Le jeudi 27 janvier 2005 Ã 14:21 -0500, Dimitrie O. Paun a Ãcrit : > On Thu, Jan 27, 2005 at 06:26:05PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > The non-latin support of gtk2 (vs gtk1) alone is a clear user benefit. > > So this is *very* far from an abstract argument with no tangible end- > > user incidence. > > I don't dispute that. But this is all tangential to the main purpose > of the freaking thing: to play music. You can get me the best non-latin > support, perfect HIG compliance, etc. but it it doesn't do a good job > playing music, it can't replace xmms. If you can't even read your playlist because xmms displays garbage, do you really think you'll appreciate the music you can't find ? (and btw xmms is not better at playing music than any other linux player - they all use the same backend libraries for christsakes. In fact the argument could easily be made that xmms is *worse* at playing music - all the stupid badly written eye-candy has been known to load systems enough to cause music skips) I'm not too fond of the rhythmbox UI myself. I'm the last one who'd say it doesn't have room for improvement. I'll even admit there are some parts of xmms' garbage heap of an ui that are better thought than the rhythmbox one. But even if xmms and rhythmbox were on the same level (and they're not - xmms' few qualities do not redeem its numerous problems) rhythmbox is getting better and xmms - not. Which means xmms will leave FC sooner or later and rhythmbox will stay (till it's relegate to history too). If it doesn't happen in FC4 it'll happen in FC5. So I'll stop loosing my time arguing about it here and let software obsolescence follow its natural course. -- Nicolas Mailhot
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
