I feel like a traitor

[deancasino]

I love Songbird, I really do, I even bought some shirts (They are awesome by the way) but I recently discovered Banshee, and well it's just so well developed in comparison.

I think I am going to switch, sadly. The thing is does Banshee crash a lot? If so, that will break the deal for me and send me running home to Songbird to confess my sins and beg forgiveness.

[-grubby]

Banshee does not crash a lot. Though, you could have answered that yourself by running it.

[ad_267]

Banshee > Songbird. :D

[deancasino]

Though, you could have answered that yourself by running it.

I do not care for such trivial pursuits sir!

[SunnyRabbiera]

Well to be fair Songbird is still new compared to Banshee.
Banshee came onto the scene in 05, and Songbird in 06.
One years worth of development can make a lot of progress.

[RichardLinx]

One years worth of development can make a lot of progress.
Indeed, this is why KDE will forever be better than GNOME.

On topic, you only now just discovered Banshee? That's insane. With the amount of media players available for Linux and how often Banshee is recommended to be made the default music player for Ubuntu, well, you get the idea..

But yes, I too prefer Banshee over Songbird (Songbird is nice though). And I prefer Rhythmbox over Banshee... The cycle continues. Also, Banshee is extremely stable in my experience.

[murderslastcrow]

Banshee rocks. I think it should replace Rhythmbox. There was even an iTunes store plugin for Banshee, not sure if it still works, but it was quite revolutionary for a time.

Banshee is fast, stable, and will soon be getting an even more aesthetically appealing interface targeted towards netbooks. I used to use Songbird and used the Native Feathers to get it working with compiz, but Banshee really does offer a ton of great options, and it has polish. Banshee is the iTunes killer, in my humble opinion. (well, what isn't better than iTunes?)

[deancasino]

(well, what isn't better than iTunes?)

Amen brohiem!

[ad_267]

Indeed, this is why KDE will forever be better than GNOME.

Heh, well to be fair KDE 4.x was like starting all over again. I don't know how much code was retained from KDE 3 though. I'm thinking of switching to OpenSUSE with the release of 11.2 by the way, still trying to decide between Ubuntu 9.10, Kubuntu and OpenSUSE.

Back on topic:
One thing that puts me off Songbird is that the Linux support feels a bit behind other platforms. There's no support for MTP devices on Linux for example, only Windows, although I realise is only an issue for a small proportion of people.

[siimo]

Banshee is developed using mono/.NET so it does have a lot of haters just like Tomboy and whatever other mono apps.

But for someone like me who does .NET development as a day job, i welcome it with open arms. :popcorn:

Perhaps one day i will look at the code and contribute.

[deancasino]

Back on topic:
One thing that puts me off Songbird is that the Linux support feels a bit behind other platforms. There's no support for MTP devices on Linux for example, only Windows, although I realise is only an issue for a small proportion of people.

Not as small as one would think, it is a common topic among work colleges and friends alike, unprompted mind you.

[FuturePilot]

Banshee > Songbird. :D

This

[3rdalbum]

Does Songbird run on an 8.9inch netbook without jumping up and down on the screen whenever you click it?

[hanzomon4]

(well, what isn't better than iTunes?)

What's wrong with iTunes?

[deancasino]

What's wrong with iTunes?
Well since you asked:

Hardware requirements:



A PC with a 1GHz Intel or AMD processor
Intel Pentium D or faster processor is required to play Standard Definition video from the iTunes Store
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo or faster processor is required to play HD video, an iTunes LP, or an iTunes Extras from the iTunes Store
512MB of RAM; 1GB is required to play HD video, an iTunes LP, or an iTunes Extras
Screen resolution of 1024x768 or greater; 1280x800 or greater is required to play an iTunes LP or iTunes Extras
DirectX 9.0-compatible video card with 32MB of video RAM; 64MB recommended
QuickTime-compatible audio card


Software requirements:



Windows XP Service Pack 2 or later, or 32-bit editions of Windows Vista
QuickTime 7.6.4 (included) - Oh good! Extra programs I'll never use!
200MB of available disk space - This amazingly was listed in software requirements? Good one itunes...

[directhex]

Does Songbird run on an 8.9inch netbook without jumping up and down on the screen whenever you click it?

There's a netbook-specific UI in development. Not in Karmic, though

[Tibuda]

Indeed, this is why KDE will forever be better than GNOME.

really cool story bro


What's wrong with iTunes?

