Posted by: Anonymous
[ip: 209.190.168.98]
on December 17, 2008 08:13 PM
@ Anonymous [ip: 82.232.16.14]
I think the only reason anyone is complaining is that Amarok is a project we really like, and have very specific reasons for liking, and in 2.0, many of those reasons are gone. It's one thing to abandon a project because development tails off, or it never really did exactly what you wanted so you jump when something better comes along. In Amarok's case, it already was, for many many people, the absolute best-of-breed music library manager, and with 2.0, many of the features and workflows we've become used to are gone, making it less useful. The developers seem interested in people's critiques, and seem willing to help find alternative methods, so why should anyone jump ship to a project which, when compared to Amarok 1.4.x, doesn't come close to measuring up?
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re: Amarok gets a facelift
Posted by: Anonymous [ip: 209.190.168.98] on December 17, 2008 08:13 PMI think the only reason anyone is complaining is that Amarok is a project we really like, and have very specific reasons for liking, and in 2.0, many of those reasons are gone. It's one thing to abandon a project because development tails off, or it never really did exactly what you wanted so you jump when something better comes along. In Amarok's case, it already was, for many many people, the absolute best-of-breed music library manager, and with 2.0, many of the features and workflows we've become used to are gone, making it less useful. The developers seem interested in people's critiques, and seem willing to help find alternative methods, so why should anyone jump ship to a project which, when compared to Amarok 1.4.x, doesn't come close to measuring up?
#