On Sun, 2009-08-02 at 10:47 +0930, Tim wrote:
> For instance there's little reason not to use VideoLan (VLC)
as the
> standard media player in Linux....
Does anyone in the Real World actually think of themselves as using a
"media player"? Perhaps they consider playing video and playing music to
be two different things. Now there's a thought ...
I find it even slower to get started than any of the alternatives,
and
a
bit CPU heavy. So that's quite a nuisance when you're file managing
(e.g. double click on something in a list of other things, to work out
what's what, and there's an awful lot of waiting involved). RhythmBox
is also quite heavy, with all that baggage of being a library of all
your files, which is quite painful when my music collection is on the
file server, accessed via NFS. And Totem is a behemoth that doesn't
let
you do much (few codecs included, few remote ones ever found, etc.).
I use Amarok for music (and have a fairly serious dislike of its new
look, but that's beside the point). For "click-to-play" video I use
Dragon, which is simple, effective and above all fast. I reserve VLC for
the harder cases.
poc