61–70 of 155 posts
It feels like music players are becoming a thing for old geezers, like everything that requires you to have your data on a local disk. The 'modern' approach is just streaming everything off the net, no local storage required. (I'm writing this as a disapproving old geezer, just in case it wasn't clear.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> (I've tried it a few times with Wine, and was never impressed vs. running it natively on Windows) Really? I noticed it's slower to start up but other than that it seems the same. I use it pretty regularly because foobar components handle formats the others can't. Other than that, I'd say Audacious is the closest Linux analogue to foobar2000. My one big gripe was freezing up for a bit when a stream cuts out (blockin…
Last time I tried it (quite long ago), I recall having some audio issues. Maybe I should try again... that was back when my old audio interface (that only ever worked on XP, since they never released production-grade drivers for Win7) finally died.
But there's something refreshing about seeing a tool that just gets more useful over time. Contrast that with closed-source software, whose features are driven by OKRs and might vanish if a new PM decides they aren't promotion-worthy or important to the next billion users.
I do wonder about hygiene and vision on such projects. On the one hand, seeing what happens when dozens of people over the decades have all written players for their own weird pet format is cool. On the other, I imagine a lot of that falls out of maintenance if the guy who wrote one looses interest, or if the project gets ported to a platform he doesn't care about.
I also expect that the Linuxisms of "everything is a setting" and "control density over visual appeal" are natural consequences if nobody is in charge of setting a vision.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been using strawberry since moving to linux since there was no good foobar2000 replacement but I just discovered fooyin these past couple of days and this is so convincingly close that I can pretend it's just foobar2000. That's not to throw any shade on strawberry, it's also incredibly good, but foobar2000 will always have it's claws in me.
foobar2000 actually runs very well in Wine.
If you are a KDE user, I highly recommend fooyin, which is essentially a Qt6 clone of Foobar2000: https://www.fooyin.org/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Music players are a great example of a type of app that at first brush seems simple and difficult to do badly, but in reality is littered with subtleties and bits that hinge on the preferences of the user, all of which can make or break the app. Makes it easy to understand why there’s more players than can be counted but few worth using.
That's because they all try to be more than they should be. I don't need or want a visualization option. I don't need or want an equalizer. I don't need or want a library. Those functions properly belong in other places or in the waste bin. My music library is on my filesystem and is sorted and arranged as I prefer. When I want to play an album I drag it over to MPC-HC. When I want to create a custom playlist, I open…
How do you manage albums that could be classified as two or more genres?
> runs on GNU/Linux distributions, macOS, Windows, *BSD, OpenSolaris, and other UNIX-like systems. > Each platform’s native UI toolkit is employed to deliver the best experience > GTK2, GTK3, ALSA and PulseAudio on Unix systems If the author is here, please understand that there is no "native" UI toolkit for Linux or BSD. These platforms have several widely-used desktop environments, some of which use the Qt toolkit…
> If the author is here, please understand that there is no "native" UI toolkit for Linux or BSD. You're wrong. When a library is native to some system, it does not mean that it is always shipped with the system. It means that it runs directly, without an interpretation layer in the runtime. So GTK3 is native to Linux/Xorg. The desktop environment is irrelevant, and may not be based on GTK3.
To put it in practical context, apps built with Gtk generally stand out like sore thumbs on Qt-based desktops like KDE Plasma, both in the way they look and in the way their widgets respond to input. This rather undermines the app's claim "to deliver the best experience" with its choice of UI toolkit.
But if you like, go ahead and believe that I'm wrong instead of trying to understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know what it is, that doesn't make it good.
It's amazing how bad software developers are at naming their projects. At least this one is unique enough to be searchable, and could probably be SEO'ed above the computer lore (indeed, at least for me it's already #1 for "deadbeef" on the Google SERP). The worst are when they pick a generic English word for a project that has nothing to do with that word. I'm not going to name and shame, but there are so many exampl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's amazing how bad software developers are at naming their projects. At least this one is unique enough to be searchable, and could probably be SEO'ed above the computer lore (indeed, at least for me it's already #1 for "deadbeef" on the Google SERP). The worst are when they pick a generic English word for a project that has nothing to do with that word. I'm not going to name and shame, but there are so many exampl…
My experience is that the most overloaded software project name is “Apollo”. I worked at one big company that had three different internal services by that name. I blame NASA for this one :v