A fork wouldn't be necessary in my opinion. That's overkill.
As I said in my comment above, 2.2 and 2.3 are going to be focusing on the playlist and general usability in the interface.
I'm of the opinion that, instead of forking, it would be more beneficial for those wanting the old interface to simply integrate an option to switch to a 'classic 1.4' style interface.
Do you know what I liked most in Amarok? The UI. A playlist, a file browser to drag stuff from, and a play button. That's it. I don't need a more complicated UI. I don't want one.
You've either misread or misunderstood my comment. I actually stated that 2.2 and 2.3 will be focusing on the playlist and user interface. As in, it will have the capability of looking and behaving like 1.4. When I said 'far superior under-the-hood', I wasn't just referring to the nice Wikipedia plugin - I was actually thinking about things like the faster storage database. You know, being able to search your songs a lot quicker, or being able to have far larger databases of music which Amarok can effectively handle. That's better.
They overhyped the API changes so much, they forgot about the users.
I think you've just gone ahead and said something that is completely subjective. You think that they forgot about the users. Probably what you don't know is that since the inception of KDE 4.0, the KDE community has never been more greatly focused on the users. There has never been a time in KDE's history where they have ever worked more closely with GUI designers, artists and users. For blinky's sake, the whole focus of the entire project is on the users.
If drastic changes needed to be be made you should go as far as creating a new product, so people stick to the old one that works while devs polish the new product.
You don't get it. 2.0 is a new product. Its new from the ground up. Its new in the sense that it is built for the future.
Also, 1.4 is the old one that works that you can stick to. Honestly, its as simple as that. 2.x could never become what it will become if they stuck with the 1.x codebase. Its a good thing. If you're uncomfortable with the state of 2.x, then stay with 1.4. Simple as that.
I agree that Amarok 2.0 and 2.1's features aren't on par with 1.4.
But, I cannot wait till 2.2 and 2.3 where full support for pluggable media (iPods, CDs, etc), fully customisable interface and better playlist usability will be major advances.
The real advantage will be after feature parity with 1.4. Amarok 2.x is far superior 'under the hood'.
I've only been hearing positive stuff coming from the Amarok devs.
Is the parent mixing up dev's actually getting fed up or just people being unhappy with the new interface? Is the parent also aware that in Amarok 2.2 and 2.3 the interface will become largely like Amarok 1.4 (with at least the possibility to fully customise the interface)?
The question then is, which users are buying a pre-installed OS with all the drivers set up and which users are installing the OS freshly on their computer?
Funny you mention that. I installed Ubuntu 8.10 on a friend's laptop. She also needed to run her knitting software on it too - I set up wine and it installed and worked perfectly - no kidding.
My boss rang me up yesterday because he said he needed a new password to get into his computer because his old one wasn't working.
As it turned out the batteries on his wireless keyboard were flat. He wasn't even.....AARGH!
Re:The Achilles heel of this...
on
Phoenix BIOSOS?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Parent should be modded 'informative' not 'funny'. What he says is true.
I have yet to discover a device in my house that just works when I plug it into my Microsoft Windows Vista computer (exceptions being USB mass storage devices).
This is in stark contrast to the fact that all devices in my house (scanners, printers, phones, cameras, etc) work straight away when plugged into my Linux machines (Ubuntu 9.04 and Suse 11.1).
It isn't coincidence, Linux has had better 'out-of-the-box' support for devices than Windows for quite a while now.
From the article: "You can just take it (Windows 7) out of the box, and its ready to go."
I'm getting really sick of these stupid people saying how their manufacturer configured, tweaked and driver loaded version of Windows 7 works with their laptop 'out-of-the-box'.
Surely, I'm not the only one who finds this stupid. OF COURSE your manufacturer configured OS is going to work out of the box!!!!!!!!111one1
From the article: "Linux, even if you've got a great distribution and you can argue which one is better or not, still requires a lot more hands-on than somebody who is using Windows."
Error, should be: "Linux, even if you've got a great distribution and you can argue which one is better or not, still requires a lot more hands-on than somebody who is used to only using Windows."
I'm going to sit down - my hands are shaking with.......wage.
Yeah, thats right, I got so indignant I typed this reply standing up and pounding on my keyboard.
I assume you're referring to the Port Arthur massacre?
The funny thing is that this guy had an M16 and tonnes of ammo. There are many conspiracy theories that fly around what happened.
Even now, gun laws in Tasmania are utterly stupid. It is illegal to own any tool that can shoot projectiles - EVEN SLINGSHOTS. I don't know how nail guns got around that - but that's the stupidity of bureaucrats.
Uh, I'm not sure why you'd want them to 'crap all over your desktop'. Ooooh, I get it - do you think you'll be *forced* to have all this on your desktop? I'd say you're a primarily proprietary software user - because you don't seem to be used to the idea of 'choice'.
Slashdot Mirror
A fork wouldn't be necessary in my opinion. That's overkill.
As I said in my comment above, 2.2 and 2.3 are going to be focusing on the playlist and general usability in the interface.
I'm of the opinion that, instead of forking, it would be more beneficial for those wanting the old interface to simply integrate an option to switch to a 'classic 1.4' style interface.
You've either misread or misunderstood my comment. I actually stated that 2.2 and 2.3 will be focusing on the playlist and user interface. As in, it will have the capability of looking and behaving like 1.4. When I said 'far superior under-the-hood', I wasn't just referring to the nice Wikipedia plugin - I was actually thinking about things like the faster storage database. You know, being able to search your songs a lot quicker, or being able to have far larger databases of music which Amarok can effectively handle. That's better.
