[Feedback] What did you do with Amarok?

Tue Jul 28 15:30:49 UTC 2009

well, we must accept the fact that if people is complaining that way about
amarok is because there is something wrong(or at least there was), you as
developpers need to accept that you reallly made a mistake releasing amarok
as poor as the 2nd version was, I've been building amarok from the trunk
since the last two monts or even more and I can say that it has some really
nice improvements, but do we really need a mini application looking for
artist photos??? I think we don't, it's nice to have that kind of stuffs but
is more important to have an equalizer instead, you might say that amarok is
enveloped in a great framework and future releases will rock, but for a
simple user is just a kick in ... well you know where.

Also the users of amarok (including me) need to stop complaining about every
single feature that we missed in amarok2, if you want something new or
reimplemented on amarok then give ideas, fill bugs, and not just say,
""hey!! i missed the old playlist and I hate you so much for taking away
from amarok""  Help in amarok improvement, if you don't want to help,  do
not have time  or you just don't want to wait until your old loved amarok
functionallity is ready, then maybe amarok 2 is not for you

P.S. When I say YOU, I mean "A quien le quede el saco"

Atentamente Oscar:

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 3:13 AM, Alejandro Wainzinger <
aikawarazuni at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 7:12 AM, Eric Altendorf<ericaltendorf at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Well, it would be nice if Amarok could play FLACs from the beginning.
> > Like, really, the beginning.
> >
> > It would also be nice if it didn't consistently fail to read FLAC
> > metadata (possibly solved in recent versions I've tried)
> >
> > It would be nice if having 200 compilation albums didn't litter the
> > artists list with 3000 random artists.  (Finally solved, yay.  Amarok
> > 2 was totally unusable before "Various Artists" came back.)
> >
> > It would be nice if Amarok didn't try to create symlinks on vfat
> > filesystems on ipods when you try to sync them.  Not only does Amarok
> > manage to corrupt the ipod, but in the process it throws up several
> > thousand "Can't create symlink" dialog boxes.  Useful.
>
> If by sync, you mean copy all of your local collection to the iPod,
> copying should not generate symlinks, and the copying is done by KIO
> anyway, so I'm not sure what Amarok is doing wrong.  I've never
> experienced this, and I haven't seen a bug report on it, but link me
> if I'm wrong, I'd like to take a look at it just in case.
>
> >
> > It would be nice if album art could be loaded at some size larger than
> > the miniscule default.
> >
> >
> > And yes, I have filed detailed bug reports for the more severe of these
> issues.
> >
> > Overall, yeah, Amarok2 killed a lot of good features, provided no
> > valuable new features, and most of all, broke a lot of basic
> > functionality.  The most recent versions I've picked up have be
> > re-approaching the "usable" state, so I do have hope for Amarok2 some
> > day being good again, but man things have sucked really bad for a long
> > time.
>
> Generic speech is all very well and good for FUD, but could you
> explain _which_ good features were "killed," which of the new features
> are not "valuable" and which basic functionality is broken?  Also,
> what is required until you consider Amarok 2 "usable?"
>
> >
> >
> > --eric
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 9:11 AM, Ian Monroe<ian.monroe at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 6:06 AM, Gary
> >> Steinert<gary.steinert.ml at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Monday 27 July 2009 01:25:06 mail at enricojoerns.de wrote:
> >>>> Enrico Jörns sent a message using the contact form at
> >>>> http://amarok.kde.org/en/contact.
> >>>>
> >>>> I just want to point out very quickly how dissapointed I am after
> having
> >>>> used the 2nd generation of Amarok.
> >>>> How could you remove all the very good things that made Amarok to my
> >>>> veryvery favourite music player?
> >>>>
> >>>> I was nearly shocked how bad 2.1 is!
> >>>>
> >>>> No possibilty to delete files out of playlist
> >>> This has been part of the playlist since 2.0 was released IIRC. Either
> right
> >>> click -> Remove from Playlist or use the icon at the bottom of the
> playlist.
> >>
> >> He means delete files.
> >>
> >>>> No possibility to hide the contex window (heard fixed now!?)
> >>>> No playlist shuffle option (or too much hided?)
> >>> Shuffle and repeat are under the Playlist menu. We're working on
> getting it into
> >>> the main window, but the playlist will need a bit of a rethink before
> we will
> >>> be able to manage it without cluttering the screen too much.
> >>
> >> Amarok 2.1 doesn't have a shuffle feature, though 2.2 will.
> >>
> >>>> No more possibility to easy rename id3 in playlist for multiple
> songs..
> >>> This is working at least in trunk. Never had call to test it before now
> so I
> >>> don't know what its like in 2.1
> >>
> >> Well its certainly not as easy as in Amarok 1.4.
> >>
> >>>> Hardly any configuration for everything
> >>> Like what exactly? Because our audio is handled by phonon, a lot of the
> audio
> >>> settings have moved to the global KDE settings.
> >>
> >> And Amarok 2.2's whole layout will be configurable. :)
> >>
> >>>> ...and many more of those little nice things that brought Amarok 1.4
> along!
> >>> We have lost a few features, but we haven't taken anything out of
> Amarok
> >>> without careful consideration. There are features that we haven't been
> able to
> >>> implement yet due to other restrictions. Like the graphic equaliser
> which,
> >>> until recently was not supported by phonon.
> >>>
> >>> But if you take a look at 2.1, you'll find a great deal of new and
> interesting
> >>> features, such as a big increase in the number of internet services
> that you
> >>> can access right from within Amarok. And a new, more powerful scripting
> >>> interface that will allow a whole new array of scripts to be written.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> So, sorry, but as long as I can, I will try to youse the old Amarok,
> hope
> >>>> it will run in 4.0 too...
> >>>>
> >>>> Please bring back life to Amarok! There are so many people who wish
> that!
> >>> Amarok is very much alive =) It's just evolved.
> >>
> >> I agree. :) Amarok 2.1 already has everything I need, outside of some
> >> regressions with the dynamic playlist which I'm working on now.
> >>
> >> Ian
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Amarok mailing list
> >> Amarok at kde.org
> >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Amarok mailing list
> > Amarok at kde.org
> > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Amarok mailing list
> Amarok at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/amarok
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/amarok/attachments/20090728/b2bb145b/attachment.html>