Re: [gentoo-user] Re: xmms alternative

["b.n." <brullonulla@gmail.com>]

Harm Geerts ha scritto:

> Just because *you* wouldn't use it, doesn't mean it's crap...
> Just because *you* wouldn't use it, doesn't mean you have to badmouth it.
> 
> You seem to forget people spend time creating these great programs at no cost.
> You don't insult the program, you insult the people behind it.

I personally like and use amaroK, but if he feels it's a smoking pile of 
crap, it's in his whole rights to loudly say so. Many nice and helpful 
people end up coding piles of crap, the fact they are lovely people 
doing free software doesn't stops me to tell their program is a (free) 
pile of crap.

> But even worse is that you based your *opinion* on a screenshot and the 
> dependencies without even touching the program... and then tell the whole 
> world it sucks.

He doesn't like something with these dependencies and the interface 
depicted in the screenshot. So his comments are perfectly appropriate.

>> Amarok constitutes a replacement for xmms just like an 18-wheeler
>> tractor-trailer combo constitutes a replacement for a half-ton pickup
>> truck.
> 
> Amarok is not a replacement, amarok is an alternative, which is exactly what 
> this thread is about. If you compare them as equals your statement holds 
> truth, *nobody* would argue that.

I think he implicitly meant "something about as lightweight and simple" 
by reading the word "alternative". And I feel he's quite right. I 
happily switched from xmms to amarok, but they are definitely not 
similar programs targeting the same audience.

And now stop the incumbent flamewars :)

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list