-
 KDE-Apps.org Applications for the KDE-Desktop 
 GTK-Apps.org Applications using the GTK Toolkit 
 GnomeFiles.org Applications for GNOME 
 MeeGo-Central.org Applications for MeeGo 
 CLI-Apps.org Command Line Applications 
 Qt-Apps.org Free Qt Applications 
 Qt-Prop.org Proprietary Qt Applications 
 Maemo-Apps.org Applications for the Maemo Plattform 
 Java-Apps.org Free Java Applications 
 eyeOS-Apps.org Free eyeOS Applications 
 Wine-Apps.org Wine Applications 
 Server-Apps.org Server Applications 
 apps.ownCloud.com ownCloud Applications 
--
-
 KDE-Look.org Artwork for the KDE-Desktop 
 GNOME-Look.org Artwork for the GNOME-Desktop 
 Xfce-Look.org Artwork for the Xfce-Desktop 
 Box-Look.org Artwork for your Windowmanager 
 E17-Stuff.org Artwork for Enlightenment 
 Beryl-Themes.org Artwork for the Beryl Windowmanager 
 Compiz-Themes.org Artwork for the Compiz Windowmanager 
 EDE-Look.org Themes for your EDE Desktop 
--
-
 Debian-Art.org Stuff for Debian 
 Gentoo-Art.org Artwork for Gentoo Linux 
 SUSE-Art.org Artwork for openSUSE 
 Ubuntu-Art.org Artwork for Ubuntu 
 Kubuntu-Art.org Artwork for Kubuntu 
 LinuxMint-Art.org Artwork for Linux Mint 
 Arch-Stuff.org Art And Stuff for Arch Linux 
 Frugalware-Art.org Themes for Frugalware 
 Fedora-Art.org Artwork for Fedora Linux 
 Mandriva-Art.org Artwork for Mandriva Linux 
--
-
 KDE-Files.org Files for KDE Applications 
 OpenTemplate.org Documents for OpenOffice.org
 GIMPStuff.org Files for GIMP
 InkscapeStuff.org Files for Inkscape
 ScribusStuff.org Files for Scribus
 BlenderStuff.org Textures and Objects for Blender
 VLC-Addons.org Themes and Extensions for VLC
--
-
 KDE-Help.org Support for your KDE Desktop 
 GNOME-Help.org Support for your GNOME Desktop 
 Xfce-Help.org Support for your Xfce Desktop 
--
openDesktop.orgopenDesktop.org:   Applications   Artwork   Linux Distributions   Documents    LinuxDaily.com    Linux42.org    OpenSkillz.com   
 
Apps
News
Groups
Knowledge
Events
Forum
People
Jobs
Register
Login


Sponsoring


-
- Content .- Fans  . 

Idea: Save Amarok 1.4

   1.4  

KDE Improvement

Score 29%
Depends on  KDE 3.x
Downloads:  40
Submitted:  Jul 26 2009
Updated:  Oct 16 2012

Description:

Hi, how about saving the Amaork 1.4X Project from being destroyed by Amarok 2.X.
I\\\\\\\'m not a programmer but I know that there are a thousand reasons why Amarok 1.4 is much better than version 2.

I also don\\\\\\\'t think that Amarok 2 is developing in the right direction.

Who would be willing and able to continue developing Amarok 1.4 starting from the given source code...

Or are there already plans in that direction?


EDIT: NO NEED ANYMORE: USE CLEMENTINE. IT ALSO INLCUDES MOODBARS NOW!




LicenseGPL
Debian(http://amarok.kde.org/de/node/261)
Send to a friend
Subscribe
Other  Apps  from stalin2000
Report inappropriate content



goto page:  1  2 

-
.

 CuberoK

 
 by cleitonfelix on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

Do you Know about cuberoK? It's a great project.


"...pra que usar de tanta educação, pra destilar terceiras intenções..."
Reply to this

-

 Re: CuberoK

 
 by stalin2000 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

Hi, Cuberok looks good, but I would prefer Amarok because of it's infinite capabilities, plugins etc. - and because I'm used to it, and because it has nothing to do with google.