Don't have a native Linux version.


On topic: Banshee is really cool, but I still prefer QuodLibet. I don't know why you are a traitor if you find a new app you like.

[Johnsie]

I don't really like either... I'd rather have my music stored on 'the cloud' so I can access it wherever I go. Something like Spotify would be nice if it wasn't so restricted. It's got a great GUI and with a few extra features would definitely be a good media player.

[RichardLinx]

really cool story bro
Did I hurt the GNOME fanboy's feelings? :(

[Tibuda]

Did I hurt the GNOME fanboy's feelings? :(

I don't use Gnome. You were the fanboy with that statement.

[RiceMonster]

My biggest gripe with Banshee is you cannot select multiple directories for your music library and symlinks don't work either. This is a deal breaker for me.

[RichardLinx]

I don't use Gnome. You were the fanboy.
Guess I was, sorry for the provocative post.

[pwnst*r]

Well since you asked:

Hardware requirements:



A PC with a 1GHz Intel or AMD processor
Intel Pentium D or faster processor is required to play Standard Definition video from the iTunes Store
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo or faster processor is required to play HD video, an iTunes LP, or an iTunes Extras from the iTunes Store
512MB of RAM; 1GB is required to play HD video, an iTunes LP, or an iTunes Extras
Screen resolution of 1024x768 or greater; 1280x800 or greater is required to play an iTunes LP or iTunes Extras
DirectX 9.0-compatible video card with 32MB of video RAM; 64MB recommended
QuickTime-compatible audio card


Software requirements:



Windows XP Service Pack 2 or later, or 32-bit editions of Windows Vista
QuickTime 7.6.4 (included) - Oh good! Extra programs I'll never use!
200MB of available disk space - This amazingly was listed in software requirements? Good one itunes...


which most people have. those that cling to their 7 year old hardware i have to laugh at. it's technology people, it advances.

[RichardLinx]

which most people have. those that cling to their 7 year old hardware i have to laugh at. it's technology people, it advances.

Yeah, and you need decent hardware (like what's listed in iTunes requirements) to view HD video at a steady frame rate anyway.

[hoppipolla]

I love Songbird, I really do, I even bought some shirts (They are awesome by the way) but I recently discovered Banshee, and well it's just so well developed in comparison.

I think I am going to switch, sadly. The thing is does Banshee crash a lot? If so, that will break the deal for me and send me running home to Songbird to confess my sins and beg forgiveness.

I know what you mean. On paper love Songbird - it's fully featured and powerful with a cool name and cool branding. But something about it just doesn't appeal to me. I much prefer Amarok and Banshee :)

[RichardLinx]

I know what you mean. On paper love Songbird - it's fully featured and powerful with a cool name and cool branding. But something about it just doesn't appeal to me. I much prefer Amarok and Banshee :)

+1 to Amarok.

[hoppipolla]

which most people have. those that cling to their 7 year old hardware i have to laugh at. it's technology people, it advances.

lol yeah good point. Ideally though I wouldn't have to upgrade for a LONG time! I love this lil pc it's a trooper xD

I love the fact that I'm never forced to upgrade with Linux, or at least to nowhere near the same extent as commercial OSs :)

[Eisenwinter]

lol yeah good point. Ideally though I wouldn't have to upgrade for a LONG time! I love this lil pc it's a trooper xD

I love the fact that I'm never forced to upgrade with Linux, or at least to nowhere near the same extent as commercial OSs :)
You're not forced to upgrade with Windows either. As far as programs go, well, you can choose not to update them.

As far as the OS itself goes, Windows XP (the currently most used OS in the world) is supported until 2014.

By 2014, XP will be 13 years old, so ending support for it is a logical move. Most people will probably be on at least Windows 7 by that time anyway.

[RichardLinx]

lol yeah good point. Ideally though I wouldn't have to upgrade for a LONG time! I love this lil pc it's a trooper xD

I love the fact that I'm never forced to upgrade with Linux, or at least to nowhere near the same extent as commercial OSs :)

Windows XP has been supported for like 9 years, that's pretty darn good if you ask me. Even a cheap fool like me wouldn't neglect to get a new PC after 9 years. :)

[hoppipolla]

You're not forced to upgrade with Windows either. As far as programs go, well, you can choose not to update them.

As far as the OS itself goes, Windows XP (the currently most used OS in the world) is supported until 2014.

