Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Songbird Drops Linux Support

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the business-realities dept.

Software 356

An anonymous reader writes "The Songbird developers have announced that they will no longer support Songbird in Linux. This is really a shocking announcement, as Songbird has its roots in open source. Songbird will, however, continue to be available for Windows and Mac." In their blog post on the subject, the developers said, "We remain loyal to Linux and the ideology it represents, so we will maintain a version of the software for use by our Songbird engineers who develop on the Linux platform. We’ll make that version available to the community. We will keep Linux build bots and host the Linux builds on the developer wiki. That said, those builds will not be tested and may not pick up new features developed by Songbird’s team."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Boohoo (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31723892)

Watch the neckbeards cry.

Re:Boohoo (2, Funny)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724132)

Neckbeards... Songbird...

Obligatory Family Guy reference [photobucket.com] .

Nice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724464)

LOL, good job.

DRM coming? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31723902)

Could this be a sign that some sort of DRM is coming to Songbird?

I remember testing Songbird when it was 0.1 or something like that. Early, early on.

Help in TFA? (5, Insightful)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 4 years ago | (#31723912)

Not once in TFA or the summary does it say what Songbird does.

Re:Help in TFA? (4, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 4 years ago | (#31723950)

Neither does the original story.

What's Songbird? Who cares ...

Re:Help in TFA? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31723996)

and in other news, my mate Dave said the 12 line shell script he uses for grabbing entries from /var/log/messages won't be get ported to Windows

Re:Help in TFA? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724814)

Their site is a mess anyway [imageshack.us] . And this is from Mozilla?!

Re:Help in TFA? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724306)

It's a screen saver.

Re:Help in TFA? (4, Informative)

psnyder (1326089) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724828)

It was the only fully featured music player / organizer (that I know about) that ran on the platform trinity (Linux, Windows, and Mac) out of the box. It looked and acted the same irregardless of the platform.

This is rather important in my opinion, and I find myself recommending these kinds of programs (Firefox, Open Office, VLC, Gimp, Pidgin, etc), because when a computer illiterate friend learns a program like this, they are less locked into their OS. They can use them on their Macs at work, their Windows at home, and Linux if they happen to stumble on it, and they'll feel comfortable with the same familiar programs.

Songbird is far from perfect, but it is an easy switch from iTunes (it can keep the iTunes library in sync with its own), has more features (with some excellent addons) and plays more file types. So now I'm looking for the next platform independent player / organizer to recommend.

Re:Help in TFA? (1)

celibate for life (1639541) | more than 4 years ago | (#31723958)

It's a pet simulator, like a tamagochi.

Re:Help in TFA? (2, Funny)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | more than 4 years ago | (#31723974)

Helps you sleep at night by filling your room with the sound of doves and seagulls, but only if you use Windows or Mac.

Re:Help in TFA? (5, Informative)

spyrochaete (707033) | more than 4 years ago | (#31723998)

Songbird is a music player and library organizer similar to iTunes or Winamp. It's based on the Mozilla Firefox Gecko framework. It inexplicably uses about 130MB of RAM while idle.

Re:Help in TFA? (4, Funny)

NewbieProgrammerMan (558327) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724176)

It inexplicably uses about 130MB of RAM while idle.

Thanks, that's all I needed to know!

Re:Help in TFA? (5, Funny)

Winckle (870180) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724320)

Well they wanted to have feature parity with iTunes.

Re:Help in TFA? (4, Funny)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724562)

Yet I'm running iTunes right now and it's using 47 MiB of RAM while playing a 192-320 kbps VBR mp3 from a 8000+ song library. Clearly they've surpassed iTunes, I need to download Songbird right now!

Re:Help in TFA? (0)

Winckle (870180) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724646)

Yeah I've got iTunes running about the same. It could have double or treble that amount to be honest and I wouldn't mind. I've got 4 GB of RAM if one of my apps wants to use it to bring me more features that's fine by me.

Re:Help in TFA? (0, Troll)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724812)

Wait, that can’t be... Let’s translate that to a unit that real humans use: 47 “MiB” = 47 MB.
Aah, now I understand how much that is.
Huh? 47 MB? You mean not swapped memory on a system with a full RAM, and not counting all the core libs, right?

Re:Help in TFA? (2, Funny)

TheBeardIsRed (695409) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724598)

Good thing they're dropping Linux support.

