 2010, 08:40 AM
Bad for them. Seems to be a stupid move.

Glenn nl
April 3rd, 2010, 09:09 AM
Like a guy on the blog said:

Almost all mac users use Itunes, and they keep the mac port and get rid of the linux port?!?


It´s the dumbest move in FOSS i have seen

rudihawk
April 3rd, 2010, 09:38 AM
I think this is totally retarted. I never did like Songbird much, but this is the final straw.

neo_1in
April 3rd, 2010, 09:45 AM
Seriously weird move. I would get it if it were a commercial software and did not have much scope in linux market share. But its free and open source. So, to drop support for linux is just ... WTF.

Meep3D
April 3rd, 2010, 09:52 AM
I imagine the Linux sound situation might have something to do with it, as well as the development tools being a bit sub-par - quite a few developers have issues with Linux as a development platform.

kaivalagi
April 3rd, 2010, 09:55 AM
The source is available though right? Why not fork it now and continue supporting a Linux only version seperately?

arnab_das
April 3rd, 2010, 10:20 AM
The source is available though right? Why not fork it now and continue supporting a Linux only version seperately?

exactly my thoughts.

HappinessNow
April 3rd, 2010, 10:22 AM
Songbird is overall pretty useless, this may be the first sign that they are dieing.

cb951303
April 3rd, 2010, 10:39 AM
meh... we have tons of other choices. i never liked it anyway. way too slow.

gnomeuser
April 3rd, 2010, 10:47 AM
I suspect this will cost them, the people who understand Open Source are on Linux and I suspect also the people willing to work for free on the hard core bits of the player.

They might have a big plugin community but that isn't going to get the far with regards to fixing fundamental bugs and optimizing performance.

It is also telling as to their implementation choices, if it had been naturally portable and easy to maintain supporting multiple platforms would not be a burden that required action such as this.

On the whole I see this as a win for Banshee, which not only supports Linux well but is actively expanding platform support to both Windows and OS X (actually OS X is already seeing decent uptake as a platform for Banshee according to the anonymous statistics given the early state of the port).

Nickedynick
April 3rd, 2010, 10:55 AM
Songbird seemed like a good idea when it was launched, but in reality it's so bloated it's virtually useless. I recently uninstalled it from my Windows partition for exactly that reason.

I have to say that the Linux media player scene does look a lot better in my eyes than the Windows one, so I can't say I'm upset.

ErikWestrup
April 3rd, 2010, 11:35 AM
The source is available though right? Why not fork it now and continue supporting a Linux only version seperately?

I hope for a fork too.

I would have understood if they dropped support for Windows or Mac OS, but Linux? Bad decision.

rudihawk
April 3rd, 2010, 12:03 PM
Songbird seemed like a good idea when it was launched, but in reality it's so bloated it's virtually useless. I recently uninstalled it from my Windows partition for exactly that reason.


Same here, I've been using Songbird since back in the day when it was still version 0.1 It never really appealed to me. Kinda came across as a jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none.

purgatori
April 3rd, 2010, 12:10 PM
The source is available though right? Why not fork it now and continue supporting a Linux only version seperately?

It's not worth the effort.

For 'kitchen sink' players there are better alternatives like Banshee and Amarok, and for less resource-heavy/focused apps you have mpd/ncmpcpp and the like; all of which are vastly superior to this clunky mess. The only people I ever recommended Songbird to were Windows users, as I thought it was a better alternative to the horrid iTunes.

speedwell68
April 3rd, 2010, 12:33 PM
I used Songbird for a while, but I have long since dropped it. It's main plus point was it's great iPod and coverflow features. But as I have seen sense and ditched the iPod in favour of an Archos the need for iPod support has gone from my life. TBH it is really bloated, I never really did see the need for an intergrated media player and browser.

_sAm_
April 3rd, 2010, 12:54 PM
Songbird is overall pretty useless, this may be the first sign that they are dieing.

I don't think so, Philips GoGear is now bundling Songbird with the player(Windows version only); must be a huge win for them.

