Some ideas for Amarok 2.0 based on foobar2k experience

[Colin Guthrie]

Michael Pujos wrote:
> Leo Franchi a écrit :
>> On Tuesday 14 November 2006 16:55, Michael Pujos wrote:
>>   
>>>> Ultra high configurability is absolutely not what we are striving for. I
>>>> believe it's the task of the developer to provide a good GUI, not the
>>>> user's.
>>>>       
>>> This is a valid design decision while a bit disappointing but I can see why
>>> you'd want to retain a fixed, controllable UI. It's disappointing because
>>> it's a bit conservative and some advanced users might want a different
>>> customized UI to their needs or preferences. However on a development point
>>> of view it's probably simplier.
>>>     
>> The reasoning begind our decision has much less to do with developmental 
>> complexity and much more about user experience. We want amarok to be easy, 
>> fun, and powerful to use. We don't cater to the 1% of users who each want a 
>> certain thing to work their own exact way. We care about making a functional 
>> powerful media player that 99% of users can love and enjoy from the very 
>> first second---not after hours of downloading plugins and scouring forums.
>>
> I still think you can do both: present a sensible default UI without 
> having to go after plugins, while being highly componentized.

I agree here.

While I love Amarok as is and make concessions to use it as is, I'd like
the ability to tweak it a little more.

I know that the one thing that annoys me and many classical listeners is
how music is arranged and sorted. While amarok is very good at
organising things, I think that slightly more than 1% would find the
added flexibility of a more scriptable UI really handy.

Certainly of the 3 people I know personally who use Amarok, we've all
got slightly different takes on how things should be done... it's a
rubbish staw poll I grant you but perhaps worth thinking about slightly
more for v2.0 (this is what this thread is about afterall).

Just my friendly €0.02

Col.