I think you've just gone ahead and said something that is completely subjective. You think that they forgot about the users. Probably what you don't know is that since the inception of KDE 4.0, the KDE community has never been more greatly focused on the users. There has never been a time in KDE's history where they have ever worked more closely with GUI designers, artists and users. For blinky's sake, the whole focus of the entire project is on the users.
You don't get it. 2.0 is a new product. Its new from the ground up. Its new in the sense that it is built for the future.
Also, 1.4 is the old one that works that you can stick to. Honestly, its as simple as that. 2.x could never become what it will become if they stuck with the 1.x codebase. Its a good thing. If you're uncomfortable with the state of 2.x, then stay with 1.4. Simple as that.
Fair enough.
I agree that Amarok 2.0 and 2.1's features aren't on par with 1.4.
But, I cannot wait till 2.2 and 2.3 where full support for pluggable media (iPods, CDs, etc), fully customisable interface and better playlist usability will be major advances.
The real advantage will be after feature parity with 1.4. Amarok 2.x is far superior 'under the hood'.
Photoshop is arguably more complex than your garden variety knitting software. So in that sense, it isn't surprising that it isn't fully working yet.
Having said that, Photoshop CS2 already works in wine and support for CS3 is coming in codeweavers next release.
Yeah, I'd like to know too.
I've only been hearing positive stuff coming from the Amarok devs.
Is the parent mixing up dev's actually getting fed up or just people being unhappy with the new interface? Is the parent also aware that in Amarok 2.2 and 2.3 the interface will become largely like Amarok 1.4 (with at least the possibility to fully customise the interface)?
Seconded for Plan 9 and BSD
The question then is, which users are buying a pre-installed OS with all the drivers set up and which users are installing the OS freshly on their computer?
Yeah, sorry - its not as simple as you think.
Funny you mention that. I installed Ubuntu 8.10 on a friend's laptop. She also needed to run her knitting software on it too - I set up wine and it installed and worked perfectly - no kidding.
Yeah, left-click on NetworkManager in any modern distro (such as Ubuntu). It even uses a wizard to take you through the steps.
Or didn't you know that? When was the last time you actually used Linux on the desktop? 5 years ago?
cue Space Odyssey music.
My boss rang me up yesterday because he said he needed a new password to get into his computer because his old one wasn't working.
As it turned out the batteries on his wireless keyboard were flat. He wasn't even.....AARGH!
Parent should be modded 'informative' not 'funny'. What he says is true.
I have yet to discover a device in my house that just works when I plug it into my Microsoft Windows Vista computer (exceptions being USB mass storage devices).
This is in stark contrast to the fact that all devices in my house (scanners, printers, phones, cameras, etc) work straight away when plugged into my Linux machines (Ubuntu 9.04 and Suse 11.1).
It isn't coincidence, Linux has had better 'out-of-the-box' support for devices than Windows for quite a while now.
Again, this would change if the drivers were in userspace - but they're not for good reasons.
If you RTFA, you'll probably notice that they had to keep their systems online.
You're talking about bad drivers like its the OS's fault.
The trade-offs of having drivers in userspace outweigh the positives.
That, my friend, is a dangerously shallow explanation of security.
This is the reason I find his statement so annoying.
Consider the change for the average Joe coming from Windows XP to Windows 7. They're going to have to re-learn a lot anyway.
Should I feed the trolls children?
"Yeeees Mr. Socceroos.". Ok then.
There isn't much in the way of Linux any more.
Someone should tell the whole of Russia's schools. Oh, and the French Gendarmerie Nationale. Oh, also, you should tell the Vietnamese government.
Ah, stuff it, go read page 12 onwards of the PDF on this page: http://boycottnovell.com/2009/01/10/edgi-continued-dumping-vs-gnu/
From the article: "You can just take it (Windows 7) out of the box, and its ready to go."
I'm getting really sick of these stupid people saying how their manufacturer configured, tweaked and driver loaded version of Windows 7 works with their laptop 'out-of-the-box'.
Surely, I'm not the only one who finds this stupid. OF COURSE your manufacturer configured OS is going to work out of the box!!!!!!!!111one1
From the article: "Linux, even if you've got a great distribution and you can argue which one is better or not, still requires a lot more hands-on than somebody who is using Windows."
Error, should be: "Linux, even if you've got a great distribution and you can argue which one is better or not, still requires a lot more hands-on than somebody who is used to only using Windows."
I'm going to sit down - my hands are shaking with.......wage.
Yeah, thats right, I got so indignant I typed this reply standing up and pounding on my keyboard.
But how can it be an alternative if we don't know exactly what it does?
For all you know, BigTable has an extension that makes everyone's salad sandwiches at Google.
I assume you're referring to the Port Arthur massacre?
The funny thing is that this guy had an M16 and tonnes of ammo. There are many conspiracy theories that fly around what happened.
Even now, gun laws in Tasmania are utterly stupid. It is illegal to own any tool that can shoot projectiles - EVEN SLINGSHOTS. I don't know how nail guns got around that - but that's the stupidity of bureaucrats.
You do understand that the same goes for Windows PC's don't you?
Ever heard of OEM?
OpenMoko Phone - its about 1.5 years old now.
Uh, I'm not sure why you'd want them to 'crap all over your desktop'. Ooooh, I get it - do you think you'll be *forced* to have all this on your desktop? I'd say you're a primarily proprietary software user - because you don't seem to be used to the idea of 'choice'.