By 2014, XP will be 13 years old, so ending support for it is a logical move. Most people will probably be on at least Windows 7 by that time anyway.

But Windows XP sucks ***. lol

[RiceMonster]

But Windows XP sucks ***. lol

Nah. It's rock solid IMO.

[hoppipolla]

Nah. It's rock solid IMO.

Yeah but it sends me to snore-ville.. lol

[pwnst*r]

Yeah but it sends me to snore-ville.. lol

wth is that supposed to mean other than "i don't like MS at all, look at me!!"

[hoppipolla]

wth is that supposed to mean other than "i don't like MS at all, look at me!!"

what I mean is that you can get a far more interesting and dynamic OS going on older hardware with Ubuntu/Linux than is offered by Windows XP.

[Sand & Mercury]

I used Songbird for a time and I consider its interface to be second to none on Linux. The only reason I do not use it is because it is simply so slooooow. For that reason alone Rhythmbox wins out for me.

Never used Banshee. Rhythmbox sorts my library and plays my music, that's all I require.

[pwnst*r]

what I mean is that you can get a far more interesting and dynamic OS going on older hardware with Ubuntu/Linux than is offered by Windows XP.

sure, if you're a nerd. most people don't want a dynamic or interesting OS, they just want their crap to work for what they do. damn, how many times does one have to say that?

[hoppipolla]

sure, if you're a nerd. most people don't want a dynamic or interesting OS, they just want their crap to work for what they do. damn, how many times does one have to say that?

whatever man. lol


I used Songbird for a time and I consider its interface to be second to none on Linux. The only reason I do not use it is because it is simply so slooooow. For that reason alone Rhythmbox wins out for me.

Never used Banshee. Rhythmbox sorts my library and plays my music, that's all I require.

Yeah I found Songbird kinda slow too. It's just not my thing, it seems to have it's fans though so it clearly appeals to a certain kind of user :)

[pwnst*r]

whatever man. lol





well thought out reply, bravo!

[Warpnow]

There's a songbird for linux? Wow.

Why would anyone use it? One of my favorite parts about linux when I switched was actually having a good music program.

[hoppipolla]

There's a songbird for linux? Wow.

Why would anyone use it? One of my favorite parts about linux when I switched was actually having a good music program.

oh no man see that's gonna ignite a FIRE lol xD

There's this big Amarok Vs Foobar debate going on now which I have been involved in before with a friend of mine!

Whatever, it's just music guys... as long as Amarok installs quick and works well I can listen to my music and I'm happy.

[BackwardsDown]

There's a songbird for linux? Wow.
Why would anyone use it?
Because I like it more than any other music-player, just like Firefox.

[pwnst*r]

There's a songbird for linux? Wow.

Why would anyone use it? One of my favorite parts about linux when I switched was actually having a good music program.

lol, troll

[hoppipolla]

lol, troll

come on man you have a go at me and then you post things like that.

Even I acknowledge that when people say something with all honesty like Warpnow did, there must be REASONS why they have said it.

In this case, Linux's more ambitious players really are more accessible than Foobar. I had no IDEA Foobar was even skinnable.

As for Songbird, the interface just doesn't appeal to everyone. Both Amarok and Banshee offer complete, quick-to-install packages that are well-integrated with their target DEs. Foobar really does look good in some ways don't get me wrong, but these points still stand.

[zekopeko]

Well to be fair Songbird is still new compared to Banshee.
Banshee came onto the scene in 05, and Songbird in 06.
One years worth of development can make a lot of progress.

This isn't exactly correct.
Banshee did come in the scene in '05 but the 1.x series was released in 07/08 (not sure). It was pretty much a complete rewrite of the platform.

[zekopeko]

FYI

There is a Banshee version for Windows in development. Can't wait to have a decent music player on Windows.

[Warpnow]

lol, troll

Yeah, I hung around on this forum for four years waiting for he chance to poke fun at a seldom used or discussed music manager.

I never liked music applications in windows. iTunes was annoying and buggy, not to mention ate resources. Songbird seemed to be more an OS version of iTunes than its own player, and it crashed on me all the time. Plus, its interface is not very exciting.

Then...I moved to linux. Way better music managers. Easier to use, more customizable...

I honestly didn't even realize Songbird was compiled for linux, given that all the distros I've tried come with different ones, and I've never felt the need to go back to it.