Re:Help in TFA? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724218)

Songbird is a music player and library organizer similar to iTunes or Winamp. It's based on the Mozilla Firefox Gecko framework. It inexplicably uses about 130MB of RAM while idle.

...all in the name of competing with the feature sets of iTunes and Winamp!

- sincerely, a user who just a while ago had to scream "uninstalling iTunes frees HOW MUCH disk space???" :)

Re:Help in TFA? (1)

xZgf6xHx2uhoAj9D (1160707) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724458)

"Uses" or "has mmap()ed into its address space"? There's a galaxy of difference between the two.

Re:Help in TFA? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724628)

Since it is UNusable by other processes, I fail to see the difference. Can you explain this galaxy you live in?

Re:Help in TFA? (2, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724788)

Wow, for a Gecko-based (actually xulrunner-based!) program, that’s very little.

So it’s basically Amarok, in slow, with an inexplicably low memory usage...

The last time I tried songbird, it was horribly slow, had a really badly designed interface (more “stylishness”, lest “actually usable”ness), and was just all around crappy.

I’ll keep Amarok. TYVM.

Re:Help in TFA? (1)

nickull (943338) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724840)

130 mb of ram while sitting idle? Then it's perfect for windoze and osx.... So what are the alternatives for *nix users now? dn grep this: s/$your_beliefs/$common_sense/i;

Sorry to hear about that, but... (4, Interesting)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 4 years ago | (#31723916)

I use Linux pretty much exclusively, excepting a virtual instance of XP.

I've tried Songbird for Ubuntu each time a new release came out and frankly, it was a horrible experience.

I loved the layout of the software, but having to wait damn near a half hour (or more) each time I'd start it up to reindex all my music was annoying, to say the least.

I've ended up just sticking with Rhythmbox, which is OK,but I really did prefer the Songbird layout.

Re:Sorry to hear about that, but... (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724016)

I agree.

Back on XP, Songbird seemed like a stop-gap measure to avoid having to deal with the atrocity named iTunes, without having to ditch Windows. Songbird had a neat layout and nice features, but it was very apparent that it was still an early development version.

On Linux, there are many good media players and no reason to continue to use it. I switched to Rhythmbox on the day I installed Ubuntu.

Re:Sorry to hear about that, but... (1)

Bacon Bits (926911) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724020)

I tried Songbird, too. I wanted a music player with a modern interface that was cross-platform so I could always have the same expectations on Windows or Linux. Firefox and Thunderbird taught me the value of that. I was also frustrated with the slow loading times, however, and have found that I simply listen to music less often overall. In the end I've never found anything I've liked quite as much as Winamp 2.95.

Re:Sorry to hear about that, but... (4, Informative)

markdavis (642305) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724316)

>In the end I've never found anything I've liked quite as much as Winamp 2.95.

Then you will probably be quite happy with xmms ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xmms [wikipedia.org] ) or audacious ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audacious_Media_Player [wikipedia.org] ). I know *I* am :)

If you want a heavyweight, feature-packed, system and not just a simple player, check out Amarok ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amarok_(software) [wikipedia.org] ) or Rhythmbox ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhythmbox [wikipedia.org] )

Re:Sorry to hear about that, but... (1)

Elektroschock (659467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724406)

Basically, what Songbird didn't provide was CD ripping. That is all I miss from iTiunes.

Re:Sorry to hear about that, but... (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724862)

I loved Winamp too. Used Songbird for a while on OSX as it was the closest thing I could find to Winamp at that point, but I missed having a dynamic playlist area. Moved to Linux, eventually after trying several players I found Exaile. Can browse my music by files, have a dynamic playlist, and show "what's playing" in my messenger, which is all I really want in a media player.

You can do all the other fancy stuff like have multiple playlist tabs, organise your collection by tags, internet radio etc and it comes with a lot of plugins to let you rip music, pause your music when you lock your screen etc. The interface is really nice and clean, though I don't like what they did with it in the latest version of the Ubuntu repository actually.. they hid some features from view - like you now have to right click stop to use "stop after current song" - and disabled others entirely. For example you can no longer tag multiple songs at once :( Thankfully I updated all the tagless songs in my collection before they removed it.

Re:Sorry to hear about that, but... (1)

Bieeanda (961632) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724052)

Songbird is just as terrible on Windows. There's nothing like having your music player just stop playing in the middle of a song, refuse to start back up unless you kill the process and restart it, only to have to repeat five or ten minutes later.