And is this so strange, I mean Mozilla focus most on the Windows version, same for other programs as RawTherapee. Not many are using Linux.

SmittyJensen
April 3rd, 2010, 01:00 PM
haha. even the music player nobody uses leaves linux.

cb951303
April 3rd, 2010, 01:03 PM
And is this so strange, I mean Mozilla focus most on the Windows version, same for other programs as RawTherapee. Not many are using Linux.

That's the excuse of commerical software makers: "Not many are using Linux" but I don't see why it's relevant for free software.

EarthMind
April 3rd, 2010, 01:25 PM
It's sad to see Linux support go but to be honest I don't see the popularity of this player flourish because it's way too resource demanding for a music (soon: media) player. Maybe it'd have more success on Linux if they didn't discriminate it this much, but on Windows? It's not like any music player is going to be as successful as Winamp, itunes and the newb-loved WMP anytime soon, especially not if it remains such a memory hog.

purgatori
April 3rd, 2010, 01:27 PM
I suspect this will cost them, the people who understand Open Source are on Linux and I suspect also the people willing to work for free on the hard core bits of the player.

They might have a big plugin community but that isn't going to get the far with regards to fixing fundamental bugs and optimizing performance.

It is also telling as to their implementation choices, if it had been naturally portable and easy to maintain supporting multiple platforms would not be a burden that required action such as this.

On the whole I see this as a win for Banshee, which not only supports Linux well but is actively expanding platform support to both Windows and OS X (actually OS X is already seeing decent uptake as a platform for Banshee according to the anonymous statistics given the early state of the port).

Which is a good thing. I'm an MPD/MPC user myself, but I still think that Banshee is the best player, in its class, and getting better all the time.

xir_
April 3rd, 2010, 03:40 PM
I think there are a couple key reasons for this:

Firstly Ubuntu now has its own 7 digital store by default. Thats going to be most of the affiliate money in songbird gona from Linux.

Secondly Mozilla has always been bad to Linux and treated it as though it was an after thought. just look at the performance of Firefox under windows and next Ubuntu. And soon there will be directX support in Firefox, wait till those benchmarks come out.


The thing that has pissed a lot of people is the whole tone of the article, the title is jovial and the content doesn't really have a good explanation as to why they cant offer a community development drive instead of a near total drop of support. I think they have severely mismanaged this.

kaivalagi
April 3rd, 2010, 04:55 PM
I think there are a couple key reasons for this:

Firstly Ubuntu now has its own 7 digital store by default. Thats going to be most of the affiliate money in songbird gona from Linux.

Secondly Mozilla has always been bad to Linux and treated it as though it was an after thought. just look at the performance of Firefox under windows and next Ubuntu. And soon there will be directX support in Firefox, wait till those benchmarks come out.


The thing that has pissed a lot of people is the whole tone of the article, the title is jovial and the content doesn't really have a good explanation as to why they cant offer a community development drive instead of a near total drop of support. I think they have severely mismanaged this.

Spot on! Especially the last paragraph

I don't use Songbird, I am more of a MPD / Sonata kinda guy, but even so I don't like this or what it implies about the company's view of Linux and the open source movement in general...

Ric_NYC
April 3rd, 2010, 05:09 PM
Shame on them.

MooPi
April 3rd, 2010, 05:12 PM
The common thread through these post is the bloat and lag that Songbird exhibited.I too experimented with it several months ago and found it way to much of a resource hog. Played music nicely but what a footprint. Sorry to see them give up on us the Linux community.

Danny Dubya
April 3rd, 2010, 05:16 PM
WTH are they thinking? in that blog post of theirs they gave absolutely no valid reasons whatsoever for stopping the linux counterpart of the app.
There seems to be a lot of that going around, huh. *looks at Canonical*

As for Songbird, couldn't care less -- Banshee, Rhythmbox and Amarok are better players anyway as far as I'm concerned.

kaivalagi
April 3rd, 2010, 05:36 PM
There seems to be a lot of that going around, huh. *looks at Canonical*

As for Songbird, couldn't care less -- Banshee, Rhythmbox and Amarok are better players anyway as far as I'm concerned.

