On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 11:06 PM, wrote:
> I've used Rhythmbox before and never really liked it. I can't really say
> what I didn't like about it, it always felt too heavyweight (much like
> Exaile did as well). For music playing I'm very much of the school of old
> school Winamp/XMMS. I don't ne
On Mon, 2009-01-12 at 09:52 +, Odysseus Flappington wrote:
> I haven't looked into this much personally, however, I do believe that
> it is commonly accepted that Amarok is the _the_ best music
> application out there, on any platform. That's the impression I get
> anyway ;) I think you should
2009/1/11 :
> On Jan 11, 2009 4:29pm, Evan wrote:
>> I can only address the problem of playing music from a file server, but
>> I'm curious why you didn't try to use the default music player with Ubuntu,
>> called Rhythmbox? It can play music stored on an external file server
>> without any probl
On Jan 11, 2009 4:29pm, Evan wrote:
I can only address the problem of playing music from a file server, but
I'm curious why you didn't try to use the default music player with Ubuntu,
called Rhythmbox? It can play music stored on an external file server
without any problems.
Just my 2 ce
I can only address the problem of playing music from a file server, but I'm
curious why you didn't try to use the default music player with Ubuntu,
called Rhythmbox? It can play music stored on an external file server
without any problems.
Just my 2 cents.
--
Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list
Ubu
