On 8/23/07, Sham Chukoury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [snip]
> XMMS2 seems to appeal to those mostly in and around the 'college/ > university student' demographic. I think there are some reasons for > this particular situation... Music players have been done to death > over the past decade - most hardcore coders aren't really interested > in this anymore. The 'college/university student' types are likely to > be the kind of people who do have an active interest (as well as > time!) in discovering, collecting and listening to new music. > Conversely, since music players have been done to death, relatively > new programmers can quickly learn from the vast pool of knowledge > accumulated by others over the past decade. But this is digressing > almost into another post.. The point is that XMMS2 has a strong > appeal to relatively new programmers interested in exploring new ways > of experiencing their music collection. This has been quite well > reinforced by XMMS2's participation in Google's Summer of Code over > the past 2 years. [/snip] Interesting view! And it also brings up another related question that we talked about on freenode today. How do we want to profile XMMS2? I think that one of the major pro's for XMMS2 is that we don't have to profile it with one face because of the abstraction, but maybe this is also a reason why we haven't been able to attract a huge number of users, because we don't have a united "profile" of XMMS2. At my day job we always tries to find the USP (unique selling points) for our product and not take the fight to the competitor with a direct comp. We should try to find out what we think is the unique parts of XMMS2 and summarize them to some short "features" this can also be a pointer on how we want to develop the product in the future. My view of XMMS2 is the following: I do it because it's fun! This is the only reason I ever did it. Of course I will be happy if we gain more attention, but we should gain attention on the right things. Look for example at bmpx, they have a bit more attention (do they?) than we have because of the bling, but it's pretty empty when you open the box. XMMS2 is nothing about the bling, but of what's in the black box. I would like to profile XMMS2 like the "opensource foobar2k". Great support for audiophiles, organization freaks and customization maniacs. I think we have taken a good step toward this goal. I don't see XMMS2 as a head on competitor of Amarok or rythmbox, because they have a different focus. We might be able to draw some of the music-lovers from them, but we will lose people that just want to play their 128kbps mp3 with gaps but look a lot of bling! What's your view of XMMS2? -- Tobias -- _______________________________________________ Xmms2-devel mailing list Xmms2-devel@lists.xmms.se http://lists.xmms.se/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xmms2-devel