Agreed, I still prefer Rhythmbox out of what you listed, although I use none of those anymore...MPD all the way.

But for me this is more about the principle and which company we are talking about here...

cascade9
April 3rd, 2010, 05:54 PM
Does anybody speak fluent marketing?


We remain loyal to Linux and the ideology it represents, so we will maintain a version of the software for use by our Songbird engineers who develop on the Linux platform. We’ll make that version available to the community. We will keep Linux build bots (http://buildbot.songbirdnest.com/) and host the Linux builds on the developer wiki (http://wiki.songbirdnest.com/Developer) . That said, those builds will not be tested and may not pick up new features developed by Songbird’s team.


http://blog.songbirdnest.com/2010/04/02/songbird-singing-a-new-tune/

Does that translate as 'you freebies can just do it yourself' or 'our guys will still build it, but its beta, forever, and dont expect that new features will be added', or both at once?


I don't think so, Philips GoGear is now bundling Songbird with the player(Windows version only); must be a huge win for them.


I'm temped to go all tin-foil-hatted and suggest that philips might have pushed things this way (possibly with them being pushed by microsoft in turn) but I really..ops, typed it already LOL


I think there are a couple key reasons for this:

Firstly Ubuntu now has its own 7 digital store by default. Thats going to be most of the affiliate money in songbird gona from Linux.

Interestingly, if yuo go to the 'Philips Songbird" page it lists 7 digital as a partner.

http://www.consumer.philips.com/c/mp3-media-player/22126/cat/us/#cp_tab_content_5

I really dont know what to make of this tangled web. Maybe my tin foil hat is too tight?

I have to admit, I never liked songbird- bloated slow thing. But losing the linux version isnt a good thing, for either party, from where I'm standing.

arnab_das
April 3rd, 2010, 08:43 PM
personally one of the reasons why i love songbird is the fact that it has mediaflow (aka the itunes type album browsing thing). with rhythmbox everything is just okay-ish. everything just works and all that. there's no sense of 'style' extensive theming etc. in rhythmbox (let me take nothing away from the developers of rhythmbox though, coz they have done a fab job). but i think since ubuntu is advocating all this new fresh look and stuff, songbird just sort of fit the bill. maybe it couldnt have been integrated into the ubuntu cd right now, but in time it could have become a potential powerhouse of a media player.

what i will miss? well, the fun, to be honest. the add ons, the 'live' lyrics, etc (i know amarok does all this as well, but it isnt half as classy on a gnome interface). there's a difference between using itunes and windows media player. same applies to rhythmbox and songbird. i know people will say that after all we will listen to the music and not stare in awe at the interface of the media player, but u know, the look counts. even if to a certain extent.

(the reason why i compared rhythmbox to songbird is because the former is the most popular player on ubuntu)

PC_load_letter
April 3rd, 2010, 09:31 PM
I didn't use it that much, I just liked the photo presentation that accompanies the songs, it's a great feature that I like to see implemented in other media players.

It was way too bloated and it won't be missed. They probably think they know what they are doing, good luck.

PC_load_letter
April 3rd, 2010, 09:36 PM
This comment made my day LOL

SCRUSS: So you’re now providing an iTunes alternative, but only on the platforms that iTunes runs on? So long, been good to know ya.

ophion
April 3rd, 2010, 09:55 PM
Well the Songbird team can go take a hike as far as I am concerned.

Your restraint is admirable.

nothingspecial
April 3rd, 2010, 11:03 PM
Have a look at guayadeque - the links in my sig.

It`s not beyond alpha yet but I, and many others have been using it for weeks.

It`s under heavy active development. If you have a bug, issue, or feature request......it will be heard.

See here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1380811)

yester64
April 4th, 2010, 12:03 AM
Songbird seemed like a good idea when it was launched, but in reality it's so bloated it's virtually useless. I recently uninstalled it from my Windows partition for exactly that reason.

