\"Forcing\" people to use a X11/POSIX operating system of their choice is hardly acting like the company we supposedly despise.

Anyways, its open source, its not like its even possible to stop a Windows port if we wanted to (well, once we have amaroK 2.0 that is).

Perhaps a stupid question, but why 2.0?

I would like to see a port of amarok to windows too. I would like to see a stable distro of linux that works the way I would like too. Too often when I am working in a linux environment one thing or the other crashes. This was often the case with windows until I migrated to xp service pack 2. While I am in love with the idea of an open source world, linux just does not support enough hardware. I do not want to give up my video capture devices because I am married to a specific operating system. Until there is a distro of linux that \"out of the box\" supports ATI FireGL cards (yes I said out of the box), usb video capture, and one that can upgrade kde without causing a kernel panic, I will stick to dual booting with windows xp. I doubt that I will ever buy a new version of windows (unless there is a 64bit version released that will work on my laptop).

Anyways... Amarok is the BEST audio program I\'ve ever used or heard. I was working on writing a jukebox in visual basic for a long time. As soon as I discovered amarok I threw it all out because it is everything that I was wanting AND LOTS LOTS MORE! Thanks for a great app regardless of platform!

I\'d be interested in working on a port to windows if the source code is available. Does the GNU license apply to apps that can run on windows??? I know that OpenOffice and GIMP are available on windows, is that the same license?

Take care, and as always take all these comments with a grain of salt.

@eric Have you read this thread? Porting is legally possible for amaroK 2.0.

ATI is **** under Linux. Its true that if you don\'t buy a computer with Linux in mind you might run into trouble.

Currently using iTunes on WIndows. Always searching for something like Amarok... It\'s the best ever.
For example, the automatic rating sistem is unique. Infinite times better than WMP one.
A 2.0 on Windows is a dream

eric wrote:

I would like to see a stable distro of linux that works the way I would like too.

Try Debian, it is stable (even testing which has very up-to-date software). It is GPL\'d so you can modify it to work the way you would like.

linux just does not support enough hardware. I do not want to give up my video capture devices because I am married to a specific operating system. Until there is a distro of linux that "out of the box"...

The hardware issue is exactly what I worry about with porting great apps like amaroK. I have been able to use apps like amarok, Konqueror, Quanta and the such to convince people to move to GNU/Linux. They then purchase Linux compatible hardware for their next computer. If this happens enough, companies like ATI will actually care about their Linux drivers because it will motivate sales. Then there will finally be a distro that:

supports ATI FireGL cards (yes I said out of the box), usb video capture, and one that can upgrade kde without causing a kernel panic

and that is good for everyone (except MS who may even have to port Office).

P.S. I have upgraded KDE numerous times on Gentoo and Debian, no problems .

im against porting amarok to windows. its absurd to develop free software under a closed environment...

read here: http://www.fefe.de/nowindows/

I strongly agree with xam. Porting software to winslows does not benefit the Community, it benefits Micro$oft. I am sick and tired of windows zealots around me. I hate those bribed officials that force universities to use windows.

I do not force anyone to use *nix. Everyone should chose what software to run (your computer doesn\'t really care). If amaroK was ported, users would have one less reason to switch.

start thinking about your comment, there are people who can\'t use linux (for instance at work, or simply because they had no knowledge about it) why should the community penalize these people?
in my opinion a windows port is the best whwat you can do for your project ... it makes it popular!

Bah poppycock... Amarok should be ported to windows and with qt now freely available to that platform, the only thing I really see would be an issue is seperating amarok out from all the other KDE bits for a windows port...

Do it and do it fast, This is the way to convert people and gain support and it doesn\'t detract from your current base... it only adds to it as people see the quality and faster realease cycle under *nix and think... hey perhaps I should swap.

Can someone try to port amaroK to Windows with the following libs?

http://wiki.kde.org/tiki-index.php?page=KDElibs+for+win32

I think they do all what we want and they work for Kexi already - why shouldn\'t they work for amaroK?

Please someone try to compile amaroK for Windows with these libaries!

Oh Yeah I\'ll try it, if you port it to qt4beta2

oh it\'s a beta, hm this couldn\'t be good

bah the wiki lib uses the commerzial qt3, ok so If you\'ll buy us one, I\'ll try it
--
I\'ll post it now the last time ever (the next will be a FAQ and no more anwsers to such things):

Qt3 for windows = commerzial
Qt4 for windows = free licence

amaroK uses ATM Qt3
amaroK hasn\'t the money for a commerzial windows licence

amaroK needs a sound backend
amaroK hasn\'t a engine for windows

amaroK developers = linux developers
amaroK hasn\'t (AFAIK) windows developers

so amaroK can be ported if KDE and amaroK use Qt4 not before

--
you can search for a WINDOWS developer who ports amaroK to a qt4 beta and then to windows and then provides a engine

until anybody has such a guy/team - STOP posting wishes, we know that you want it but we can\'t do anything
--
*and cause some arguments where you can\'t use linux at work -- ehm, why you should listen to music with amaroK at WORK, shouldn\'t you work there?
*and don\'t able to use linux? eh man you shouldn\'t use linux you should use KDE with amaroK, nobody wants you to jump around on the console

We wouldn\'t need to buy the Qt3 license for Windows since there\'s a version for free-as-in-beer software. But Qt on Windows isn\'t GPL compat, so its illegal to link amaroK againist it, as its a violation of amaroK\'s GPL license. Some GPL KDE 3 programs (that one database program whose name I forget) have already been ported to Windows since their copyright holders allow it and kdelibs uses Lesser GPL (so is allowed to be linked againist non-free). amaroK has too many authors and we don\'t want to meddle around with the license anyways, so it won\'t happen until KDE 4/amaroK 2.0, like apachelogger is saying. At which time it\'d probably take a Windows developer.

What do you think about donating something like 50 to 100 Euro to get this job done... now/nearer future then KDE 4?

I\'d like to hv amaroK for windows now too, but in the end its wrong. I use my dads laptop right now and I hate windows but musstn\'t install Linux on it :\'(
But some ppl in this forum were right, ppl would more switch back to windows. i duno why someone would b so freaking stupid to go back to windows (I had to cuz i dont hv any other pc right now)?! linux rules and we shouldn\'t betray linux -so stop thinking of copieng nething from linux to windoofs nor switchin bk to it!!!
:angry: