um, karamba and context browser CSS... I\'d say we already had some form of skins.

No need for skins over here! I like my desktop consistent, and amarok fits perfectly.

Amarok is so great, I use it even though I\'m a GNOME desktop user. I think adding skin support would appeal not only to insane desktop-hybrid idiots like myself, but also to normal, sane people who customize KDE itself heavily... I know that when I used KDE, the one thing that really got me was having to mess with the colors.

Anyway, just my €0.02...

Amarok is so great, I use it even though I\'m a GNOME desktop user. I think adding skin support would appeal not only to insane desktop-hybrid idiots like myself, but also to normal, sane people who customize KDE itself heavily... I know that when I used KDE, the one thing that really got me was having to mess with the colors.

Anyway, just my €0.02...

No skins please! Amarok looks nicew for me. I am tired of winamp/xmms skins with unreadable fonts and unrecognizeable controls. As I\'ve said in another thread, many players for windows are themeable because windows\'s widgets look really ugly. KDE\'s widgets are themeable on their own, so why should amaroK has its own themes.

sninky-chan wrote:

Amarok is so great, I use it even though I\'m a GNOME desktop user. I think adding skin support would appeal not only to insane desktop-hybrid

Hey! Gnome isnt a desktop-hybrid! :angry:

You have to be kidding ? No skin support ?

Honestly. you make a nice media player, but ive thrown up better looking things.
Fair enough, dont make skin support #1 on your priority list, but atleast acknowledge that it would be nice.

People that dont want to use skins, or dont like them, dont have to use them.

If every developer had your view about skinnning, how bloody boring would everyones desktops be ? We\'d all have the same icons, same wallpaper, some looking applications.

One of the great features of linux (and kde, gnome etc) is the ability to be able to change it to look as you want it. Not as some developer wants you to see it.

Skin support is needed.

WiSHiE wrote:

You have to be kidding ? No skin support ?

Damn straight.

Honestly. you make a nice media player, but ive thrown up better looking things.
Fair enough, dont make skin support #1 on your priority list, but atleast acknowledge that it would be nice.

Nah, can\'t do that.

People that dont want to use skins, or dont like them, dont have to use them.

It\'s more fun to force people.

If every developer had your view about skinnning, how bloody boring would everyones desktops be ? We\'d all have the same icons, same wallpaper, some looking applications.

I LOVE communism!!!

One of the great features of linux (and kde, gnome etc) is the ability to be able to change it to look as you want it. Not as some developer wants you to see it.

See - Es - Es

Skin support is needed.

Pay me.

I don\'t see the need for skin support. With applications like karamba you can create your own skins, and amaroK has a complete line of DCOP calls to allow you to create karamba themes that can control any part of amaroK.


Consider the following potential problems with implementing skins.

Some sort of skinning code must be written, and currently there is nobody willing to code this.

If somebody did implement the code then we would need to ship with at least one skin, but 2-3 would probably be best. We would then have to wait for someone to come up with a few skins and then decide from them which ones to ship.

On top of needing some skins to ship with, a skin format would need to be decided on first. Do we support winamp style skins, or maybe kjofol is the way to go.

If some sort of skin engine did get implemented, then we would have the ricer crowd screaming about how amaroK is becoming too bloated for there fluxbox.

And to top it off who will maintain the codebase? Nobody even wants to implement the feature, so who will fix the bugs when they come rolling in?

With third party solutions that already exist (i.e. karamba), I wouldn\'t hold my breath waiting for somebody to include skin support.

Still waiting on skin support! :S

Erik wrote:

Still waiting on skin support! :S

...what would make you think its forthcoming?

Why not only make the XMMS-like player window themeable? Like really themable, not only skinnable? With transparency and other cool stuff. If not in the current amaroK, i think it would be a neat feature for lets say 2.0, especially because QT4 is said to handle transparency etc well.

I really like to see skin support to amarok, I like the clean look of the playlist.
But The XMMS like player window  Let's make this thing skin aware! So it can fit better to nice desktops.
you can add a button next too the play window box in the configuration menu. a button to select skins and to install this things.

And if you don't like the skins select "default" and every body happy.

When Amarok is to bloated than make a "lite" version or make skins a option (addon).
And I think if you make the engine (I can't ) The community makes the themes for you.
I don't have to ship any skins because there is already a "default" window.

so the player will be the same but then whit extra skin support, Amarok 2.0 cool-and-classic version.

don't hold your breath.

Amarok gets new sections added to the UI changes made quite regularly. Everytime something like the recent addition of an online music store would require a reworking of all skins to reflect these changes. This would either lead to a bunch of skins that were not useful and a bunch of dissatisfied users or slowing down Amarok development conciderably...

it might be practical to theme the little playback tool however

I haven't tried Amarok outside of KDE so I can't comment there... I can suggest using the "custom Colour scheme" configuration option... and selecting a nice context browser style to go with...
sure it will still look a bit boxy but Amaroks feature set doesn't lend itself to a shaped, chromed style interface...