I have to say that the Linux media player scene does look a lot better in my eyes than the Windows one, so I can't say I'm upset.

Well, Songbird wanted to be an iTunes clone.
If you on Windows, there are two choices i consider. Mediamonkey and Foobar.
Never needed iTunes since it is bloaded as well or badly coded (its slow).

swoll1980
April 4th, 2010, 02:56 AM
I think this is totally retarted. .

Irony at it's finest.

aklo
April 4th, 2010, 03:41 AM
Will i like songbird...i am a user.

I don't care if it is bloated...i have a fast comp i don't see any difference anyway..i also like the old orange bird logo...one of the best logo design i've see.

Anyway if they drop support for linux, so be it. Just a software afterall and i can now try other names like amarok or whatever....i haven't use any of them since i went on ubuntu 5 months ago. Time to change.

semitone36
April 4th, 2010, 05:05 AM
A lot of people on these forums dislike songbird and I can respect that, but this greatly affects me. I loved songbird. Seriously. Its one of the first programs I download on every linux system I install.

I have never sworn on these forums before but seriously Mozilla? **** you.

Primefalcon
April 4th, 2010, 05:08 AM
TBH I've never used songbird anyhow, I use VLC for movies or music, if I am wanting to play a bit seriously with audio and such I'll load up rhythmbox... So I'm sorry to say but meh, no concern really to me

swoll1980
April 4th, 2010, 05:10 AM
Songbird is a monstrosity of unholy bloaty crap. That's all I have to say about that.

markbl
April 4th, 2010, 05:18 AM
Hey Songbird refugees, have a look at Guayadeque. It's pretty darn good.

banjobacon
April 4th, 2010, 05:30 AM
I have never sworn on these forums before but seriously Mozilla? **** you.

Mozilla does not make Songbird.


Seriously weird move. I would get it if it were a commercial software and did not have much scope in linux market share. But its free and open source. So, to drop support for linux is just ... WTF.

The software is free. The the organization that develops the software is a commercial, for-profit company, and their employees certainly do not work for free.

They've been developing Songbird for three platforms for a few years. They probably have a good idea of which platform is the least profitable.

cariboo907
April 4th, 2010, 06:32 AM
Merged to threads on the same subject

murderslastcrow
April 4th, 2010, 06:43 AM
Looks like we'll have to develop Songbird ourselves and make it better. There is a project with the pending title LyreBird which is planning to take the source code and add some Linux-specific modifications, so if the right people get behind this, we might have a better version for Linux than the version available for Windows or Mac. Who knows? I just don't see much motivation to keep this alive beyond the current feature set. But this means we can use libgpod to add some REAL iPod support, among other features that could integrate well with GTK/QT.

juancarlospaco
April 4th, 2010, 07:47 AM
theres a lot of browsers that really works

themarker0
April 4th, 2010, 08:38 AM
Songbird is a monstrosity of unholy bloaty crap. That's all I have to say about that.

So is Vbulletion. So is windows Vista. Last time i checked, both sell/sold very well.

sleepee
April 4th, 2010, 08:34 PM
i might be one of the few here who actually like itunes, so i have to say, i'm really sorry to see songbird, the supposed future itunes killer, go away..
it definitely had its flaws, as many are so quick to point out, but i thought it was promising..
oh well.. hopefully, the project can get picked up by somebody else??
there's still definitely a lot of people who enjoyed using songbird on linux..

scouser73
April 4th, 2010, 08:51 PM
I used to use Songbird and I found ver. 1.2.0 ti have been the best but ever since the upgrades it became slow and cumbersome. Tagging a track would always revert which annoyed me greatly, it's not a loss to the Linux community that the developers of Songbird have ceased making a Linux version. Essentially Songbird was just a music player with a browser.

northwestuntu
April 4th, 2010, 09:48 PM
i loved the layout to it, but it was superbloated! not to big of a loss, so many good apps out there to move to.

northwestuntu
April 4th, 2010, 09:50 PM
can anyone suggest a player that has built in lyrics on the side like songbird?

