Re: [News] Amarok 2.0 Approaches Release

On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:27:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Malina - First alpha release of Amarok 2.0

Amarok never should have made it to V1.0...
It's a slow, bloated, buggy program that can't deal with large amounts of
files and trips all over itself.
On top of that the user interface ranks amongst the worst on the planet.

If ever there was a poster child for Linux/OSS basement ware, slop ware,
Amarok is it....

And BTW Amarok has a lot of potential but it just isn't ready yet and to
put a V2.0 version on it is a scam....




--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

"Moshe Goldfarb." <> stated in post
tcr2rr2s0w01$. on 7/12/08 5:54 PM:

> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:27:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Malina - First alpha release of Amarok 2.0
>
> Amarok never should have made it to V1.0...
> It's a slow, bloated, buggy program that can't deal with large amounts of
> files and trips all over itself.
> On top of that the user interface ranks amongst the worst on the planet.
>
> If ever there was a poster child for Linux/OSS basement ware, slop ware,
> Amarok is it....
>
> And BTW Amarok has a lot of potential but it just isn't ready yet and to
> put a V2.0 version on it is a scam....

I find it funny that a music organizer / player asks the user on install
what database they want to use. What? Sure, some techie folks might care
but if you going to have such an odd option why not have a default and let
the techies change it if they want? Heck, have an advanced install option
if you want it set up at install - right now it is just silly.


--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing. - Unknown

On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:02:48 -0700, Snit wrote:

> "Moshe Goldfarb." <> stated in post
> tcr2rr2s0w01$. on 7/12/08 5:54 PM:
>
>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:27:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> Malina - First alpha release of Amarok 2.0
>>
>> Amarok never should have made it to V1.0... It's a slow, bloated, buggy
>> program that can't deal with large amounts of files and trips all over
>> itself.
>> On top of that the user interface ranks amongst the worst on the
>> planet.
>>
>> If ever there was a poster child for Linux/OSS basement ware, slop
>> ware, Amarok is it....
>>
>> And BTW Amarok has a lot of potential but it just isn't ready yet and
>> to put a V2.0 version on it is a scam....
>
> I find it funny that a music organizer / player asks the user on install
> what database they want to use. What? Sure, some techie folks might
> care but if you going to have such an odd option why not have a default
> and let the techies change it if they want?

So, what is "default" database that is installed with each Linux based
distro?

> Heck, have an advanced
> install option if you want it set up at install - right now it is just
> silly.

No, right now it is different from what you are used to.

--
Rick

I Like To Capitalize The First Letter Of Each Word Because Of My Mental
State. Just FYI. I Need Medical Care. Just FYI

Just FYI

For Your Information. Just FYI. Isn't Posting For Your Information? I
Thought So But My Tiny Brain Tells Me To Say Just FYI Because I Don't
Realize That. Just FYI

Just FYI

"Snit" <> wrote in message
news:C49EA248.C7899%.. .
> "Moshe Goldfarb." <> stated in post
> tcr2rr2s0w01$. on 7/12/08 5:54 PM:
>
>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:27:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> Malina - First alpha release of Amarok 2.0
>>
>> Amarok never should have made it to V1.0...
>> It's a slow, bloated, buggy program that can't deal with large amounts of
>> files and trips all over itself.
>> On top of that the user interface ranks amongst the worst on the planet.
>>
>> If ever there was a poster child for Linux/OSS basement ware, slop ware,
>> Amarok is it....
>>
>> And BTW Amarok has a lot of potential but it just isn't ready yet and to
>> put a V2.0 version on it is a scam....
>
> I find it funny that a music organizer / player asks the user on install
> what database they want to use. What? Sure, some techie folks might care
> but if you going to have such an odd option why not have a default and let
> the techies change it if they want? Heck, have an advanced install option
> if you want it set up at install - right now it is just silly.
>
>
> --
> The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
> nothing. - Unknown
>

On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:02:48 -0700, Snit wrote:

> "Moshe Goldfarb." <> stated in post
> tcr2rr2s0w01$. on 7/12/08 5:54 PM:
>
>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:27:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> Malina - First alpha release of Amarok 2.0
>>
>> Amarok never should have made it to V1.0...
>> It's a slow, bloated, buggy program that can't deal with large amounts of
>> files and trips all over itself.
>> On top of that the user interface ranks amongst the worst on the planet.
>>
>> If ever there was a poster child for Linux/OSS basement ware, slop ware,
>> Amarok is it....
>>
>> And BTW Amarok has a lot of potential but it just isn't ready yet and to
>> put a V2.0 version on it is a scam....
>
> I find it funny that a music organizer / player asks the user on install
> what database they want to use. What? Sure, some techie folks might care
> but if you going to have such an odd option why not have a default and let
> the techies change it if they want? Heck, have an advanced install option
> if you want it set up at install - right now it is just silly.