Worse than iTunes, after years of active development. That's an impressive feat.

Re:Sorry to hear about that, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724660)

I also use LInux almost exclusively, except when it came to "tax time" H&R block, as well as TurboTax, does not support the Linux OS, go figure - their programs are browser-based, anyway I digress...
Rhythmbox works for everything I do so far, good job at streaming since I listen to Groovesalad or Cryosleep most of the time anyway. I just wish mp3Tag had a native Linux version instead of running through Wine, I really like that app.

Re:Sorry to hear about that, but... (1)

sjustice (1782748) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724780)

i'm with you. i really wanted songbird to be my default music player, but it just never matured for ubuntu. rhythmbox may be boring, but it works!

Alternatives (2, Informative)

tokul (682258) | more than 4 years ago | (#31723918)

Rhythmbox, amarok, xmms.

So long, Songbird. You won't be missed.

Re:Alternatives (4, Interesting)

DarkKnightRadick (268025) | more than 4 years ago | (#31723944)

XMMS 1.x is no longer supported and I hate the client/server model used in 2.x Amarok won't install without KDE and Rhythmbox is nearly unusable for my needs. Granted I am running FreeBSD. VLC is ok for most of my needs but I've been using Grooveshark [grooveshark.com] lately to bolster up my music collection.

Re:Alternatives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724000)

XMMS 1.x is no longer supported

Audacious2. Nuff said.

Re:Alternatives (2, Interesting)

TheSunborn (68004) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724224)

That program does have a total fucked up file requester. There is no way to write the name of the directory you want to load music from.

Re:Alternatives (1)

CAIMLAS (41445) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724846)

Audacious* is a pile of crap. It's better than XMMS2, but I've found it's not only unstable but glitchy in other regards (eg. adding/removing files).

Re:Alternatives (2, Interesting)

Tyr_7BE (461429) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724208)

What needs do you have that Amarok satisfies but Rhythmbox doesn't? Just curious.

Re:Alternatives (1)

TheTurtlesMoves (1442727) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724878)

In my case Rhythmbox needs the Genome libs... and i haven't installed them and really don't want too.

Re:Alternatives (2, Insightful)

jadrian (1150317) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724238)

Amarok won't install without KDE

What do you mean by that? It needs kde libs, what's the big deal? It's not like you need to install the desktop environment.

Re:Alternatives (1)

Night Goat (18437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724436)

Those libraries are what's keeping me away from Amarok. There are a TON of libraries that need to be installed in order to get Amarok going. I'd rather not install all the libraries for the sake of getting a music player working.

Re:Alternatives (4, Insightful)

walshy007 (906710) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724540)

I fail to see why so many people using gnome hate anything that uses QT/kde libraries with such a passion. By doing so you are seriously limiting yourself and overlooking some nice software.

Amarok, k3b, k9copy (only decent dvd ripper I've found on linux suitable for recommending to others), konqueror (meh as a web browser but great for viewing local filesystem and sftp'ing with other machines, like a swiss army knife), kino for converting dv cam footage. etc.

The recent trend over the last few years for everyone to default to gnome and nobody having used any qt stuff seems strange to me, I always have both sets of libraries installed and use the best tool for the job.

Re:Alternatives (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724808)

Then you're not listening to what people are saying. They don't want both vast sets of libraries eating up all their resources. Either Gnome or KDE is a resource pig, running a good chunk of the libraries of both is a nightmare.

Re:Alternatives (0, Troll)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724310)

XMMS 1.x is no longer supported and I hate the client/server model used in 2.x Amarok won't install without KDE and Rhythmbox is nearly unusable for my needs. Granted I am running FreeBSD.

I heard the same problems plague Commodore 64 users, too. It's an outrage, I tell ya.

Re:Alternatives (1)

Yaa 101 (664725) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724362)

I use Audacious simply because it sounds better than VLC, somehow VLC sounds hazy and dull even when using it's equalizer.
Further, any music application that enables me to remove my files by accident is a nono for me.

Re:Alternatives (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724526)

XMMS 1.x is no longer supported

And yet, it tends to still be the music player of choice on my Linux machines..even when the poor things are running Debian.

The problem I have with all the gui alternatives (Amarok etc.) is that they're either somewhat less stable than xmms or complete memory and cpu hogs.

