Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Amarok 2.4 Beta 1 Brings A Basket Of Features

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,104

    Default Amarok 2.4 Beta 1 Brings A Basket Of Features

    Phoronix: Amarok 2.4 Beta 1 Brings A Basket Of Features

    KDE Software Compilation 4.6 is set to be released in January and coming alongside that will be the Amarok 2.4 music player release. KDE SC 4.6 Beta 1 came late last month, but now Amarok is joining the Christmas party with its first 2.4 beta release. It brings a basket of new features, thanks in part to the contributions made this year with the Google Summer of Code project...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=ODg4Mg

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,600

    Default

    Hmm, no sign of a MTP device synchronisation function yet? Ah well, guess I'll have to wait some more. Really looking forward to it. It's pretty odd how Amarok can see the MTP devices and read them, but not write to them, even if in Amarok 1 and other apps that utilise libMTP it works just fine.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    159

    Default

    nice.
    Most interesting for me is: "brand-new (completely rewritten) music collection scanner"
    The old one still kinda sucks. (even though it's kinda usable right now, it still has some hicups)

    I'm looking forward to the stable version .... maybe I should also try the beta ... if it isn't too broken ...

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Amarok is the worst audio player and a worst example of software, slow, memory hog, bad UI layout. Takes ~100MB of memory just to start it up. They could learn something from foobar2000 and mimic the same design.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hax0r View Post
    Amarok is the worst audio player and a worst example of software, slow, memory hog, bad UI layout. Takes ~100MB of memory just to start it up. They could learn something from foobar2000 and mimic the same design.
    What's the point of copying something that works. If you like foobar2000, then use foobar2000...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    125

    Default

    Am I the only one who dislikes the whole "right-click and add/replace playlist" metaphor?
    It's the most important reason I use Juk. Awkward playlist sorting in Amarok is the other main reason.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,146

    Default

    Highlights of Amarok 2.4 include trans-coding support
    Wait, what? Feature creep FTW!

    Yeah, and playlists suck. Just use my file structure directly, dammit!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    270

    Default

    I third that. I never understood how someone can think that this is useful.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    Wait, what? Feature creep FTW!

    Yeah, and playlists suck. Just use my file structure directly, dammit!
    Amarok aims to be a full featured media player, and iTunes/Windows Media Player both have transcoding. Its useful for moving songs to players that only support limited media formats; and probably easier for most users than 'transcode'

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackStar View Post
    Wait, what? Feature creep FTW!

    Yeah, and playlists suck. Just use my file structure directly, dammit!
    You do realize that you can browse by collection, or there is a way to browse directories directly from the left pane. You can add individual files, or recursively add directories.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •