The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: Amarok good, but
by Tim McCormick on Friday 29/Feb/2008, @00:47
|
Sounds like a problem with your choice of base system, or a packaging bug to me.
I've been running Amarok for a while, and haven't had any of the described issues since 1.2 at least. Perhaps there's a problem with the sound engine you're using?
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Amarok good, but
by Eric Laffoon on Friday 29/Feb/2008, @01:25
|
I don't develop Amarok, I develop Quanta and Kommander. Your comment looks familiar though. I had someone say Quanta was slow once when it is very fast... turns out he had lots of very long if/else statements in his PHP which identified a parser bug. Someone else complained about behavior I wasn't experiencing and it was choices Fedora had made packaging kdelibs. It took a day and a half for our lead developer to find that. Statistically at one point we were tracing over half our bugs to packaging issues... in user terms, things that happened in the chain of bringing the software to you after it left our hands.
Whenever you state your experience with a piece of software, never forget you may have some difference in your hardware, configuration or libraries that make your experience utterly foreign to the vast majority of users. Here's a clue to your subjective analysis. Programs don't win user awards and accolades when they don't work right and don't seem finished.
You wouldn't complain to an auto manufacturer that you were stuck in a traffic jam after you bought their car. Instead of accepting you have a problem you should check with your distribution to see if they have a solution.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Amarok good, but
by Wil Palen on Friday 29/Feb/2008, @07:49
|
Programs do win awards if it's the best FOSS has to offer, regardless of their shortcomings. And I'm not that clueless that you should slap me with your car/traffic jam analogy.
I manage multiple systems with the same distribution, using the same backend, etc. On my main system Amarok works flawless. On two other systems I see intermittent crashes and track-skips. Might be the backend, might be the hardware, but apparently it's not the packaging.
Also, when dragging/dropping multiple tracks to the Collection view, many times only 1 of those tracks ends up in the local Collection folder, without any feedback to the user that not all has been copied.
It's often the error conditions that are badly handled, as is the case with Amarok.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: Amarok good, but
by Max on Friday 29/Feb/2008, @10:37
|
Amarok 2.0 isn't finished yet.
Most everybody knows that.
I just hope it will be in time for KDE 4.1
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Amarok good, but
by whatever noticed on Sunday 02/Mar/2008, @15:50
|
"I just hope it will be in time for KDE 4.1"
Why?
Amarok has its own release schedule, it isn't part of the KDE Core Packages.
So it could get released before or after the release of 4.1.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: Amarok good, but
by Steve on Saturday 01/Mar/2008, @18:15
|
Will a new alpha of Amarok be released anytime soon?
Maybe with KDE 4.0.3? A wider audience should get to test it.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: Amarok good, but
by Max on Saturday 01/Mar/2008, @23:13
|
Awesome. I'm already on the edge of my seat!!!
-Max
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