Reply to this

-

 try trunk

 
 by thomas12777 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

- playlist layout is more flexible then in 1.4 - and still improving
- you can relayout the UI including getting rid of the plasma view in the center
- lacking visualization is a lack in ponon and to be fixed by a GSoC project (hopefully...)
- lousy treeview speed is a general issue in the Oxygen style inherited from the /windows/ Qt style...
- thanks to lubos, libplasma doesn't increase the RAM usage of an app by ~10 megs on nvidia systems anymore
- remains the debatable semi-skinnable svg theme - well, seems mark changed his mind on the flexible layout, thus this will likely vanish as well ;-P

any specific reason to keep amarok 1.4?

<advert>meanwhile, why not try bespin to hack amarok?</advert>


Reply to this

-

 Re: try trunk

 
 by stalin2000 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

.. I wrote this to the amarok2 developers...:

How can you turn a almost perfect program into a terrible Itunes-clone?
The first thing which is really bad is this weird column in the center of the window, one cannot get rid of. Then there are a thousand functions missing.

Please take into account what what Linux-users want and please don't aim at the dumbest users on earth as the target group for this program.

Also have a look at this comment:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1096880&page=7


Reply to this

-

 Re: try trunk

 
 by SputnikRock on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

There are. Amarok 1.4 still has lots of more essential features, while Amarok 2 has some nice features that are easy to miss...

One of the latest inventions of Amarok 1 has been "tagging". It is not perfect - but I will use Amarok 1 until tagging is at least fully supportet by Amarok2! - It is a different level of organisation with tags! - I do not want to miss it!

... there are more things...

Several of them are plugin-solutions for amarok 1. One of them is the best way to produce CD-Covers for Mix-CDs under Linux. - I don't want to loose that!!! - And lots more...

It is still a very, very long way for a really good Amarok2. - Let's talk about again in 2 years maybe!!


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: try trunk

 
 by thomas12777 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

afaik tagging will rely on nepomuk - once it's done =P

at least trunk supports multilevel playlist sorting (e.g. artist -> album -> track number -> title)

unfortunately i cannot say anything about that mix cover thing - doesn't impact my musical taste, i guess (and i seriously more or less give a sh... on covers as well ;-)

i agree that repeat/shuffle togglers would make a lot of sense in the bar below the playlist or the player area - i'll try to convince someone =D


Reply to this

-

 Forks destabilize

 
 by SputnikRock on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

Amarok 1.4 is still available. - And I currently use it still under KDE 4.3!

But I don't think it is a good idea to fork it. - It is a better idea to focus the power on Amarok2 until the program becomes a real successor of Amarok 1.

Voted for "bad idea", sorry!


Reply to this

-

 Re: Forks destabilize

 
 by stalin2000 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

... yes but what does focusing help if the DIRECTION is wrong and the target User is the DAU??


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Forks destabilize

 
 by SputnikRock on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

please explain what you exactly mean with "wrong direction"... It is very vague...


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: Re: Forks destabilize

 
 by stalin2000 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

Yes, in my opinion Amarok 1.4 has the paradigm of a program that can do anything. Full functionality, full opportunities.
Amarok 2 has the paradigm of a "easy to use" program, which is quite limited in it's functionality (I do not believe that all the fuctions of amarok 1.4 will ever be implemented)
Amarok2 is also strongly oriented on Itunes, which is a very complicated, very dumb program (not possible to ad things to playlist, while playing etc.)

The Amarok 2 Programers should be ashamed of themselves to bring out a program with a higher number, which can't even do half the things the former program could do. The real name for Amarok 2 should be Amarok 0.9... Be honest with the numbers!!