Amarok is just so bad it's not even funny anymore.
Sure it does a hundred different things but how many does it do well?
How about asking it to scan 10's of thousands of music file directories,
some with zipped cover art, txt files, par files, rar files etc.
The typical online music collectors hdisk.
The dammed program freezes, hogs resources, goes out to lunch with no
updating of the progress bar etc...
Then there is the interface....

Sit a noob down in fornt of that program and ask him to use it without
looking at a Wikki...
He will sit there with a blank look on his face....

A similar thing happens with later versions of Microsoft Media Palyer
BTW...
Yet another piece of **** with a confusing UI.

It doesn't crash though... but it still sucks....


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

"Rick" <> stated in post
-KmdnfBqs4Mow- on 7/12/08 6:47 PM:

> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:02:48 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> "Moshe Goldfarb." <> stated in post
>> tcr2rr2s0w01$. on 7/12/08 5:54 PM:
>>
>>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:27:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>
>>>> Malina - First alpha release of Amarok 2.0
>>>
>>> Amarok never should have made it to V1.0... It's a slow, bloated, buggy
>>> program that can't deal with large amounts of files and trips all over
>>> itself. On top of that the user interface ranks amongst the worst on the
>>> planet.
>>>
>>> If ever there was a poster child for Linux/OSS basement ware, slop ware,
>>> Amarok is it....
>>>
>>> And BTW Amarok has a lot of potential but it just isn't ready yet and to put
>>> a V2.0 version on it is a scam....
>>>
>> I find it funny that a music organizer / player asks the user on install what
>> database they want to use. What? Sure, some techie folks might care but if
>> you going to have such an odd option why not have a default and let the
>> techies change it if they want?
>>
> So, what is "default" database that is installed with each Linux based distro?
>
Your question, in this context, is nonsense. You have just proved your
inability to understand what you read. The question is not what database
*any* other program uses, no less the OS database default.

>> Heck, have an advanced install option if you want it set up at install -
>> right now it is just silly.
>>
> No, right now it is different from what you are used to.

It is not designed for the general user... most people are not going to care
any more about what database their *music* player uses than they care about
what brand of socks their favorite political prefers.

--
BU__SH__

"Moshe Goldfarb." <> stated in post
on 7/12/08 6:58 PM:

> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:02:48 -0700, Snit wrote:
>
>> "Moshe Goldfarb." <> stated in post
>> tcr2rr2s0w01$. on 7/12/08 5:54 PM:
>>
>>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:27:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>
>>>> Malina - First alpha release of Amarok 2.0
>>>
>>> Amarok never should have made it to V1.0...
>>> It's a slow, bloated, buggy program that can't deal with large amounts of
>>> files and trips all over itself.
>>> On top of that the user interface ranks amongst the worst on the planet.
>>>
>>> If ever there was a poster child for Linux/OSS basement ware, slop ware,
>>> Amarok is it....
>>>
>>> And BTW Amarok has a lot of potential but it just isn't ready yet and to
>>> put a V2.0 version on it is a scam....
>>
>> I find it funny that a music organizer / player asks the user on install
>> what database they want to use. What? Sure, some techie folks might care
>> but if you going to have such an odd option why not have a default and let
>> the techies change it if they want? Heck, have an advanced install option
>> if you want it set up at install - right now it is just silly.
>
> Amarok is just so bad it's not even funny anymore.
> Sure it does a hundred different things but how many does it do well?

Rick has told me I would have to risk breaking the law just to get some
pretty basic functionality out of it.

> How about asking it to scan 10's of thousands of music file directories,
> some with zipped cover art, txt files, par files, rar files etc.
> The typical online music collectors hdisk.
> The dammed program freezes, hogs resources, goes out to lunch with no
> updating of the progress bar etc...

So even with the option to pick different databases it does not handle a lot
of data well? If so that is absurd.