Re:Alternatives (1)

clang_jangle (975789) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724744)

Granted I am running FreeBSD. VLC is ok for most of my needs but I've been using Grooveshark lately to bolster up my music collection.

I'm using FreeBSD too, and find that taking a little time to script mplayer (no gui) and using find to write playlists (i.e. find ~/audio/ -name '*.mp3' > allmusic.m3u) is a great solution. Amazingly flexible, and takes far fewer resources than anything else I've tried. Read man mplayer for some ideas.

Re:Alternatives (4, Informative)

TeknoHog (164938) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724046)

I currently use Herrie where I formerly used XMMS and Audacious. It is a light textmode player that does everything I want. In fact, I originally wrote a textmode frontend for XMMS/Audacious simply because it was more convenient to use that way. Later it turned out to have other uses, for example controlling my media machine via ssh from my work computer.

My main problem with most music player software today is the idea of a 'media library'. In order to play a file, you first have to put it in the library. I understand such a database has its benefits, but to me it is unnecessary complication of a simple operation. In fact, I do have a custom script for managing music files burnt to DVDs, but in the unix spirit I like to keep thing separate, so I am free to use different players.

Re:Alternatives (2, Interesting)

markdavis (642305) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724492)

I couldn't agree with you more. This is why I have always used XMMS, and recently switched to Audacious. I don't *want* something to "manage" my "library". I don't want a database. I don't want 1,000,000 features. I just need a simple, fast, efficient music player. And xmms/audacious do just that :)

(I do use Amarok sometimes when I need something more powerful... but haven't used it since KDE 4, since they totally hosed the user interface :( )

Re:Alternatives (2, Insightful)

Tapewolf (1639955) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724710)

My main problem with most music player software today is the idea of a 'media library'. In order to play a file, you first have to put it in the library. I understand such a database has its benefits, but to me it is unnecessary complication of a simple operation.

This. I work with sound effects and speech clips a lot, usually ones that I've been sent as part of a project, and one of the things I want to be able to do is play a bunch of short files quickly and easily, with no messing around. I used to use XMMS, but it kind of faded away. I use mocp a lot now, more recently audacious. Having to register something into a database when I only want to listen to it once just quickly to make sure the recording was okay, that's just a pain in the ass.

Re:Alternatives (2, Informative)

lightrush (1471807) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724210)

Exaile, Banshee. So long and thanks for all the fish, Songbird!

Community involvement (5, Insightful)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 4 years ago | (#31723920)

There's a housing development not far from where I live that has draconian rules about "community involvement". In order to own property there, it is necessary to spend time on the board or doing board-approved activities. They have immaculate lawns.

I own my own property here, and I have no connection to any third party except the bank and the government. My lawn is a mess, but I welcome anyone who would like to mow it.

Isn't the spirit of Free Software about everyone pitching in and helping each other freely? Or did I misunderstand freedom to mean freedom for others to do work for me for free?

I see nothing in Songbird's announcement that is negative in any way.

Re:Community involvement (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724330)

Are you sure that's your lawn you're standing in?

Re:Community involvement (1)

skine (1524819) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724642)

Isn't the spirit of Free Software about everyone pitching in and helping each other freely? Or did I misunderstand freedom to mean freedom for others to do work for me for free?

Open source is about a few people helping themselves and allowing everyone else to easily help themselves. This would be inventing an automatic lawnmowing system, letting everyone use the blueprints free, and allowing them to use their own resources to build the system.

However, in open source software, this last step is practically trivial and resource-free.

Open Source != Linux (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31723964)

Linux is open source. Open source is not Linux.

Its not really that shocking.

AND ANOTHER ONE BITES THE DUST !! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31723966)

Oh! Let's go!
Steve walks warily down the street
With his brim pulled way down low
Ain't no sound but the sound of his feet
Machine guns ready to go

Are you ready hey are you ready for this?
Are you hanging on the edge of your seat?
Out of the doorway the bullets rip
To the sound of the beat yeah

Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone and another one gone
Another one bites the dust hey
Hey I'm gonna get you too
Another one bites the dust

How do you think I'm going to get along
Without you when you're gone
You took me for everything that I had
And kicked me out on my own

Are you happy are you satisfied?
How long can you stand the heat
Out of the doorway the bullets rip
To the sound of the beat look out

Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone and another one gone
Another one bites the dust hey
Hey I'm gonna get you too
Another one bites the dust

Hey
Oh take it - Bite the dust
Bite the dust hey
Hey Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust ow
Another one bites the dust he he
Another one bites the dust hay yay ya ya ya
Ooh shout

There are plenty of ways that you can hurt a man
And bring him to the ground
You can beat him
You can cheat him
You can treat him bad and leave him
When he's down yeah
But I'm ready yes I'm ready for you
I'm standing on my own two feet
Out of the doorway the bullets rip
Repeating to the sound of the beat

Another one bites the dust
Another one bites the dust
And another one gone and another one gone
Another one bites the dust yeah
Hey I'm gonna get you too
Another one bites the dust
Shoot out

E-he! Alright! Netcraft confirms it !!

Maybe it is just because it has fierce competition (4, Interesting)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724008)

So far on Linux desktop there have been three excelent iTunes like media players - Rhythmbox, Banshee and Amarok (last one mostly after features not gui). All three players excels in different ways, but what's important - they just work and I doubt we need more iTunes type clones in ui and functionality for Linux platform.

I know that Songbird guys are those positively mad people who did huge piece of dirty work to port Gstreamer to Windows and OS X and it shows what's their main priorities are. And that's fine, because Windows and Mac need a nice open source music player too (and ported Gstreamer framework of course).

Why the shock? 0% of the market is not worth it.. (-1, Flamebait)

nweaver (113078) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724010)

Why the "shock"?

0% (well, near zero, within rounding error) of the desktop market is not worth supporting.

Especially with so many of the old school unix types like me having migrated to OS-X, Linux really is effectively dead as a desktop platform, so why waste resources developing for it?

Re:Why the shock? 0% of the market is not worth it (4, Funny)

celibate for life (1639541) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724030)

so many of the old school unix types like me having migrated to OS-X

Troll harder.

Re:Why the shock? 0% of the market is not worth it (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724090)

More like flamebait. I modded appropriately..

Re:Why the shock? 0% of the market is not worth it (3, Interesting)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724128)

Old school Unix? MacOS? You must be joking?

I say that as an old SunOS user that ignores his mini that sits under the desk.

I might want to steal some Mac apps but that's about it. Really, I would be more interested in stealing some Win apps.

MacOS is for grannies that can't be trusted not to browse sites they've been told to stay away from.

Re:Why the shock? 0% of the market is not worth it (0, Troll)

abigor (540274) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724522)

No, he's telling the truth. If you worked in the Unix development biz, you'd know that too.

Re:Why the shock? 0% of the market is not worth it (0, Troll)

abigor (540274) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724512)

It's true, kid. Get over it.

Re:Why the shock? 0% of the market is not worth it (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724104)

Especially with so many of the old school unix types like me having migrated to OS-X

I call Shenanigans! A real old school Unix user would have:
a) Capitalized the 'U' merely out of respect
b) Waxed nostalgically about Unix (at least 3 full paragraphs)
c) Included "rm -SCO" or "sudo fuck SCO" in their post

As for me, an old school Unix user, I switched to Mac because it was the best computer I could steal. The old lady I took it from still thinks her toaster is the slowest screen saver ever.

let the themknow how you feel then, uninstall! (1)

komok (1499373) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724026)

As an act of righteous anger I uninstalled it upon reading this.
To be honest though, Songbird is nothing to miss. Any platform has a more than adequate substitute and this whole browser-integration-into-the-media-player deal is just ridiculous.

solongbird (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724042)

Not long before the Windows and Mac development stops, too. This software failed to gain traction.

Performance Issues (3, Interesting)

bmo (77928) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724074)

If there was ever a music player on Linux that was worse than the worst versions of Amarok, it's Songbird. Nice ideas, but it never ever did work correctly for me, and it wasn't for lack of memory or processing power. I kept installing it and removing it from time to time to see how it was going.

It's like they never tried getting it to perform correctly on Linux. Oh well.

Maybe it works better on Windows, but I'll never know since I never use that unless I absolutely have to.

--
BMO

Re:Performance Issues (1)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724328)

There is one with much worse performance: Banshee. And Ubuntu guys want to make it the default player in place of Rhythmbox...

Re:Performance Issues (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724462)

Really? I've been using the Ubuntu 10.04 beta for a while now and Rhythmbox is still default, what makes you think they want to switch the players?

