unalone's dashboard

When I close the Songbird window, it should not stop music playback and close. It should continue running as a background prcoess. This was unintuitive for me, using the product, and I should be able to keep the application open without a Window. (That's really music player 101, or ought to be.)

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
Make Songbird a background process.

That makes sense.

No. It doesn't work like that. A third-party company has no rights to steal away a company's proprietary system.

You want to stop registering? Stop using so many web sites. Find one or two things that work for you and stick with them. Moving to a site that 37signals just bashed incredibly won't help. 37signals doesn't like this site. They offer support here grudgingly. So you won't get help here. – unalone, on May 09, 2009 04:36

Brilliant, mate. So you leave their OFFICIAL forums, which don't help, to complain on unofficial forums they blasted because they can't be as active here. – unalone, on May 09, 2009 03:15

They DO. They just don't do it on GetSatisfaction, because they built their own support system. – unalone, on May 08, 2009 22:10

If a program has mediocre controls, then it's mediocre. A jukebox program's most important feature is making browsing easy, and that includes controlling browsing views. Its second most important one is consistent playback, which I filed another bug complaint for.

Native doesn't just mean "non-emulated." It also refers to the feel of the program in context of the operating system. Songbird feels out of place. And you can't judge a program out of context. A part of design is making something fit in.

Proprietary apps are often better than cross-platform ones. That's because the developers spend more time making them shine. I pick iWork over Office, for instance, because it is in fact a more native-feeling and nicer program.

iTunes on Windows is awful. It's better than Songbird on Windows at the moment, but it's not good. I prefer WinAmp.

Google has said explicitly that they AREN'T releasing Chrome on the Mac yet because they've developed it with a separate, more Apple-obsessed team. I think they might do Chrome justice on OS X. If not, I'll criticize that too.

Songbird doesn't arrange playlists as well as Genius, doesn't browse as well as iTunes' browsing options, its visualizer is worse, it doesn't support playback when the window is closed. I don't care about it supporting more devices, because I only use one device. I don't care about more platforms: I only use one. Customization? What does that matter? I care only about finding and playing music. That's where Songbird fails. And for the record, I've never had to file a complaint with iTunes. So I don't give a damn about its customer service.

You're not on the Songbird team, so I won't complain that your response is wholly unprofessional, but: when I complain about features that are concretely missing/poor, the proper response isn't to say "Well, we do some stuff nicely," because I don't care about that stuff. The proper response is to either say that you'll work on fixing the problem, or to explain why the problem isn't a problem at all.

Apple's "demands?" It's called "interface guidelines" and it's what makes OS X flow the way it does. The best third-party apps follow them to a T. Don't get mad just because it's Apple. Apple knows best almost all the time. It's why we use its products.

Don't mock iTunes until Songbird plays music after you close its window, because until then it's lost. – unalone, on December 10, 2008 01:54

@mike: Yeah. It's a lot of trouble. But that's because they're developing three separate programs, for three separate operating systems. If any one of those is mediocre on its system, then it's not excused by the other systems. And I've got sympathy for the situation - hence my posting bugs instead of avoiding Songbird entirely - but at the same time, I won't use Songbird over iTunes unless it can do everything iTunes does and better. Native applications are always better than non-native ones. – unalone, on December 09, 2008 18:46

That's not logical, though. The vast majority of users are going to use on a single operating system. And for those users, having Songbird feel as native as possible is essential. Especially on OS X, where Apple's demand for consistency across interfaces is legendary.

Making me have to learn an entirely new system for a program is illogical, unless that system is vastly more usable. This isn't: it's harder to use even if I wasn't already used to the OS X layout. – unalone, on December 09, 2008 17:43

It's not. I submitted three bug reports alongside this, all of which directly concern usability.

I also have to say that "pretty good" shouldn't be what your team aims for. – unalone, on December 04, 2008 07:31

I'd rather something that doesn't stand out than something that stands out in a bad way. If something else came along, that would be fine, but this is just weird.

I think that it's a small point, but the best software is what it is because of the details. – unalone, on December 03, 2008 19:05

Something like "theme" or "style" is much more neutral, and makes the product seem less gimmicky.

"Feather" implies one small part of a whole. If you were changing one aspect of the layout, one small part, then "feather" makes sense. But you're using "feather", which is a small object, to replace Firefox's "skin", which describes something that covers a whole. It's not an apt visual metaphor.

I think the entire thing is gimmicky (does ThunderBIRD use "feathers"?), and beyond that feather just doesn't work to describe a modification that changes an entire visual layout. – unalone, on December 03, 2008 17:25

But it is in English...

Or is that an extra setting I need to change it to? – unalone, on June 22, 2008 02:13

Then how do I ADD badges? – unalone, on June 21, 2008 20:48