one of the apps i showed the audience in ohio last weekend was the video player codeine. it's everything i need and just as important it's not anything i don't.when you start it up without specifying a file or url (which causes it to immediately start playing that file), you get this:
as you can see it asks what you want to do, including listing the last few videos you watched. this prevents me from have to jump immediately to the play menu and makes it obvious how to use it. and once you pick what you want to do you get a very sensible window:
when the video starts a little overlay appears in one corner asking if you like it to resize the window the size of the video and if you ignore it for a few seconds it just slides back out of the window.
the toolbar has a play button, a play meter and a full screen toggle. if you go into DVD mode you get a little menu toggle button too. that's it. no volume, no quality adjusters (there's a dialog for that available under the setting menu though), no system tray icon, no playlists, no forward/back/up/down/inside out buttons ...
it just plays video. if i had to vote for a video player for KDE4, codeine would be it.
now the configuration dialog is a bit intense, as it seems to let you set just about everything imaginable in xine (the media engine it uses). but the only reason i know what it looks like is because i checked it just before writing this blog entry. up till now i've never had a single reason to configure this app because it balances features and control with sensible defaults. for me, this is video player perfection =)
so max howell, i take my hat off to you and send my gratitude for codeine. =)
30 comments:
That's usability as I know and love it from and in GNOME. It's wonderful to not have to configure your everyday apps, they should just run as you want them to run without any configuration. I'm really looking forward to your KDE4 and hope that apps like codeine make it into it. I've read that you're planning to increase KDE's usability, if this also includes decreasing complexity (at least limiting the user-visible options, i.e. toolbar and menu clutter) and choosing sane defaults, I'm sure that KDE4 will totally rock! Next summer's getting hot :)
Aaron,
What is it about Codeine that makes it a better choice than Kaffeine?
first, kaffeine is a great player that is amazingly flexible. i've used kaffeine for quite some time actually.
however, that flexibility is exposed all throughout its UI which makes it amazingly complex.
there are three tabs on the main interface(!), is playlist centric (which IMHO is not how most people watch videos; listen to music, yes, but not video), uses terms like "Open DVD" instead of just "Play DVD", has no less than 4 different icons for various "play a non-dvd file" and even supports audio cd's!
it has a systray icon (why do i want that in a video app? the only time i ever want to interact with a video app is when i'm looking at it!)
it has 2 toolbars by default with all kinds of things like playlists and frame capture.
minimal mode is +too+ minimal (i have to rely on the right click menu)
it does have nice features like being able to save streams and audio control from within the app. output filters, and resize support. but these are either too hidden in the UI (see how codeine shows the autoresize overlay) or too exposed in the ui.
overall, it's just very busy for a video player when all i want to do is play video (which is 99% of my usage of a video player ;). i've put mac and windows users in front of kaffiene and they tend to just sit there unsure what to do.
codeine could do with a few more features and some polish (e.g. 'v' doesn't toggle the video quality settings dialog properly) but it gets the interface just about perfect imo
How does this go together with you praising amarok's usability (being similarly complex and flexible as kaffeine )?
> How does this go together with
> you praising amarok's usability
two reasons:
0) amaroK is trying to provide an immersive experience around playing music. kaffeine seems to be about playing video, making it more on part with juk in scope. compare juk's interface with kaffeine and codeine.
1) the current amaroK interface supports self-discovery (e.g. the "The Playlist" bubble that appears in the playlist when you start it up empty), and despite it's featurefulness, it's UI is pretty clean. their toolbars could be cleaner, but even in their current state they have fewer buttons that kaffeine does (i personally don't see the need or purpose of undo/redo in the toolbar of amarok)
when looking at an application the questions are what is it trying to achieve, does the UI support the essential activities of those goals, is it learnable and easily discoverable and does it generally get out of your way otherwise
amaroK is getting better at that with each release while supporting common music listening mechanics such as playlists (which we used to call "albums" ;).
why does kaffeine even have playlists?
Kaffeine is not just video player, but also audio player. I dont think, there should be two different video/audio player in kde.
One Media player should suffice.
We can have something like kmediaplayer --audio to start in audioplayer mode, and --video to videoplayer mode.
Playlist support in video player mode can be squeezed out. Or may be, as an advanced option.
