Slashdot Mirror


Songbird the Open Source iTunes?

An anonymous reader writes "Cnet has an interesting story about a company about to release an open source alternative to iTunes. Apparently, the software can be used with a multitude of music services." From the article: "Apple's iTunes is 'like Internet Explorer, if Internet Explorer could only browse Microsoft.com,' Lord said. 'We love Apple, and appreciate and thank them for setting the bar in terms of user experience. But it's inevitable that the market architecture changes as it matures.'"

8 of 226 comments (clear)

  1. Roooby Rooooby ROOooo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Ruh Roh Rapple!!!

  2. Penisbird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Open source pornography?

  3. iWould by nodialtone · · Score: -1, Troll

    have iNamed this iThing iSongbird.

  4. Re:amaroK with option to spend money by jx100 · · Score: -1, Troll
  5. Re:Judging by their screenshots... by Durandal64 · · Score: -1, Troll

    Please. iTunes was and always has been a simple UI in a sea of overly cluttered WinAmp-style garbage. The only things Apple copied were having one area reserved for showing playlists and one area reserved for showing tracks. Otherwise, iTunes was totally different from any other jukebox available at the time. The single-window approach was what made it so successful.

  6. RIAA by wcleveland · · Score: -1, Troll

    Great! Just something else for the *AA to fuss about!

  7. Re:Judging by their screenshots... by penguin-collective · · Score: 1, Troll

    Otherwise, iTunes was totally different from any other jukebox available at the time.

    There have been hundreds of jukebox programs before iTunes; how can you say with certainty that it was "totally different" from all of them? In any case, the application domain doesn't really matter much; the UI itself is a rip-off of numerous NeXT and Smalltalk interfaces (with the NeXT interfaces themselves being a rip-off of Smalltalk).

    And the thing is: I don't think there is even anything wrong about copying other people's successful interfaces. But there is something wrong about it when Apple complains about it, given that their entire company is based on taking the best ideas out of other UIs and then modifying them. And, unfortunately, Apple has been complaining a lot, throughout their corporate history, and even gone as far as suing people.

  8. Apple "setting the bar in user experience"? Er, no by soliptic · · Score: -1, Troll
    Er... no, they're not.

    Or, to be more fair/accurate: that's a matter of opinion.

    I personally think the iTunes interface is an absolute piece of shit, I hate it. I could list specific examples but it's Christmas day and I can't be bothered, given that an Apple fanboy will mod this to oblivion whether I give specific examples or not.

    But, honestly, can we cut out this "Apple's interface is always teh best!!!" idiocy? To me, I actively dislike the Apple way of doing things, not just in iTunes, but throughout OSX, and vastly prefer the WinXP approach. This is not a troll, or flamebait, or funny- this is my honest opinion. I'm sick of people acting like it is an unarguable truth that Apple's interface and UI design is guaranteed always the best. It's a matter of opinion.