Re:Performance Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724872)

Ubuntu seems to revel in poor choices. For a distro that was born with so much potential, it's becoming the crackhead of Linux.

Re:Performance Issues (1)

Dmritard96 (1268918) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724402)

Same, every few months I would try it out and something was either incredibly slow, buggy, or it would just be a massive memory hog...not really a major loss.

Farewell (1)

bkissi01 (699085) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724076)

Songbird was far from perfect, but overall it was my favorite media player. Guess I'll just be sticking to VLC and loose the media library functionality.

Re:Farewell (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724150)

I must say that I am totally underwhelmed.

This was by far my least favorite Linux media player of many.

Genuine diversity always helps ensure that your ecosystem does not collapse upon the death of a single member.

Re:Farewell (2, Interesting)

bmo (77928) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724152)

>he hasn't heard of the media library pane in vlc

http://wiki.videolan.org/Media_Library [videolan.org]

--
BMO

Re:Farewell (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724442)

As of VLC media player version 0.9.8a, the Media Library feature offers only the most basic abilities.

Awesome (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724116)

I've been here lots of times in the past in threads about iTunes where you fuckers were all "iTunes sux, Songbird on Linux rawks!". Now they're shitcanning Linux support and LO AND BEHOLD, Songbird sucks.

Fucking hypocrites.

Re:Awesome (2)

etymxris (121288) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724192)

Really? I browse slashdot every day and have for the past 10 years and I don't recall hearing anything about "Songbird". I find it implausible that it's been widely heralded as the Linux iTunes alternative.

Re:Awesome (1)

LingNoi (1066278) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724476)

I've been using linux for around 4+ years and Slashdot for much much longer. I've never even heard of Songbird before.

Songbird Irrelevant Anyway (2, Interesting)

mardukvmbc (244275) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724130)

In my opinion Songbird became irrelevant anyway the moment it dropped ipod support. I don't know how they think they can gain any semblance of marketshare, or cred for that matter, by dropping key features from it's codebase. It ran like crap anyway. Who builds a music player on top of mozilla?

Apparently they don't support much of anything (4, Informative)

BrandonJones (1581809) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724136)

Out of curiosity I dowloaded songbird just now and tried to install on my Windows 7 machine. Got a nice dialog saying "We don't support this OS. You can try, but things may not work properly." So you don't support Linux, and you don't support the latest version of Windows (or, I'm willing to bet, Vista)... Why not just call yourself a Mac product and be done with it?

Re:Apparently they don't support much of anything (1)

Fluffy Bunnies (1055208) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724248)

You'd lose that bet. No idea what's the deal with Win 7, though.

Re:Apparently they don't support much of anything (1)

Spad (470073) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724324)

I've got it running on Win 7 x86 and x64 without any issues or warnings.

Sadly I haven't been able to find anything better to replace it; it is terribly sluggish.

Re:Apparently they don't support much of anything (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724344)

It does not run well on Mac either. It is just a pretty sad application.

Hate to see it go, but I never used it. (1)

murph (16036) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724168)

I like the idea of it, but I don't really use the big music organizing programs.

From my experience it's not a great loss (5, Informative)

overnight_failure (1032886) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724236)

N.B. I am a Windows 7 user and it did say when I installed that Windows 7 was not supported.

I dropped iTunes out of my home setup a while back and thought I've give Songbird a go. I've been running it for about 4 months now and I have to say, in IMO, it is one aweful piece of software which I rarely use now. Barring the crashes (ack. NB above) its usability is pretty poor.

I hope others have hade better experiences with it.

I would feel bad about this... (2)

bgfay (5362) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724266)

...but I tried Songbird and it was slow, prone to crashes, and generally not very useful. Compared to Banshee, it just didn't work well enough. I don't like to see any company stop supporting their software on Linux, but I'm hardpressed to find anyone I know who uses Songbird anyway.

This is a sad thing at the general level of Linux software, but so far as usefulness goes, not that big of a deal to me.

Re:I would feel bad about this... (1)

bgfay (5362) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724286)

Bad form to reply to my own post, but here goes.

I just had a thought: this is exactly the way it's supposed to work. Songbird is a pretty bad player and I wouldn't imagine that many people are using it, so it dies.

I like the idea of natural selection. It works.

