Is it a joke or what?

What is the point of cloning XMMS seeing as it works great already?

Now with beep you have a clone of a clone, with less features and plugins than the original clone. Does it bring anything new other than the fact that its based on gtk2?

What's with the wasted effort? Its typical of the linux world, with distros or otherwise. Something already works great, so somebody out there decides to copy it and reinvent the wheel!

I am sure the developers appreciate your positive opinion on their work that they distribute to you and anyone else who wants it.

"Now with beep you have a clone of a clone, with less features and plugins than the original clone." Typical of people like yourself, don't like a program, doesn't have the featureset you want, so you moan about it instead of identifying the problems properly and helping to fix them.

go awai

Perhaps it was cloned cause XMMS was officially dead, no more development. They since have started a sister project, XMMS2 but Beep to my understanding was probably a bunch of other developers or people who wanted to keep improving a software base like XMMS to their own liking.

So do you think the same of Mozilla? It was pretty much based/cloned from Netscape which was also based off a previous browser. The beauty of open source is just that. Don't like the way a open source application or project is heading, take their existing code and improve it the way you like for yourself and share it.

BMP exists because XMMS was never ported to GTK2. BMP fits in nicely with GNOME 2.x and other GTK2 based DEs or WMs.

This is a rant. And where do rants go? That's right, in General.

And away - we - goooooooo

And this makes me think. What's the deal with GTK1? Most of the applications I use are GTK2 applications, but there are some which I need which are Qt and some which are GTK1.
GTK1 applications always seem to look pretty awful, and it doesn't follow the GTK2 colour scheme. This is annoying, because it makes it stick out like a thorn. (I use GNOME)

Here is a screenshot showing what I mean.
http://img58.imageshack.us/img58/901...bleugly0ss.png

When I tried KDE, I was happy to see that KDE applies the colour scheme to GTK1 applications, making things look a lot better.

Anyway, why don't the GNOME developers make it so that the GTK2 colour scheme applies to the old GTK1 applications if the user specifies that it should? This seems like a sensible thing to me. Also, I remember that someone wrote a GTK2 engine that made GTK2 applications be drawn by Qt or something so they would integrate better in KDE. Would it be possible to write a GTK1 engine that makes old GTK1 applications be drawn by the GTK2 engine or whatever? I'm not asking if anyone will do this for me, I'm just asking if it would be possible.

I may have gotten my words wrong or something; this toolkit stuff is pretty complicated.

Well there was one sensible reply to this post besides the usual flak that I was expecting, and this was it:

However:

I really don't see the point of trying to help develop something when something else out there like it already works great. I already am helping out on a few projects, for your information.

End.

It'd be pretty funny if you applied that logic to clothes...

customer : but sir! there's already a tshirt over there!
clerk : but this one's a different material, the old one was cotton, this one's hemp!
customer : but sir! it looks the same!
clerk : There's more than what meets the eye son.
.............................

point of this? I'm glad there's different similar projects, that means things that people cannot develop anymore, due to the lack of interest or time or whatever other reason, can still be updated. I'm still amazed by the number of distributions nowadays, a decade or so ago, there was only a handful, not much to chose from.

Distributions are like shoes, gotta find one that fits to be comfortable. The same applies to software, I don't get why you're complaining about choice.

Regardless, the simple fact of the matter is that this is not the appropriate place for such a discussion. Not only do we not care about your rant, we can do nothing about it. Why? We're not the developers. If this was the developer's forum, then your rant (possibly better worded and with actual pertinent suggestions) might be better received. If you disagree, please re-read the title of the site. In case you need help with that, it's LinuxQuestions.org, not Bitch-About-Applications-That-We-Have-No-Control-Over.org. I will concede that this is in fact the General forum and your topic is not breaking any rules by being here, but why post it when you know damn well it will not be well-received? This is called "trolling" (and don't say you didn't know it would not be well-received):

Then why are you posting on a forum related to an OS that's a clone of Unix?

Replies to posts like this always bring me much mirth...
the usual mix of ad hominen and straw man rebuttals

No, Linux is a branch of unix with its own goals, targets and developments: it was not created to be a clone of unix.

Which was entirely my point, which no-one yet seems to have realised.

If beep was created in order to provide some feature that the original XMMS lacked, or in some other way enhance the range of software currently available for linux computers, that would be acceptable, just in the way that the choice between different distributions with different goals in mind is beneficial to the community (as someone else pointed out). However, if it is only a *clone* of the original, and as I said does not bring any new features or advantages "other than the fact that its based on gtk2", then what's the point?

As to the t-shirt analogy, your argument is flawed in that the t-shirts *are* different, an alternative material, a different feel, a new and individual product! Their creater sought to bring something to the world of clothing, that was not already present, variety: the "spice of life", to borrow a cliche.

I would not object if as with the t-shirts, beep branched from XMMS to bring variety to the rest of the world and enhance the range of software available. However, it is only a clone, and a clone with less features. It brings no new opportunities or innovation, and is, therefore, pointless.

Sort of like me building an alternative channel tunnel between France and Britain when one already exists: totally redundant and useless. A tunnel to e.g. Germany, on the other hand, would be practical, as though it might be similar, it is not trying to be the same, but has a different purpose in mind. I apply this analogy directly to xmms and beep. As purely a clone, beep serves no purpose, as it seeks to recreate something that already exists.

What if traffic caused the tunnel to be overloaded?

Ever considered that maybe, just maybe, BMP was just getting going? If you bothered to read their roadmap, you would see that the first release of BMP was in February of 2006. One of the joys of OSS is that you get to see the sausage being made.

That has got to be one of the strangest comparisons I've ever heard.