I feel, most of the poeple go in wrong direction of sacrificing feature for usability. Featurefullness is not directly against usability but clever management of features.
Most of the things against kaffeine, which you have, can be tweaked easily by kaffeine developers. Whereas, to get kaffeine features to codeine would take time.
> I dont think, there should be
> two different video/audio player
> in kde.
and yet you see the need to have different command line switches to create different guis for video or audio? no, we need 2 apps. look at the difference between a GOOD video player interface (e.g. codeine) and a GOOD music playing interface (e.g. juk or amarok, depending on whether we are looking for minimal or immersive)
> most of the poeple go in wrong
> direction of sacrificing feature
> for usability.
i agree. kaffeine makes the other mistake of not refining the interface enough so that the feature set gets completely in the way.
> Most of the things against
> kaffeine, which you have, can be
> tweaked easily by kaffeine
> developers.
and yet release after release they don't. could, would, should... it doesn't matter unless it becomes "did".
they certainly could clean up their interface, cleanse the menus and provide a simple workflow for the common case (this is codeine's strength). the question is: will they?
> Whereas, to get kaffeine
> features to codeine would take
> time.
interface changes don't take time? ;) seriously though, the two features codeine could do with IMHO are the output filter (which is pretty esoteric, really) and audio control (which is handy, but not critical)
generally, though, codeine covers pretty much everything i need for watching video, be it files or on vcd/dvd.
what features would you add?
First, let me say that I basically agree with everything you said about codeine, as a simple video player, its brilliant. My wishlist for codeine is thus: The option of a volume slider. Shortcut access to the 50/100/200% sizes in the correct aspect ratio. Accessing full-screen mode via double-clicking the video.
DVD-Only next/prev chapter, but thats about it. (Possbly play menu entries for file/vcd/dvd & recent media as opposed to the dialog box, but I'm undecided on that).
> kaffeine seems to be about playing video, making it more on part with juk in scope. compare juk's interface with kaffeine and codeine.
juK, aah yes. I can see how you might compare the look of Kaffeine to that of juK, but in operation, they are different beasts. On the one hand, Kaffeine's interface is well structured and options are generally found where I feel they should be, it may be a bit confusing to a less experienced user to sit down and easily find deinterlacing options or something, but it doesn't mean they're in the wrong place. On the other hand, I can only say that it feels like all the good UI decisions for juK were sucked in to a great big UI blackhole somewhere out in space. It seems that every time I open juK, I spend half my time searching through ALL the menus because I can't find the option I'm looking for, let alone where it feels like it should be.
> why does kaffeine even have playlists?
I can't comment on why the developers added them, but I find having playlists in a video player incredibly useful as I quite often play videos in a similar manner to how I listen to music, and watch a bunch of music videos, or consecutive tv episodes and I MUCH prefer to just queue them all up, instead of having to browse through and find the new video each time the previous one finishes. If I think about another video I want to watch, I want to add it and forget it, not have to keep it bugging me in the back of my mind
---
Update:
I've just reread what I said about juK about above, and it sounds quite critical. I don't mean to bag wheels and mpyne and any other contributors to juK, and I think that while juK attempts to provide a collection-centric player and tagger, the functionality they have created is great, but the UI is stopping people from using it.
Amarok is not simply a music player, it is fundamentally a database manager. Searching, organizing, and maintaining a personal music database is a complex task and needs a capable UI.
If people had collections of thousands of videos that needed cataloguing, perhaps a complex interface would be needed for that too. However, playing a single video is a very simple task and needs only a very simple UI. Capturing frames and streams, adding filters, arranging videos into playlists; those kinds of features are useful but don't belong in a player, they really belong in a video *editing* application. KDE doesn't need a complex player with some randomly selected video editor features, it needs a simple video player and a separate complex and capable video editor.
i don't agree with anonymously above me. i hate 'mediaplayers', they are just useless. why don't we integrate webbrowsing in the mediaplayer too? like apple does, btw, in itunes, and microsoft? lets make it even harder to use!
if i want to see a movie, i don't want playlists, a million buttons etc etc. I want to see the movie, period. with music, i want to listen music. but i don't just listen one song (like i watch one movie) - i make a playlist. such a relatively complex interface is needed to empower me to build playlists quickly the way i want. but i don't want to make a playlist with my movies (as one movie is long enough, and who shuffles his video's?).
i don't see what the connection between video and music is, sorry. since Kaffeine became a 'media player', i dumped it. it was my favorite movie player, until version 0.5 came out - they made it unbelievebly hard to use. i continued to use 0.4.2, but it was too buggy. pity no-one continued development on the videoplay part of kaffeine. now my girlfriend rather uses xine-ui instead of kaffeine... how f*cked up can an interface be if it's worse than xine-ui???
I suggested --audio --video switch just for those, who wants that.
Basically what I want is not a bloat like kate/kwrite/kedit types in kde.
One media player, instead of kaffeine,juk,amarok,codeine,noatun , there should be a kmediaplayer.
That will have two switchable interface ala in kdevelop IDEAL, tabbed, top level window mode.
One mode will be tuned for video mode, other will be for audio mode. They can be switched on the fly.
Playlist support in video mode is not wrong at all. Now when disk space is cheap, people do have video collection, which they want to view one by one( like music albums). We should refrain from too much assumptions. How many people think that to satisfy a joe user, they are flaming advanced user ?
> Basically what I want is not a
> bloat like kate/kwrite/kedit
> types in kde.
flawed example.
kate/kwrite/kedit all edit text.
amarok provides an immersive experience for audio while codeine plays video, which are different use cases.
> That will have two switchable
> interface ala in kdevelop IDEAL
i think my head just imploded with this one ;) usability, kdevelop and IDEAL do not belong in the same sentence.
IDE's in general are horrifically complex (on purpose and with decent results) to deal with a horrifically complex set of tasks (creating software).
> Playlist support in video mode
> is not wrong at all
it is if the common use case has no need for it and its always in your face. i commonly found myself with kaffeine doing something sightly unexpected because of its implicit playlist queueing. ug.
> We should refrain from too much
> assumptions.
i agree. we should determine the common use case(s) and optimize for them. i don't know if your comment here exhibits that.
> How many people think that to
> satisfy a joe user, they are
> flaming advanced user
well, i'm probably as advanced a user as you'll find and i view a TON of video as my laptop is my primary DVD player and there a few video humour web sites i frequent. i really don't find the lack of a playlist something that gets in my way as an advanced user who watches a fair amount of video on his laptop.
Codeine is definitely a step in the right direction. It's just not fully there yet:
- Does Play File... open the file dialog. If yes, then how user friendly is that? Not at all. If anything then Codeine should scan the user's files for video files and only show those files. In a flat list. With a quick search.
- The Play VCD / Play DVD buttons should only be shown if a VCD/DVD is found in one of the drives. (Not sure about that. What happens if the user clicks on Play DVD if there's no DVD in the drive?) And if there's a CD/DVD in a drive then the title of the VCD/DVD should be shown (provided that's possible). Like [Play "Aaron does Málaga" (DVD)].
- People know what a DVD is. But what the heck is a VCD? (Well, I know, but many other people will not know.) Maybe there should only be one button [Play CD/DVD] (?).
mahotsukai,
Many people in my vicinity don't know about DVD, because here VCD is much more popular.
That's why I said, we should refrain from too much assumption.
Shouldn't that be Kodeine?
As mentioned above, there are legitimate cases where you would want to queue up multiple videos -- TV shows, music videos, movies that come in multiple parts, whatnot. So while I agree that a video player shouldn't be playlist centric, I don't think including one is an inherently bad idea.
codeine is indeed just a great program, its the first video frontend to get me off of CLI mplayer - if you know all the key commands for mplayer already it has great usability ;).
I think an optional amaroKesque volume slider would be nice. mxcl doesn't watch DVDs much, so it needs some love in that regard as well. Some other little details, like xine-lib has a crazy small default subtitle size. But thats it.
So mxcl: please move codeine into extragear. :D
then the question is, do we have the will to do what needs to be done to noatun and kaboodle.
Oh, I went there.