PC_load_letter
April 4th, 2010, 10:59 PM
can anyone suggest a player that has built in lyrics on the side like songbird?

Exaile has a lyrics plugin.

arnab_das
April 4th, 2010, 11:31 PM
so what happens now? does songbird website alongwith its add ons become dysfunctional or something? or is it a dormancy stage?

kelvin spratt
April 4th, 2010, 11:55 PM
Exaile is a fine player and fast with it also plays and Rips CD.
Never liked songbird.

Docaltmed
April 5th, 2010, 02:11 AM
Banshee FTW.

chriswyatt
April 5th, 2010, 02:38 AM
"Songbird Singing A New Tune"

"Songbird Flies The Nest" might have been a more appropriate title.

victor9098
April 5th, 2010, 02:48 AM
can anyone suggest a player that has built in lyrics on the side like songbird?

Banshee has a good lyrics plugin, so does does Amarok and Rhythmbox but that is complicated (right click song, then properties...).

victor9098
April 5th, 2010, 03:14 AM
"Songbird Singing A New Tune"

"Songbird Flies The Nest" might have been a more appropriate title.

:lolflag:

Kyran
April 5th, 2010, 04:12 AM
I felt a little sad for the users of PPC when Songbird dropped support for them, I had no idea they've come for us next!

Sure, Linux has plenty of better alternatives, but not all of them are cross platform.

ericmc783
April 5th, 2010, 04:13 AM
i liked songbird. although now i use banshee

ve4cib
April 5th, 2010, 05:33 AM
Meh? I honestly never even knew there was a Linux version of it. I use it at work under Windows because it was the most Rhythmbox-like player I could find, but it always seemed like a second-rate clone of a good application to me.

So put me firmly in the "this will not affect me in the slightest" category. Still, it's always a touch sad when an open-source project discontinues a branch due to a lack of developers.

amitabhishek
April 5th, 2010, 05:40 AM
I liked Songbird!!! Pity on them!

BTW why can't they drop the browser part and continue developing the media player. This will probably take off some load from their rag-tag development team. Who uses their browser anyways!?

mathspeedy
April 5th, 2010, 05:49 AM
The browser is just useless, it takes memory, CPU and time...](*,)
I've used songbird before and I never used the browser.[-(
They should had just work on the player part, because I was experiencing a lot of bugs...:mad:

J_Stanton
April 5th, 2010, 06:38 AM
vlc ftw.

toupeiro
April 5th, 2010, 07:18 AM
It's an interesting decision. Open Source is not always synonymous with Linux. There is plenty of room for Open Source to thrive on Windows. Frankly, I think there should be more of it on the windows platform. If the project gets enough steam behind it, perhaps they can cross-compile it again. Just because their developers happen to be able to turn around code on windows faster and less problematically does not make them "rag-tag developers." There are not many projects I can think of that totally switched gears like this, but best of luck to them with their project.

Paqman
April 5th, 2010, 11:59 AM
in that blog post of theirs they gave absolutely no valid reasons whatsoever for stopping the linux counterpart of the app.


Er, yes they did. They've only got limited resources. Clearly they weighed the man-hours it took to support against the install base and decided it wasn't worth their time.

It's a shame for Linux users, but good news for open source fans on Windows and Mac, as they'll benefit from the extra resources Songbird will have for them.

northwestuntu
April 5th, 2010, 04:18 PM
I liked Songbird!!! Pity on them!

BTW why can't they drop the browser part and continue developing the media player. This will probably take off some load from their rag-tag development team. Who uses their browser anyways!?

agreed! i have no use for the browser. maybe someone will keep working on the media part of it. songbird lite maybe?

northwestuntu
April 5th, 2010, 04:19 PM
Banshee has a good lyrics plugin, so does does Amarok and Rhythmbox but that is complicated (right click song, then properties...).

can you have it built in to a frame instead of a popup? i keep getting the popup lyrics.

aklo
April 5th, 2010, 04:20 PM
Songbird can be something big, but trying to be everything is a fail.