Reply to this

-

 want a pure qt4 de

 
 by google01103 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

to keep/fork/continue 1.4 means retaining qt3 and personally I'm hoping for a qt4 only desktop


Suse 11.1 x64, KDE 4.3, Opera 10.x weekly build
Reply to this

-

 Re: want a pure qt4 de

 
 by Laerte on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

Plus, ppl will have to mantain KDE 3 kdelibs, as Amarok depends on that too.

Personally, I miss nothing from 1.4 series, and I'm very happy with 2.1.


Reply to this

-

 Re: want a pure qt4 de

 
 by stalin2000 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

Ok nobody would complain if it was qt4 and had the following functionality:

1. Full functionality of 1.4
2. Possibility to switch the program layout to "1.4-style" without that stupid coulumn in the middle!!


Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: want a pure qt4 de

 
 by google01103 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

re: the layout - I would suggest you find the video of 2.2 that's out there and see how the layout is now dynamic as how the parts can be laid out


Suse 11.1 x64, KDE 4.3, Opera 10.x weekly build
Reply to this

-

 small things need to be change

 
 by bugmenot1234 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

I have to say that there are some facts that I don't like in amarok 2 at the moment:
- I hate the play/pause/next buttons style. just keep them separated!
- podcast tab: no transfert to ipod (have to go to the files-tab), no "update in podcast x" (have to open them all to see where something changed)

but it plays my music so I'll stick to it :)


Reply to this

-

 Re: small things need to be change

 
 by google01103 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

"play/pause/next buttons" option to change in svn so they're no all mushed together called "main toolbar ng"


Suse 11.1 x64, KDE 4.3, Opera 10.x weekly build
Reply to this

-

 Re: Re: small things need to be change

 
 by bugmenot1234 on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%

nice! Once KDE 4.3 is out I'll switch to amarok svn! thanks for the info


Reply to this

-

 completely agree

 
 by arch0njw on: Jul 26 2009
 
Score 50%
arch0njwarch0njw
self
Home
-
J W 0

self
United States of America, Boston
Last visit Jun 15 2012
0 Friends
0 Groups

More info
Send a message
Add as friend
Other contents
--

The general response to issues I have filed for Amarok 2 basically amounts saying that it is still a work in progress. That is particularly evident with responses like "trunk in SVN is fine". That's nice, but today it's fine, tomorrow it might not be. Having people pull from SVN in order to finally find a stable, feature-functional version of the software is a bad approach.

Amarok 1.4.x was *stable*.
It worked great.
It had all the features I wanted.

I will take the step forwards to the next version when it isn't a step backwards feature wise. I still use Amarok 1.4.10 for that reason, and don't mind tolerating the Qt 1.3 stuff so I can keep the software that "works properly" (IMO).

As to the questions about "what is missing" -- do a feature comparison between the two. That will answer the question.

Amarok 2 has had some GREAT steps forward. But it is not yet sufficiently mature enough to replace 1.4.x.


Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic
Reply to this

goto page:  1  2 

Add commentBack






-
-
Do you like or dislike Ubuntu Unity?
 Yes, unity is alien technology!
 It is less confusing than Gnome 3 default, shell.
 Granny thinks it is much more usable than Gnome 2
 Canonical is embarrasing itself with this split project
 Gnome 3 default shell is much better
 I dislike Unity, Gnome 3 default shell is alien technology!
 None of the above, I like the 2Gb for free and Apple alike behavior. Will post a comment instead

resultmore
 
 
 Who we are
Contact
More about us
Frequently Asked Questions
Register
Twitter
Blog
Explore
Apps
Jobs
Knowledge
Events
People
Updates on identi.ca
Updates on Twitter
Facebook App
Content RSS   
Events RSS   

Participate
Groups
Forum
Add App
Public API
About KDE-Apps.org
Legal Notice
Spreadshirt Shop
CafePress Shop
Advertising
Sponsor us
Report Abuse
 

Copyright 2003-2014 KDE-Apps.org Team  
All rights reserved. KDE-Apps.org is not liable for any content or goods on this site.
All contributors are responsible for the lawfulness of their uploads.
KDE and K Desktop Environment are trademarks of KDE e.V.