Earlier quoted context omitted.
The recent removal of the system tray icon is anti-user. It provided users with easy access to Play/Pause from the system tray, but that meant users spent less time in the app, so the system tray icon was removed completely.
Infuriating. It's 2015 and my Winamp is still more usable than a "new" music player. Why do they care if I spend more or less time in the app if I'm a premium user, surely that can't be the reason for this regression.
How is Javascript used within the Spotify desktop application?
31–40 of 100 posts
Re: How is Javascript used within the Spotify desktop application?
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Add to that the massive start-up time for the Windows client. A fresh instance Spotify from a rebooted machine takes ages to gain full functionality. If you quit in the middle of a good playlist, most of the time you'll be able to continue playing from where that playlist left off. If you opened Spotify to find a song or move to another playlist, you'll be waiting a while. I just started Spotify with a stopwatch: 2:2…
Wow.. I agree that Spotify isn't the most lightweight application, but it doesn't feel much heavier than, say, Chrome on my Linux installation. Are you on a mechanical hard drive perhaps? The network performance though is quite bad, searching for some song often fails or just is very slow to load and render.
Re: How is Javascript used within the Spotify desktop application?
#33This is where the praise ends. As a Spotify Premium user, I love the service, but the interface as many others have pointed out has really gone downhill. I don't know who is leading the UX squad over at Spotify, but the app needs considerable work. High startup times, incredible amounts of frame rate lag and removal of the system tray icon. What is going on over there? I have also noticed that the app can play a song quickly, but browsing and searching is incredibly slow (even on a fast connection).
Re: How is Javascript used within the Spotify desktop application?
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Infuriating. It's 2015 and my Winamp is still more usable than a "new" music player. Why do they care if I spend more or less time in the app if I'm a premium user, surely that can't be the reason for this regression.
It's 2015 and Winamp is still the only music player that really whips the llamas ass.
Re: How is Javascript used within the Spotify desktop application?
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
The recent removal of the system tray icon is anti-user. It provided users with easy access to Play/Pause from the system tray, but that meant users spent less time in the app, so the system tray icon was removed completely.
Infuriating. It's 2015 and my Winamp is still more usable than a "new" music player. Why do they care if I spend more or less time in the app if I'm a premium user, surely that can't be the reason for this regression.
Though this is on Ubuntu, and Spotify is still a beta app on that platform last I checked. I don't think I've had this problem on Windows.
Re: How is Javascript used within the Spotify desktop application?
#36I have a feeling that's not the case for the Linux version. It looks completely different than other platforms and is also build against Qt libraries.
Re: How is Javascript used within the Spotify desktop application?
#37The Spotify desktop client has seen a massive regression since 2008 or 2009. It's incredible how they managed to make it so unresponsive. Scrolling in a playlist is like playing a game at 10 fps. It's uncomfortable and not worth it. Ads are worse as well. I've seen countless malware ads in the bottom banner.
Add to that the massive start-up time for the Windows client. A fresh instance Spotify from a rebooted machine takes ages to gain full functionality. If you quit in the middle of a good playlist, most of the time you'll be able to continue playing from where that playlist left off. If you opened Spotify to find a song or move to another playlist, you'll be waiting a while. I just started Spotify with a stopwatch: 2:2…
Re: How is Javascript used within the Spotify desktop application?
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
Infuriating. It's 2015 and my Winamp is still more usable than a "new" music player. Why do they care if I spend more or less time in the app if I'm a premium user, surely that can't be the reason for this regression.
It's 2015 and I can't "alt-tab" into spotify in order to pause/play by pressing space; I have to click somewhere in the upper half of the interface in order to "refocus", or the spacebar just scrolls down. Which is useful for something, I guess. Though this is on Ubuntu, and Spotify is still a beta app on that platform last I checked. I don't think I've had this problem on Windows.
Re: How is Javascript used within the Spotify desktop application?
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Should a music player be anywhere near as heavy as Chrome? A web browser is a pretty immensely complicated thing (CSS, DOM rendering, Javascript JIT compiler, etc.). Similar criticisms have been made of iTunes over the years (though I find it's not bad in the current version). Things like laggy scrolling are a bit understandable there, since they've defaulted to the grid of album covers view for a while. But Spotify…
I assume this thing is just a web app rendered in their "browser"? So doesn't it need to do all the things you list? Needs css to layout the DOM, needs to parse and execute javascript. I'm a recent convert from grooveshark, so I've been using the spotlight web player and I find it a pretty nice web app to be honest. I haven't dealt with any of the actual desktop clients yet, so don't know if anything I said above is…
From a users perspective, that is an implementation detail and doesn't matter. A users only cares if his music player feels slow or not.
Re: How is Javascript used within the Spotify desktop application?
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe that could offer the basis for an alternative client. Thanks for sharing your knowledge. :)
An alternative desktop client using libspotify and a non-web GUI toolkit would be much more interesting.