Like others here, i strongly disagree why they need to have a build in browser....do people actually use songbird to browse ?

The next thing we know they have a songbird anti virus.

Edit:
Some credits to songbird , it is the only player that supports chinese characters in linux.
I've tried rhythmbox/vlc and some titles displays correctly but some just shows up weird.

Simian Man
April 5th, 2010, 04:38 PM
The reason Songbird had a browser is because it's based on Mozilla and the Xulrunner platform. It does't include a browesr, it is a browser.

As for them dropping Linux support, I am sure that if enough people care enough about it, then Songbird will get some new contributors willing to put in the time needed to support Linux. I personally don't care about it.

dazer26
April 6th, 2010, 12:34 AM
It just doesn't make sense, when their Linux user base is slightly larger than their Mac user base, why drop linux? I also don't get why a mac user would use Songbird instead of itunes? The whole point of getting a mac is cause everything works seamlessly out of the box and you don't have to download a hodgepodge of random programs off the net (like windows). The latest version of songbird was actually not too bad on Linux, still a bit of bloat and lag, but I liked it. I love programs that have skins and plugins, cause I get bored easily. It's true tho that the web browser was useless, and the next version was supposed to support videos, I have other better programs for that thanks. I already deleted songbird, Amarok2 works pretty damn good (finally!) and will do just fine.

kaitwospirit
April 6th, 2010, 02:24 AM
I like the browser in the context of downloading music - on any page with mp3s you can just click on the bar at the bottom of the screen for each track that you want. I didn't use it for general browsing but it's great for music browsing. I don't feel like it's bloated.

chrisinspace
April 6th, 2010, 02:01 PM
I like the browser in the context of downloading music - on any page with mp3s you can just click on the bar at the bottom of the screen for each track that you want. I didn't use it for general browsing but it's great for music browsing. I don't feel like it's bloated.

This was the key thing that differentiated Songbird and the main reason I used it. There is a wealth of music blogs out there. They are a great way to discover new artists or keep up with the ones you like. Songbird's browser added a new level of interaction with these sights. As a media player, it was always just ok, but as a way to consume online audio, it was great. This project had a lot of potential, but I think its days are numbered with the current strategy. I don't say this because they have abandoned the Linux community but because they continue to diverge further and further from their one unique feature and try to become another iTunes/WMP. I do wish them luck, but until they come back to us, I'm done with them on all platforms. ):P

chrisinspace
April 6th, 2010, 02:34 PM
I have never sworn on these forums before but seriously Mozilla? **** you.

Don’t bash Mozilla. They had nothing to with this. Songbird uses their source code because it is open source, but Mozilla has no influence over the decisions of Pioneers of the Inevitable (PoTI), the company that makes Songbird. I have seen this type of backlash against Mozilla in other forums as well, but it is not warranted. They have always provided full support to Linux and given us the full-featured browser with no feature-lag, unlike Songbird. Please don’t let PoTI’s abandonment of the Open Source community drag Mozilla’s name through the mud.

ubunterooster
April 6th, 2010, 03:36 PM
The Zunes! How else will Zune playing linux users be able to connect their player to linux without that important add-on only in songbird. Maybe it is good the magnets on my cowon D2+ killed my zune's drive.

All good songs come to an end.

♪♭♪

cph05a
April 6th, 2010, 05:29 PM
Like others here, i strongly disagree why they need to have a build in browser....do people actually use songbird to browse ?

I'm not sure if this why they built it in a browser, but earlier versions of songbird came with a link to skreemr which allowed you to easily download music in an iTunes-like style, except for free (probably illegally).

nothingspecial
April 6th, 2010, 06:20 PM
can anyone suggest a player that has built in lyrics on the side like songbird?

