Amarok 2.X.X < Amarok 1.4.X; devs are in denial

[SergeiFranco]

This is a very controversial topic.
Jaunty is stuck with Amarok 2.0.X, been forced to upgrade.
Hated it for following reasons:
1) Stupid context menu, can't get rid of it, no use to me
2) Can't sort playlist
3) Buggy
4) No equalizer
5) no way to rate songs from playlist
6) lots of small anoyances that I can't put my finger on
Upgraded to Amarok 2.1.1

Apart from context menu that can be turned off now, no major improvements.
If you look at feedback on http://amarok.kde.org/en/releases/2.1 it is flaming! If you look at forums http://forum.kde.org/viewforum.php?f=121 and read through dev replies they come as really arrogant and don't care what users really think. They also have vision of their creating very different to of KDE in general, they seem to think that customisation of the player is something to avoid, but I certainly think a lot of user would love to move things around.

So here is my dilema: I am very poor programmer (just a sysadmin) so I can't really fix all the issues, also going back to 1.4 is kind of admitting defeat, other players are worse than 1.4 (songbird, totem etc) and are not KDE specific (I hate gnome file picker and general feel).

I would love some group of open minded people forking Amarok 2 to make it best player for Linux (as Amarok 1.4 was).

Unless there is something out there that is a lot better than Amarok 1.4 ?

[SergeiFranco]

I forgot to add positive thought:
It looks like there will be some improvements in 2.2...

[ghostborg]

Songbird from www.getdeb.net.
Choose you platform, download, install.

It has really cool addons, like cover flow, lyrics etc., like firefox -it is based on it.
You have to get the ipod control addon to get an ipod working like ITunes.
I recommend setting up a separate Music directory and in the settings let it manage your music for you-it creates folders and arranges your music for you in your library. Do not test this out your main library or it will move things around on you. You will be sad.


Rythmbox works - not pretty but in the end we just want our stuff on our players.

[Xbehave]

used to agree with you, but 2.2 is going to be as good (although maybe still abit of a memory hog) as 1.4.x., while means later versions will be much better due to improvements in the framework.

I'm still disappointed they are not letting me hid my menubar (apparently gnome users are too dumb to google it and they got too many bug reports)

[Johnsie]

I use Spotify. It's not open source, but it allows me to access my playlist from almost any computer

[SergeiFranco]

I will definitely give a go to Amarok 2.2 once it will be semi-finished, it looks like (from reading devs replies) they got around of their fixed UI concept and finally listened to users.

But right now 2.1.1 is a load of suck.

[oobuntoo]

Here is a preview of Amarok 2.2 beta:

http://padoca.wordpress.com/2009/09/...-reeverything/

[Hallvor]

Here is a preview of Amarok 2.2 beta:

http://padoca.wordpress.com/2009/09/...-reeverything/

The beta looks good.

[Xbehave]

you can hide the context view in 2.1.1 it removes some of the suck IMO, i hated 2.1 until i saw this option now i just strongly dislike it!

[bigbrovar]

I really hated the amarok 2.X series my self, but having used it now for a while i think am starting to really like it, sure their are some features missing from 1.4 but we need to give the devs time. Its not always easy to develop for an app like amarok, sometimes you have to take hard decisions which although might have negative impact on the user in the short term, would put the project on a better framework of things in the long run. as users all we need do is make constructive criticisms and not just sit down and rant, & diss the hard work of people who work for free so that we can be happy .. just my 2 cent