> Then there is the interface....
>
> Sit a noob down in fornt of that program and ask him to use it without
> looking at a Wikki...
> He will sit there with a blank look on his face....
>
> A similar thing happens with later versions of Microsoft Media Palyer
> BTW...
> Yet another piece of **** with a confusing UI.
>
> It doesn't crash though... but it still sucks....
>



--
BU__SH__

"Snit" <> wrote in message
news:C49EB412.C7904%.. .
> "Moshe Goldfarb." <> stated in post
> on 7/12/08 6:58 PM:
>
>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:02:48 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>
>>> "Moshe Goldfarb." <> stated in post
>>> tcr2rr2s0w01$. on 7/12/08 5:54 PM:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:27:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>
>>>>> Malina - First alpha release of Amarok 2.0
>>>>
>>>> Amarok never should have made it to V1.0...
>>>> It's a slow, bloated, buggy program that can't deal with large amounts
>>>> of
>>>> files and trips all over itself.
>>>> On top of that the user interface ranks amongst the worst on the
>>>> planet.
>>>>
>>>> If ever there was a poster child for Linux/OSS basement ware, slop
>>>> ware,
>>>> Amarok is it....
>>>>
>>>> And BTW Amarok has a lot of potential but it just isn't ready yet and
>>>> to
>>>> put a V2.0 version on it is a scam....
>>>
>>> I find it funny that a music organizer / player asks the user on install
>>> what database they want to use. What? Sure, some techie folks might
>>> care
>>> but if you going to have such an odd option why not have a default and
>>> let
>>> the techies change it if they want? Heck, have an advanced install
>>> option
>>> if you want it set up at install - right now it is just silly.
>>
>> Amarok is just so bad it's not even funny anymore.
>> Sure it does a hundred different things but how many does it do well?
>
> Rick has told me I would have to risk breaking the law just to get some
> pretty basic functionality out of it.
>
>> How about asking it to scan 10's of thousands of music file directories,
>> some with zipped cover art, txt files, par files, rar files etc.
>> The typical online music collectors hdisk.
>> The dammed program freezes, hogs resources, goes out to lunch with no
>> updating of the progress bar etc...
>
> So even with the option to pick different databases it does not handle a
> lot
> of data well? If so that is absurd.
>
>> Then there is the interface....
>>
>> Sit a noob down in fornt of that program and ask him to use it without
>> looking at a Wikki...
>> He will sit there with a blank look on his face....
>>
>> A similar thing happens with later versions of Microsoft Media Palyer
>> BTW...
>> Yet another piece of **** with a confusing UI.
>>
>> It doesn't crash though... but it still sucks....
>>
>
>
>
> --
> BU__SH__
>
>
>

Was that George BUSH? If so you put in some extra spaces. Hope that clears
up the confusion.

"The Crappier Version" <> stated in post
jCdek.5205$ on 7/12/08 7:20 PM:

....
>> --
>> BU__SH__
>>
>>
>>
>
> Was that George BUSH? If so you put in some extra spaces. Hope that clears
> up the confusion.


Fill in the blanks as you wish.


--
"Uh... ask me after we ship the next version of Windows [laughs] then I'll
be more open to give you a blunt answer." - Bill Gates
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/gates/>

On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 19:17:09 -0700, Snit wrote:

> "Rick" <> stated in post
> -KmdnfBqs4Mow- on 7/12/08 6:47 PM:
>
>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:02:48 -0700, Snit wrote:
>>
>>> "Moshe Goldfarb." <> stated in post
>>> tcr2rr2s0w01$. on 7/12/08 5:54 PM:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 18:27:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>>>
>>>>> Malina - First alpha release of Amarok 2.0
>>>>
>>>> Amarok never should have made it to V1.0... It's a slow, bloated,
>>>> buggy program that can't deal with large amounts of files and trips
>>>> all over itself. On top of that the user interface ranks amongst the
>>>> worst on the planet.
>>>>
>>>> If ever there was a poster child for Linux/OSS basement ware, slop
>>>> ware, Amarok is it....
>>>>
>>>> And BTW Amarok has a lot of potential but it just isn't ready yet and
>>>> to put a V2.0 version on it is a scam....
>>>>
>>> I find it funny that a music organizer / player asks the user on
>>> install what database they want to use. What? Sure, some techie
>>> folks might care but if you going to have such an odd option why not
>>> have a default and let the techies change it if they want?
>>>
>> So, what is "default" database that is installed with each Linux based
>> distro?
>>
> Your question, in this context, is nonsense. You have just proved your
> inability to understand what you read. The question is not what
> database *any* other program uses, no less the OS database default.

Your statement. in this context, shows you abysmal knowledge of Linux
based distros.

Your words: "if you going to have such an odd option why not have a
default".

So, what is "default" database that is installed with each Linux based
distro? What do you suggest the default be?



>
>>> Heck, have an advanced install option if you want it set up at install
>>> - right now it is just silly.
>>>
>> No, right now it is different from what you are used to.
>
> It is not designed for the general user... most people are not going to
> care any more about what database their *music* player uses than they
> care about what brand of socks their favorite political prefers.

Again, you miss the point. Amarok is asking what database the user has
installed so that can be used, instead of installing its own database.


--
Rick