Guayadeque does lyrics.

ubunterooster
April 6th, 2010, 06:33 PM
@cph05a: It was built around the flexible mozzila engine, so it only made sense to have browsing.

northwestuntu
April 6th, 2010, 08:41 PM
Guayadeque does lyrics.

yeah i checked out that program and it looks good, but still you have to tab over to see the lyrics.

i think this is the best music layout. anyone know of a program that's pretty close to this?

sixstorm
April 6th, 2010, 09:40 PM
Songbird has sucked since the iPod plugin stopped development.

nothingspecial
April 6th, 2010, 10:01 PM
yeah i checked out that program and it looks good, but still you have to tab over to see the lyrics.

i think this is the best music layout. anyone know of a program that's pretty close to this?

You can ask the developer for feature requests and report bugs here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1380811).

I have never known an excellent app, such as this, with such access to the head developer. If there is something you like or have a problem with, tell him. As long as it doesn`t conflict with the "prime directive", which is to be a fast, lightweight music player for large collections; he will do something about it.

Trust me, I know.

northwestuntu
April 6th, 2010, 11:03 PM
thanks for the link. it does look the most promising out of all the music apps.

oldsoundguy
April 7th, 2010, 12:17 AM
Guayadeque is beginning to look more than good. Think I will pull it down and run it on my test box when I can get some time.
IF it shakes out (as it looks like it will) you will get my vote. MY issues have always been SOUND FIRST and ease of control modification. (music cataloging was and is not as important, nor are lyric displays and a lot of the added bells and whistles .. if the speakers can't sing and dance .. care NOT about what rides in with the program!)
(think my nic reflects that!)

nothingspecial
April 7th, 2010, 12:30 AM
Guayadeque is beginning to look more than good. Think I will pull it down and run it on my test box when I can get some time.
IF it shakes out (as it looks like it will) you will get my vote. MY issues have always been SOUND FIRST and ease of control modification. (music cataloging was and is not as important, nor are lyric displays and a lot of the added bells and whistles .. if the speakers can't sing and dance .. care NOT about what rides in with the program!)
(think my nic reflects that!)

The thing is, Guayadeque is not out of alpha yet and it has been my player for 2 months +.

Yes, I`m a Guayadeque advocate, but then I`ve been testing it, reporting bugs (which have been fixed), and requesting features (which have been implemented).

I`m lucky to have been (slightly) involved in a project that is going to be huge.

If you are looking for a music player and nothing available fits the bill, get in now.Anon, the developer, is still looking for ideas,

Someone requested new buttons a few weeks ago. It was posted on omgubuntu.
There were many entries. The winners set are now the default Guayadeqe buttons.

This is something YOU can have a say in. Get in now because, soon, this is going to be too big to have a say in. Tell the developer while you can!

anonbeat
April 7th, 2010, 10:38 AM
yeah i checked out that program and it looks good, but still you have to tab over to see the lyrics.

i think this is the best music layout. anyone know of a program that's pretty close to this?

You can rearrange the elements to fit your needs. See capture

nothingspecial
April 7th, 2010, 11:04 AM
Told you so. :guitar:

temenex
April 7th, 2010, 11:06 AM
http://getnightingale.org/
http://getnightingale.org/forum/index.php


:guitar:

xir_
April 7th, 2010, 01:53 PM
http://getnightingale.org/
http://getnightingale.org/forum/index.php


:guitar:

Their ideas are quite good.

like no internal dependencies, use system libraries by default. This should improve its performance.

medic2000
April 7th, 2010, 03:33 PM
Peh it was bloated as they said before. There is no loss for Linux. And i am using gmusicbrowser i dont care with songbird.

northwestuntu
April 7th, 2010, 05:26 PM
You can rearrange the elements to fit your needs. See capture


oh sweet! thanks for that.

ToxicBurn
May 2nd, 2010, 04:24 AM
Looks like Songbird Sold out to Windows.


After careful consideration, we’ve come to the painful conclusion that we should discontinue support for the Linux version of Songbird. Some of you may wonder how a company with deep roots in Open Source could drop Linux and we want you to know it isn’t without heartache.
 We have a small engineering team here at Songbird, and, more than ever, must stay very focused on a narrow set of priorities. Trying to deliver a raft of new features around all media types, and across a growing list of devices, we had to make some tough choices.

