Linux.... mediamonkey.... meant to be..?

[StigtriX]

I would support it even though I do not use a Linux distro regularly at the moment
Make it happen and add cool features to the backers, like:
1) Media Monkey sticker - of a size so it can be placed over an Apple logo or HP logo etc. on a laptop
2) Forum hero - unique border for the forum avatar
3) Gold tier - lifetime upgrades
4) Tester tier - take part in the development process and give valuable feedback!
5) Developer tier - take part in the development process and give valuable feedback!

[Mcrackn]

I'll buy lifetime Gold as soon as there is a Ubuntu release.

[EowynCarter]

The more I use media monkey, the more frustrated i'm feeling with it's absence on linux

Some syncing software that actually let YOU decide where you want to put your files when syncing !

[heronheart]

Pretty Please? Just wasted a bunch of time messing around with XBMC on Ubuntu. I would really like to get my media organized under Ubuntu. Nothing seems to have the power of the Monkey.

[Peke]

Everything is possible, sooner than later.

[MMFrLife]

Not to put words in Peke's mouth, as he is definitely a wise and grand wizard of "being in the know", but after that statement, you know it's coming eventually.

I'm a fan of both Windows and Linux. I want to see the Monkey on Linux, but I won't give up Windows until Linux makes it easier to download/install apps and there is a
greater variety of "feature rich" software available.

[EDIT- in response to next 2 posts]

- "but I won't give up Windows until" .......[I meant to say, "I will not start using Linux again regularly"]

- "until Linux makes it easier to download/install apps"...........ok, it has been a while since I've used Linux regularly and it was not Ubuntu. I am getting reinspired to
brush up on my Linux skills after Peke's post. So, I'm sure it will be much more satisfactory this time around.
However, the package system I do not belive makes it easier or necessarily even faster than Windows. I will agree
that maybe it's "as easy". View the last paragraph of this article [url]http://blogs.computerworld.com%20%20%20%20%20/installing_linux_software_101_for_windows_users[/url]

Granted the article was written in 2009, but I still doubt it's easier. I mean think about it:
If it takes around 5 or 6 steps (and clicks and minimal typing count as steps), the package manager process of steps would have to be at least half of that to be significant enough for it to matter and to crown it as "easier". But one thing that's indisputable is Linux is certainly more secure.

- there are programs with minimal features and there are feature-rich programs (it's simple). Not needing to support feature rich programs on the server side (as posted 2 down) is its own issue - whatever that means.

[Jodli]

Everything is possible, sooner than later.

Just peed my pants!

... until Linux makes it easier to download/nstall apps and there is a greater variety of "feature rich" software available.

Almost every linux-distribution has a package-managing-system. So its already way easier than in every other operating system because you don't even have to download anything by yourself. But i get your other point

[sshaikh]

For me music in particular would benefit hugely from a centralised access/playlist/playcount arrangement. The access part is already covered (by file shares etc) but it's the meta stuff that is less supported.

So I don't think it's about replacing Windows, but more about moving to a server/client centralised paradigm - and server sides (be they Linux or Windows) don't need to support feature rich applications.

For example, even with a centralised MM service, I'd still want to use MM on Windows to manage the centralised playlists and sync data to an ipod etc. In that sense, I hope that this won't *just* be a Linux port of the Windows desktop client, but an actual splitting of the service and GUI.

[Lowlander]

I presume that most are looking for a full standalone desktop software on Linux and MAC OS as many will run a Windows free environment and aren't looking for an MM8 like solution for Linux/MAC OS. I don't know though what the developers have planned (and it seems Linux only for now).

[joltman]

I agree that a split to server/client seems to be the next preferred step. This could even allow for larger DBs/music collections. I have 2 MMW users in the house (wife and I). We both share the same network location for music. We both use laptops with our own individual DB. Every time I add music, my MMW DB updates, but she'll have to wait for the DB to update on every start of the app. She also doesn't get the benefit of my plalists, nor I hers. If there were a server/client split, the client would just auto see the DB on the server, and all would be right with the world.

This could even lead to the possibility of having a web-based client. I could access my music from home while at work. I could stream over the web. Right now, we have a Subsonic server running. I have a script in place that will take any playlist that either of us creates in MMW, and convert it to an M3U that's readable by Linux and dumps it in a location that's readable to Subsonic. While it works, it's clunky. A MML WebServer would allow me to not only stream music (while doing on the fly conversion to a lower bitrate) but video as well. Even MMA could hook up to the server. I wouldn't need my laptop out and connected to the home network in order to update MMA on my phone.

What if you want each user to have their own MMW with their own music? Well, just have them install the server/client on their machine. The benefit of server/client is you'll have the opportunity to break those functions out to different machines if you want, or leave them on the same machine.

[Lowlander]

She also doesn't get the benefit of my plalists, nor I hers. If there were a server/client split, the client would just auto see the DB on the server, and all would be right with the world.

That's what the Media Server in MMW is for. MMW, MMA and MM8 can all act as clients to that server. You can decide what to share, and Play History is tracked at the server (useful for those who use Last Player or Played# in AutoPlaylists). A full desktop version for Linux would likely still be able to act as a client to MMW on Windows, but also allow it to be the only version needed for those who don't use Windows or don't need a central server.

[joltman]

She also doesn't get the benefit of my plalists, nor I hers. If there were a server/client split, the client would just auto see the DB on the server, and all would be right with the world.

That's what the Media Server in MMW is for. MMW, MMA and MM8 can all act as clients to that server. You can decide what to share, and Play History is tracked at the server (useful for those who use Last Player or Played# in AutoPlaylists). A full desktop version for Linux would likely still be able to act as a client to MMW on Windows, but also allow it to be the only version needed for those who don't use Windows or don't need a central server.

Lowlander,

I never thought about using it in that way. The issue is, I don't have another box here to use for Windows, let alone the cash to purchase a license specifically for Windows (since I'd want the server to be "always on"). But I was also thinking/hoping for the web-based player/sync like I mentioned above.

I would be willing to pay for the license upgrade to a Linux server/windows client. I've already purchased 2 MMW licenses (when I only needed one to cover our house) and 2 MMA licenses (for both our Android phones). I just wanted the devs to know there is interest in this model.

[Lowlander]

If you have a License for MMW you can use it on up to 3 machines. Also you don't need MediaMonkey as client, any DLNA/UPnP capable device like smart TVs, smartphones, game consoles and media streamers can be used as client to your MMW server.

[joltman]

If you have a License for MMW you can use it on up to 3 machines. Also you don't need MediaMonkey as client, any DLNA/UPnP capable device like smart TVs, smartphones, game consoles and media streamers can be used as client to your MMW server.

Lowlander,

I knew about the license details when I bought the software. I still purchased 2 licenses because I thought (and still do) the software was worth it. ANYTHING to get out from iTunes.

[sshaikh]

That's what the Media Server in MMW is for.

I'll admit that I haven't played with MMW server as much as I would like to (mainly because I'm still tied to an iPod, and I understand you can't sync an ipod via MMW running in client mode).

But if we already have a server implementation then a straight port of the existing MMW functionality would be grand