I used to think Songbird was iTunes for people who didn't want to run iTunes.

[pwnst*r]

come on man you have a go at me and then you post things like that.



a go at you? i proved that you were incorrect in your assumptions. that's certainly not trolling. i'm not saying in never troll, i admit that, but i do it when extreme biased opinions rear their ugly head, regardless of which OS the fanboi is gloating about.

[hoppipolla]

a go at you? i proved that you were incorrect in your assumptions. that's certainly not trolling. i'm not saying in never troll, i admit that, but i do it when extreme biased opinions rear their ugly head, regardless of which OS the fanboi is gloating about.

i'm not biased o.O

[pwnst*r]

Yeah, I hung around on this forum for four years waiting for he chance to poke fun at a seldom used or discussed music manager.

I never liked music applications in windows. iTunes was annoying and buggy, not to mention ate resources. Songbird seemed to be more an OS version of iTunes than its own player, and it crashed on me all the time. Plus, its interface is not very exciting.

Then...I moved to linux. Way better music managers. Easier to use, more customizable...

I honestly didn't even realize Songbird was compiled for linux, given that all the distros I've tried come with different ones, and I've never felt the need to go back to it.

I used to think Songbird was iTunes for people who didn't want to run iTunes.

what i'm saying is that it sounds like you used a couple of music managers within windows. hardly a non-biased viewpoint then.

[pwnst*r]

i'm not biased o.O

i wasn't pointing fingers, but actually, yes you are.

[hoppipolla]

i wasn't pointing fingers, but actually, yes you are.

no i'm not. and you don't actually know me well enough to make an assumption like that o.O

[RiceMonster]

no i'm not. and you don't actually know me well enough to make an assumption like that o.O

You don't need to know someone on a personal level to see that they're biased.

[hoppipolla]

You don't need to know someone on a personal level to see that they're biased.

I chose Amarok because it's more IMMEDIATELY good-looking, functional and powerful. Same goes for Banshee. I fully admit that Foobar looks good. Where is the bias?

[sudoer541]

Indeed, this is why KDE will forever be better than GNOME.

On topic, you only now just discovered Banshee? That's insane. With the amount of media players available for Linux and how often Banshee is recommended to be made the default music player for Ubuntu, well, you get the idea..

But yes, I too prefer Banshee over Songbird (Songbird is nice though). And I prefer Rhythmbox over Banshee... The cycle continues. Also, Banshee is extremely stable in my experience.

I thought rythmbox was already replaced by banshee

[directhex]

I thought rythmbox was already replaced by banshee

Blocking bugs weren't fixed in time. So Rhythmbox stays for karmic

[pwnst*r]

I chose Amarok because it's more IMMEDIATELY good-looking, functional and powerful. Same goes for Banshee. I fully admit that Foobar looks good. Where is the bias?

i'm talking about you being OS biased, which will directly reflect your opinion on software within.

[hoppipolla]

i'm talking about you being OS biased, which will directly reflect your opinion on software within.

I am not OS biased though. I fully acknowledge when Windows or OSX do something right, and I often even discuss why it doesn't exist in Linux or if it can be implemented.

i PREFER Linux personally and thoroughly support it, but I try to make sure I give credit where it's due to all OSs and I am not biased :)

[pwnst*r]

i don't have the inclination to pull examples off of your previous posts, but "ok".

[Eddie Wilson]

What's wrong with being bias kids?

[pwnst*r]

What's wrong with being bias kids?

try again?

[Tipped OuT]

What's wrong with being bias kids?

Well it's pretty hard to have an intelligent debate about software and OS's with someone that's biased. Why? Because no matter what you say, what facts you give, that person will still think Linux is better (or Windows or Mac). Then the entire debate will be point less.

[hoppipolla]

Well it's pretty hard to have an intelligent debate about software and OS's with someone that's biased. Why? Because no matter what you say, what facts you give, that person will still think Linux is better (or Windows or Mac). Then the entire debate will be point less.

Thing is, I consistently think Linux is better in it's POTENTIAL. I consistently prefer it. But so long as you have real reasons for preferring something and give credit where it's due outside as well as inside your preference, you're not really biased.

I mean I know my signature says "KDE 4.3 makes Windows 7 look like a mistake!" and I also know there are areas where Windows 7 beats KDE. However, I was also referring to what KDE 4.3 represents as a project, and the ambitious nature of it's design.