While our Linux users are some of the most passionate, do some killer development, and always provide tremendous input as to whether we’re on the right path or not, we simply can’t continue to support a Linux version as we have in the past.

And, like you, we can’t stand to see our Linux product be anything less than outstanding. Unfortunately, we can’t make that happen right now. Trade-offs are hard, and this is one of the most painful decisions in the history of the company.

We remain loyal to Linux and the ideology it represents, so we will maintain a version of the software for use by our Songbird engineers who develop on the Linux platform. We’ll make that version available to the community. We will keep Linux build bots and host the Linux builds on the developer wiki. That said, those builds will not be tested and may not pick up new features developed by Songbird’s team.

When we roll out NOFX for Windows and Mac at the end of the month, you’ll see video support – import, library management and full screen playback. We are also working on full compatibility with Windows 7 as well as support for a range of new handsets.

jetsam
May 10th, 2010, 05:25 PM
...not just to windows. This is just a gut reaction, but it seems more like "Compromised idealism in order to get more than a foot in the door of the gigantic media landscape pie factory." In 60's terms, they sold out.

Looks like there's a fork in the works.

newbie2
May 13th, 2010, 01:14 PM
UPDATED 4/5/2010 @ 2:22 pm PST

To those who voiced their disappointment and retained a civil tone, we
empathize with you. We appreciate all of the passion from the community, we again want to re-iterate that this was a very tough decision for us. We want to clarify a couple of points:

* Songbird remains open source. The code is mirrored from our working tree and available at http://publicsvn.songbirdnest.com/
* We are maintaining our Linux build infrastructure and will ensure that it continues to compile and run the unit-test suite. http://buildbot.songbirdnest.com/
* Nightly Linux builds will remain available at http://developer.songbirdnest.com/builds/trunk/latest/
* We have in house developers that use Linux every day and they will keep developing Songbird on Linux.
http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/7450/schermafdrukx.png (http://img198.imageshack.us/i/schermafdrukx.png/)

http://blog.songbirdnest.com/2010/04/02/songbird-singing-a-new-tune/

:(:rolleyes:

bash
May 13th, 2010, 01:53 PM
http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/7450/schermafdrukx.png (http://img198.imageshack.us/i/schermafdrukx.png/)

http://blog.songbirdnest.com/2010/04/02/songbird-singing-a-new-tune/

:(:rolleyes:

So wait, they put up that nice image with the table to give "additional perspective about out decision". When I look at that table I see that Linux users make up the second largest user base with 10.9% just in front of Mac and supply a quarter of all translation work. Yeah really sounds like the kind of users I wouldn't want :rolleyes:

astrobot
May 13th, 2010, 02:04 PM
The source is available though right? Why not fork it now and continue supporting a Linux only version seperately?


I honestly don't think it's good enough to be considered that someone would spend time to make a fork.

Ylon
May 13th, 2010, 03:57 PM
I do remember my preferred browser with Linux was firebird; once they started Linux had even less than the 1%

Now Mozilla is considering the global share in times where more and more companies are involved with Linux?

northwestuntu
May 13th, 2010, 05:21 PM
i found guayadeque to be much better then songbird ever was.

songbird is way to bloated.

later songbird movin on! :)

Frenske
June 30th, 2010, 03:42 PM
RIP Songbird was the slickest looking media player on Linux. Aesthetics has little to do with functionality, but for some people including me, it is important. It is a media player meant for entertainment, and not a spread sheet program, for Pete's sake. Yes that is how I see most other Linux media players.

I hope that some people make a fork out of it and focus it totally on making it a media player for Linux. Get rid of the browser stuff; trim it, rid it from unnecessary libraries and put it on a diet.

Redo
June 30th, 2010, 04:38 PM
Exaile is miles better than Songbird. The iTunes/Songbird interface is terrible.


The only media player I want on linux is foobar2000. Exaile comes close for pure music management, but for some reason it won't allow me to sort by folder structure, only by tags (I hate sorting by tags).