Comments on: Songbird: the open source media player

By: Not him.

Not him. — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:47:27 +0000

I thought WMP had an internet explorer frame built into one of the functions. Rubbish, and I’d never use it as a browser, but sill (I believe a functional browser. Please, someone, prove me wrong.

By: David Bayon

David Bayon — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:24:08 +0000

Fair point, as I said in the post, I’d only just downloaded it so hadn’t tested any of that. We’ll be sure to look closely at memory footprints in the review.

It is worth bearing in mind that unlike WMP and itunes, Songbird is also a web browser, so you could feasibly replace both your media player *and* browser with this one app.

By: Alyn Sparkes

Alyn Sparkes — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:09:29 +0000

Replying to my own post – how sad. Anyway, Songbird V1.00 displaying library: 100MB; WMplayer v11 displaying library: 20MB. Still, it looks like the memory leak is fixed. So, contrary to the author’s opinion – bloated as hell.

By: Alyn Sparkes

Alyn Sparkes — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 11:46:39 +0000

Interesting you say it’s an alternative to bloated apps. I tried this a few weeks back, and it ate more memory than Itunes and WMplayer (separately, obviously). It also had a nasty memory leak that meant it grabbed more memory at the rate of about 1MB/2mins. Is that all sorted in V1.00?

By: Ian

Ian — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 23:01:39 +0000

The lyrics add-in is very impressive, seems to do really well at providing for my depressive Belgian finest!

The Last.FM integration is very impressive, it’s provided the history of pretty much every artist in my library within seconds of playing a track by said artist

146MB RAM usage is a lot though…

By: Noghar

Noghar — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:56:21 +0000

Always nice to get pointers like this, pity there’s a mistake in the link to this blog… hhttp is not a well known prefix…