Anyway, this is off-topic, but you see my point! :)

[hanzomon4]

Well since you asked:

Hardware requirements:



A PC with a 1GHz Intel or AMD processor
Intel Pentium D or faster processor is required to play Standard Definition video from the iTunes Store
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo or faster processor is required to play HD video, an iTunes LP, or an iTunes Extras from the iTunes Store
512MB of RAM; 1GB is required to play HD video, an iTunes LP, or an iTunes Extras
Screen resolution of 1024x768 or greater; 1280x800 or greater is required to play an iTunes LP or iTunes Extras
DirectX 9.0-compatible video card with 32MB of video RAM; 64MB recommended
QuickTime-compatible audio card


Software requirements:



Windows XP Service Pack 2 or later, or 32-bit editions of Windows Vista
QuickTime 7.6.4 (included) - Oh good! Extra programs I'll never use!
200MB of available disk space - This amazingly was listed in software requirements? Good one itunes...


In other words it's a great player but it won't run on crap.

[Tipped OuT]

Well since you asked:

Hardware requirements:



A PC with a 1GHz Intel or AMD processor
Intel Pentium D or faster processor is required to play Standard Definition video from the iTunes Store
2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo or faster processor is required to play HD video, an iTunes LP, or an iTunes Extras from the iTunes Store
512MB of RAM; 1GB is required to play HD video, an iTunes LP, or an iTunes Extras
Screen resolution of 1024x768 or greater; 1280x800 or greater is required to play an iTunes LP or iTunes Extras
DirectX 9.0-compatible video card with 32MB of video RAM; 64MB recommended
QuickTime-compatible audio card


Software requirements:



Windows XP Service Pack 2 or later, or 32-bit editions of Windows Vista
QuickTime 7.6.4 (included) - Oh good! Extra programs I'll never use!
200MB of available disk space - This amazingly was listed in software requirements? Good one itunes...


That made me laugh out loud. :D

[deancasino]

My biggest gripe with Banshee is you cannot select multiple directories for your music library and symlinks don't work either. This is a deal breaker for me.

WOW! Seriously?!

[deancasino]

Music player discussion guys!

Enough with the personal attacks! I'm running Banshee and yeah I think it's fantastic. Back in Windows days, I found itunes to be the biggest resource hog, and for a music player, it was huge, something like 110mb? <---- rough estimate


Anyway thanks for all of your help!

[the8thstar]

Indeed, this is why KDE will forever be better than GNOME.

Hahaha, here we go again...

[ericmc783]

having used both, i think they are both good.

I use banshee, but have nothing against songbird.

[wootah]

Well... due to the flame war between the two people, this thread has been pretty useless. It's just a music player. Use whatever works for you. It's like we have this discussion every week about everything :(

For me:

In Windows, I have a preference to use Winamp or if I'm feeling minimalist, Foobar.

With Ubuntu, I use the default music player, Rhythmbox. I'm not a fan of many of the default options (out of the box) especially the UI. It does what it is supposed to do though, plays music. I also find that its lack of configurable options to be a serious annoyance, but that's really a GNOME philsophy type debate--digressable.

To the person that mentioned Amarok, I love that player, but I don't like installing a crap ton of KDE libraries just for a music player--especially when I don't use/need any other KDE based software.

[hoppipolla]

Music player discussion guys!

Enough with the personal attacks! I'm running Banshee and yeah I think it's fantastic. Back in Windows days, I found itunes to be the biggest resource hog, and for a music player, it was huge, something like 110mb? <---- rough estimate


Anyway thanks for all of your help!

Haha yeah it did go pretty crazy! Sorry about that xD

I think the fact is there are a LOT of great music players out there and it's just down to what works best for you :)

Banshee is a fine choice, particularly for someone on Gnome :)

[jpmelos]

Interesting if you read this post again and see its evolution. :D

On the topic, you are not a traitor... You are free to choose whatever software you want to use at any time. That's the whole point of free and open source software.

Off topic, everyone has the right to use whatever suits one best, if one can do that legally, and by that I mean of you have the money to buy all the softwares you use. But some people who "needs" Windows prefer to use a pirate version than learn to use Linux. That's ridiculous. They use pirated versions of every single version of software on their Windows PC, including games, Adobe products, the OS itself. They are thieves, they probably have U$ 10,000 worth of stolen software on their PC right now.