Re:I would feel bad about this... (1)

basotl (808388) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724774)

I've really tried to like Songbird and have installed it on several occasions. The UI looks nice out of the box and the add-ons were nice. The actual user experience had much to be desired. I use Rythmbox now.

HTML5 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724372)

Why won't they support it on Linux? What exactly is OS-specific? Hopefully HTML5 audio and video support will help further abstract the songbird layer over firefox/gecko so that it doesn't rely on any OS-specific APIs at all and can be truly portable.

Songbird GPL licence? (0, Troll)

redelm (54142) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724474)

According to the songbird wiki, it is licenced GPL. Even so, they can certainly stop development for Linux and continue it for MS-Win/Mac. They're perfectly entitled to decide where they put their development efforts. (And with bloat, they need it) But they'll have to release the source from these developments to whomever gets binaries and allow them (or others) to port the changes to Linux.

It will be interesting if they try to keep anything secret. If they have taken in any community code/patches, the code is no longer theirs to relicence. Even if they have not, users have adopted Songbird partly on the basis of it being GPL, this gives them standing to sue that derivative works also must get source released. Which Songbird has primised anyways.

Re:Songbird GPL licence? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31724534)

According to the songbird wiki, it is licenced GPL. Even so, they can certainly stop development for Linux and continue it for MS-Win/Mac. They're perfectly entitled to decide where they put their development efforts. (And with bloat, they need it) But they'll have to release the source from these developments to whomever gets binaries and allow them (or others) to port the changes to Linux.

It will be interesting if they try to keep anything secret. If they have taken in any community code/patches, the code is no longer theirs to relicence. Even if they have not, users have adopted Songbird partly on the basis of it being GPL, this gives them standing to sue that derivative works also must get source released. Which Songbird has primised anyways.

What makes you think they might stop releasing source code? Unless you have some kind of evidence, you're spreading FUD.

OS-Specific Work (1)

CritterNYC (190163) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724746)

From the actual blog post, I'd wager that the issue they're having is building out things that need OS-specific bits for each of the majors OSes. They don't have the resources to do all 3, so they are dropping the OS that has the least profit (the OS of least interest to other hardware and software partners because it has the smallest market share): Linux. Which makes sense. They'll still develop it out and include and test the OS-specific bits for Win and Mac, but either not develop them for Linux (in which case said feature will be disabled or hidden in the Linux build) or develop them and not test them (hence the unsupported build warning). As the source will still be available, anybody is free to build out those Linux-specific bits if it interests them.

None of that requires anything secret or anything close to a violation of the GPL.

Enough already! (0, Offtopic)

zill (1690130) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724554)

I am so sick and tired of these april fools posts.

i wont miss it (1)

yossarianuk (1402187) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724658)

Been running Linux for about 8 yrs, I have tried loads of distros and for some reason I have never installed/user songbird. I'm pretty damn happy with amarok now.

Serious question : Unix philosophy for music lib? (1)

Weezul (52464) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724700)

I think the unix philosophy says that life's complex tasks should be accomplished by a collection of independent utilities that interact well together. In particular, the library and player functionality must be separated. In fact, you want the same basic library tools managing all your big file sets, ala ebooks, pictures, music, movies, porn, etc., albeit using different column sets.

How can one best achieve this? Do we even have a good separate file library system that'll track diverse file attributes? ReiserFS was perhaps one good underlying "data base". Otoh, iTunes doesn't even use the Mac filesystem's metadata facility. How about specialized MySQL storage engines?

Not needed on Linux. Mainly useful on Macs (1)

rduke15 (721841) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724762)

While Linux doesn't have a player I like as much as Winamp, it has many which are adequate. I tried Songbird on Linux, and cannot remember what I thought of it or why I didn't continue using it, so I guess I have nothing to regret if they drop Linux (where I mainly use gmusicbrowser [gmusicbrowser.org] now).

Songbird is mainly useful on Macs, where iTunes doesn't support Flac or many other formats, and there is not a lot of choice of music players as there is on Windows or Linux.

I am ready... (1)

rec9140 (732463) | more than 4 years ago | (#31724810)

checklist:

1) Tar..... check!
2) Feather.... check!
3) Pitchfork...check!
4) Torch.......check!

I am ready......

Goodbye lusers! And from the comments you managed to piss of most of your user base... GOOD MOVE!

EPIC FAILURE!

Next!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?