Banshee vs Amarok

[elliotn]

I want one Media player to use and get rid of bluemido and rhytm box and totem. Which should I go for. Banshee or Amarok and why.

[billgoldberg]

I want one Media player to use and get rid of bluemido and rhytm box and totem. Which should I go for. Banshee or Amarok and why.

Of those 2 I prefer Banshee.

Not only because I don't like pulling in all those dependencies Amarok requires, but because it's too slow with a big music library.

[armageddon08]

Of those 2 I prefer Banshee.

Not only because I don't like pulling in all those dependencies Amarok requires, but because it's too slow with a big music library.

+1 although you could try out exaile.

[airtonix]

banshee does video now too.

currently only lets you specify one folder for the library to update from, would be good if it provided multiple palces to create a library from.

[bigbrovar]

If u had asked this question like 2 years ago before support for amarok 1.x was dropped i ( and majority of others) would have picked amarok. amarok was everything u ever want in a music player, it has everything for everybody's taste. it can be simple and just work or u can extend its muscle by giving it an external database engine like MySQL or Postgres. it can also be extended by the use of scripts that does everything under the sun. and probably supports must portable mp3 players under the sun. such was the greatness or Amarok that the developers (probably jealous or its fame) decided to cripple it by introducing a newer version that closely followed the windows xp to windows vista tradition as far as upgrading is concerned. oh well time to stop living in the past.. right now i use good ol Rhythmbox (even that is no longer supported anymore) but if am told to choose between banshee and the new amarok.. i would pick banshee. heck i would pick my grandmother singing to me over the new amarok

[hyperdude111]

I voted banshee but you can try songbird it is quite good.

[Skripka]

Of those 2 I prefer Banshee.

Not only because I don't like pulling in all those dependencies Amarok requires, but because it's too slow with a big music library.

On Arch, Banshee actually has more dependencies.


Amarok2 would win, if it could play CDs.

[wersdaluv]

I'm a Rhythmbox boy now :)

[geoken]

If u had asked this question like 2 years ago before support for amarok 1.x was dropped i ( and majority of others) would have picked amarok. amarok was everything u ever want in a music player, it has everything for everybody's taste. it can be simple and just work or u can extend its muscle by giving it an external database engine like MySQL or Postgres. it can also be extended by the use of scripts that does everything under the sun. and probably supports must portable mp3 players under the sun. such was the greatness or Amarok that the developers (probably jealous or its fame) decided to cripple it by introducing a newer version that closely followed the windows xp to windows vista tradition as far as upgrading is concerned. oh well time to stop living in the past.. right now i use good ol Rhythmbox (even that is no longer supported anymore) but if am told to choose between banshee and the new amarok.. i would pick banshee. heck i would pick my grandmother singing to me over the new amarok


When you re-write something from the ground up, during it's intermediate phases, it will obviously be less feature packed than the previous version. It never ceases to amaze me how this completely obvious fact escapes so many people who go on to make outlandish claims like "Amarok 2 is intentionally crippled because the devs are jealous of Amarok's fame". I'm still trying to figure out how the previous quote makes any sense. Usually when people are jealous of something it motivates them to surpass it, not willfully be inferior to it.

[abhilashm86]

if u want only audio player, try mocp
its terminal based light weight audio player


sudo apt-get install moc

http://moc.daper.net/
check it for much details........i just use this moc always :)

[Sealbhach]

I hear the Bean Sí every night.:-o


.

[cdwillis]

I recently tried Amarok2, didn't care for that and went back to Rhythmbox. I just started using Banshee though and like it better. Rhythmbox was giving me funny problems (with regards to the window size) on my netbook.

I'm still not sure if I like depending on Mono based apps (using Gnome-Do as well).:popcorn:

[Swarms]

Banshee

[So Tough]

:D Amarok by a country mile

[doorknob60]

Amarok 1.4. 2.0 isn't ready yet IMO, but it's progressing nicely. For now I'm using Exaile and I'm extremely satisfied. It's GTK as well, so no need for KDE libs (doesn't bother me, but it bothers some people). Banshee never worked well at all for me.

[SuperSonic4]

If u had asked this question like 2 years ago before support for amarok 1.x was dropped i ( and majority of others) would have picked amarok. amarok was everything u ever want in a music player, it has everything for everybody's taste. it can be simple and just work or u can extend its muscle by giving it an external database engine like MySQL or Postgres. it can also be extended by the use of scripts that does everything under the sun. and probably supports must portable mp3 players under the sun. such was the greatness or Amarok that the developers (probably jealous or its fame) decided to cripple it by introducing a newer version that closely followed the windows xp to windows vista tradition as far as upgrading is concerned. oh well time to stop living in the past.. right now i use good ol Rhythmbox (even that is no longer supported anymore) but if am told to choose between banshee and the new amarok.. i would pick banshee. heck i would pick my grandmother singing to me over the new amarok

Couldn't have put it better myself. Amarok 1.4.x should still be in the intrepid repos it came with Kubuntu 8.10 but Jaunty is replacing it with 2 which is the sole reason I'm not upgrading to jaunty

moc is an excellent cli player too

[zekopeko]

I recently tried Amarok2, didn't care for that and went back to Rhythmbox. I just started using Banshee though and like it better. Rhythmbox was giving me funny problems (with regards to the window size) on my netbook.

I'm still not sure if I like depending on Mono based apps (using Gnome-Do as well).:popcorn:

try maximus windows manager/daemon. it's part of the ubuntu netbook remix. really nice and simple windows management on a small screen.

https://launchpad.net/maximus

and please stop worrying about mono and enjoy the great apps that are written with it.

[Sonique]

Amarok 2. I like really like it, and yes it needs lots more work but it seems like it has been set up to be very open to extra features in the future.

[cdwillis]

try maximus windows manager/daemon. it's part of the ubuntu netbook remix. really nice and simple windows management on a small screen.

https://launchpad.net/maximus

and please stop worrying about mono and enjoy the great apps that are written with it.

I actually think maximus might be what is causing me grief with the rhythmbox window

[zekopeko]

I actually think maximus might be what is causing me grief with the rhythmbox window

the report a bug and make it better :D

[chriskin]

+1 although you could try out exaile.


as said, exaile i rather better than both, for my needs at least

[sheshdd]

i'm an audacious freak for the moment,i did try Amarok but it made my system run less smoothly than usual,wich is unacceptable for a cool guy like me.as for banshee i didn't really find anything really good about it.

[bigbrovar]

When you re-write something from the ground up, during it's intermediate phases, it will obviously be less feature packed than the previous version. It never ceases to amaze me how this completely obvious fact escapes so many people who go on to make outlandish claims like "Amarok 2 is intentionally crippled because the devs are jealous of Amarok's fame". I'm still trying to figure out how the previous quote makes any sense. Usually when people are jealous of something it motivates them to surpass it, not willfully be inferior to it.

u cant blame me .. i just couldnt figure out why in Gods name anyone would feel that amarok1.x needs a rewrite .. which would be better a rewrite or an improvement on existing code that and was loved.. why .. i think about this alot.. nothing seem to make sense.. and the jealous theory is just a way to make sense of it all.. why a rewrite? .. i mean why?.. if u are going to do a rewrite at least take some things from what made the old amarok a killer app.. just look at the interface of the new amarok and u would see that the amarok devs are out of touch with their users.