Songbird isn’t singing to me
In a previous post, I referred to the Songbird Firefox build as "an unfortunate waste of code." This comment prompted Rob Lord–one of the principal Songbird developers–to ask me in the comments of that post why I felt that way towards their product. I guess the wonders of Technorati keep even this obscure little blog from complete anonymity. Rather than respond in the comments of the post, I decided to speak out about the Songbird build right here, instead.
The problem I have with Songbird is that it's too specific. I don't need a media player in my browser. When I'm browsing the web, I want a browser. When I'm listening to music, I want a media player. I want them separated because to me, they provide distinctly different experiences that I do not feel need to be integrated.
One of Songbird's highly-touted features is the ability to serve up MP3s embedded in a single webpage, or possibly scooped up from an entire website. I have never needed this feature, ever. While I can see how it can be used, I simply can't see why I would want to use it.
And maybe that's my problem: I don't want it. I'm obviously not the prime target audience for this sort of software. Just like Flock isn't the prime target audience for many browser users. Flock fits me because it has the tools I want. Songbird has none of the tools I'm looking for, and so using it would be pointless to me.
In that same post I linked above, I made the comment (in regards to Flock):
I'm a proponent of new technology–even recycled technology–when it's done right and provides a user with an added or varied experience that is demonstrably beneficial to the user.
"Demonstrably beneficial" is a highly subjective phrase. I'm sure there's an audience for the Songbird software. I call it "unfortunate" because it actually has tremendous potential. But I think it would be better served as an advanced extension for Firefox rather than a completely separate build.
Maybe using the phrase "waste of code" was a bit harsh, I'll admit that much. Especially when you consider that fact that it's currently sitting at version 0.1.1. It's basically a preview build. I will definitely try it again later when it hits public beta, but I'm not expecting it to ever become my default browser. Songbird just isn't singing to me.
Blogged with Flock
My awesome family at Mahoney State Park this past summer. From L to R: me; my oldest son, Caleb; baby Harlyn peeking out from behind mommy's shoulder; my wife, Amanda; my son Alex.
We may be doing a bad job communicating the (eventual) Songbird value proposition.
Songbird isn’t supposed to replace your web browser. It is supposed to replace your media player.
I agree wholeheartedly. I just want a program that just handles my music library well. Even with such an unnecessary amount of features, however, I am still going to turn to Songbird as my next player. It is still by far the most impressive of all so far. As soon as they turn the memory usage down some more and add CD support, I will be migrating my libraries straightaway.
I searched Google to see if some measures are being performed to lighten up the load for those that don’t want the stupid web browser, but, alas, I found only one more person wishing the same as I.
Well put, Mr. Payne.