> Tim: > Tales I've read suggests that RhythmBox doesn't "just work." For *some* people it doesn't, as can be said for many other programs. It seems you haven't tried the latest version... I'm now listening to Fleetwood Mac on absolute Classic Rock. Not a problem again. >> Don't you think they take more care than XMMS developers to get this to work? > > I can't answer for them. But some programs are geared more towards one thing (e.g. playing oggs and mp3s) than other things (playing CDs). It depends on what the creators wanted to do with their program. When I have a minute, I'll egt some mp3 and oggs. I bet you they'll play no problem. >> How come there's nobody at Red Hat/Fedora <B>responsible</B> for making reports about this and having things fixed. Playing Jobs, in other words? >> You know, kinda: "Will you get this fixed or should we use Thunar... and >> XFCE? Will you get XMMS working or will we use RhythmBox? Will you get Brasero working or... Cause, in the end, you see, everything will work. You don't work, you're not there." > This project works differently than Apple Computers. And, after 18 years, we have 1% of market share on the desktop. (Listening to Janis...) My estimation is that if Linux doesn't get 5% of the market share within 3 years, it's done. So, I give up. What do you suggest to get people using Linux, NOW? More of the RTFM rant? > a. Fedora Project is different than Apple Computers. Maybe "this project" should evaluate the marketing methods of Apple and retain what makes sense: i.e.: listening to the users, amking sure everything works, etc. > b. We, the community run it, more than some head office. A community may say: this guy is responsible for giving us shit when something doesn't work and making sure that, in the end, everything works. (Listening t the Who.) As Beranger says, if Microsoft can hardly put out a version of Windows that works every 7 or 8 years, maybe Linux should reconsider having new versions every six month. Maybe there a way somewhere in between Debian's 3 year releases and Fedora's 6 month. (Beatles) > c. No one person will have tried every single application in the distro. Certainly, one person should have tried every single default application. And that Brasero shit is one. > d. Stop being silly. If I stop being silly, nothing will change and, when Google comes in the picture, we might dwindle from 1 towards 0%. (U2 playing) >> 2) Scrap Totem, install Mplayer with all the plug-ins > > Yes, Totem sucks. Even for the codecs that it does support, from the get-go, it's a CPU pig. At least something we agree on! > Mplayer's quite good, but I've seen GUIfied versions of it that was just plain horrible. Try SMPlayer. It's a version 0,6, but already quite usable. >> 3) Scrap Brasero, install K3B > > Personally, I'm against installing any KDE applications when you don't actually use KDE. K3B should be an installation choice when you want a KDE-inclusive system. I suppose adding the KDE libraries would indeed cause a space problem, but something has to burn CDs/DVDs the easy way. (Bowie playing) >> 4) Scrap Nautilus, install Thunar (For the URL bar, but when I went to /dev/sr0, I was asked which application I wanted to open said file. I of >> course entered rhythmbox, and it worked! Not much use, of course, since >> only have to right click the CD icon to open rhythmbox.) > > I don't particularly like Nautilus, but for other reasons. It's only a basic file browser, it's not a file manager (it's too simplistic for that task). > I tried Thunar quite some time ago, didn't like that, either. You should see Dolphin! It almost make me believe KDE4 will someday become a valid choice once again. > For a basic workhorse file manager, I don't mind emelfm2, too much. It has basic file filtering, etc., What is file filtering? I try to do ~/Desktop/*html and I get no result. All the fricken' file managers I have installed. This used to be standard with the KDE file manager years ago. What happened? >> 5) Scrap Glipper, install Klipper, though Klipper has bugs in GNOME. I might give Clipman another try. > > There are places to discuss what forms default installations. If you have good reasons to suggest things should or shouldn't be installed, then debate them appropriately. I'm afraid debating this with developers of this and that application would be very unproductive. Unproductive because, once again, nobody is in charge. No butt to kick, noboddy to thank for good work. Just some kind of Brownian motion seemingly going nowhere. If Shuttleworth hadn't made all his money in the most proprietary field of software, I'd say Ubuntu is headed somewhere, but I'm not sure. > Though, as I mentioned earlier, putting KDE things into a Gnome system, isn't a great idea, and you'll find those deciding basic/default package lists will say the same thing. For a Gnome desktop, the defaults will be Gnome or generic applications, likewise for KDE desktop installs. > >> I have yet to configure Firefox in about:config so that one click in the >> url window selects everything. I hope it's still possible. With the precedent version I had, clicking the icon to the left would do the job. >> Not anymore. Those bastards like to make you sweat with every new release! > > To each their own... I prefer one click to put a cursor where I click, so I can correct some mistake / modify something. First click select to erase without copying, second copies, thereafter, you edit. It's rather rare that you have to edit URLs. Enough for today! -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