Hi Aaron :-)
I've just moved house (yes, again for those who know me well), so I was lucky to catch this. I must say I'm quite chuffed with what you say :-)
I'll answer some of the comments. The expansive xine configuration dialog is quite ridiculous I agree. Most people don't need to configure any of it. I provide it because there is no good way to configure xine otherwise, and if xine is broken, I'm not sure what I could say to users if there wasn't full configuration. However I agree it is quite insane, and I would like to make it disappear if possible. Something I'm playing with is making it appear only with a CLI argument, like:
codeine --xine-configuration
so people can get at it if they need to, but otherwise it doesn't hurt inquisitive types. The main reason it's there already is because it's a dialog, so it doesn't pollute the main interface normally.
I've also already discussed it being in KDEMultiMedia4 with wheels. And he was happy with this as long is it is maintained. And this is what I would like also, providing people generally agree that it is a good solution.
With regard to queuing tracks, like eg, several tv episodes. I plan to make it so if you start codeine with several URLs, it will queue them without a playlist (but with some feedback-message). Depending on how this feels it might show a sliding popup in the bottom right corner (like it does for video size currently), offering to open the videos in separate windows (but how often would you want that I wonder?). So it has an internal playlist, not an UI playlist. Probably dragging files to Codeine will show the sliding popup allowing "queue" or "play-now".
> Does Play File... open the file dialog. If yes, then
> how user friendly is that? Not at all. If anything
> then Codeine should scan the user's files for video
> files and only show those files. In a flat list. With a
> quick search.
It does open the file dialog. And I agree, really it shouldn't, but frankly what you suggest is not realistic for me to implement yet. I need to wait for beagle or tenor. When those technologies are available, certainly, we should all be using them rather than traditional open dialogs :-)
> The Play VCD / Play DVD buttons should only be
> shown if a VCD/DVD is found in one of the drives.
Yeah this is on my TODO. The only worry I have is that if the detection gets it wrong, what does the user do then? Bugs with this kind of feature can be more annoying than not having the feature at all. So I'm not going to try implementing this kind of thing soon.
> People know what a DVD is. But what the heck is a
> VCD? (Well, I know, but many other people will not
> know.) Maybe there should only be one button
> [Play CD/DVD] (?).
Good idea. But some people have two cd/dvd drives, so they may have both. Also the same comment as I made before applies.
> Shouldn't that be Kodeine?
;-) I don't much like K-naming, but I don't much like Codeine either. I wanted to rename it before 1.0, but never thought up a better name. If it ever was included with KDE, it'd be called Video Player. At least I think that would be a good name for the KDE default.
> So mxcl: please move codeine into extragear. :D
We'll see when I get broadband back ;-) Also I don't much like the amaroK volume slider in the context of Codeine. And also the volume slider won't be in the default toolbar (because default KDE has volume control in the kicker).
Finally, the gf was much impressed that my work got shown at a KDE presentation in Ohio, so thanks for earning me some points Aaron ;-) And of course I'll be applying the same principles of design to the K CD player reworking.
Codeine - been there...
Kaffeine was very simple to use and had great simple interface until it hit version 6, where it got the welcome tab, strange playlist functionality, and sharks with lasers.
Codeine will get there too, or get abandoned like all the other "great", "simple", and unavoidably niche players.
I for one, welcome our new flavor of the month.
Hi, feel free to file the below as "personal wishlist" -- and from someone who doesn't even use KDE regularly at that! :-)
>> I dont think, there should be
>> two different video/audio player
>> in kde.
I agree, unlike superstoned ("i don't see what the connection between video and music is"). Audio (including music) is a subset of video. It's video without the graphics. The basic interactions with any one audio or video file are the same (play, pause, seek). The way one interacts with collections of audio or video files differs by content more than by type. I.e. you'll want a playlist or queue of some description for both music files (songs in an album for example, or "my favourite music for early mornings") and for episodic video. Conversely, I usually don't need a playlist for lectures since I play only one per sitting, regardless of whether they are full video or just audio.
> and yet you see the need to have
> different command line switches to
> create different guis for video or
> audio? no, we need 2 apps. look at
> the difference between a GOOD
> video player interface (e.g.
> codeine) and a GOOD music playing
> interface (e.g. juk or amarok,
> depending on whether we are
> looking for minimal or immersive)
I think there are two different purposes for audio or video applications. One is actually playing media, the other is managing a library of media. Is this what you mean by "minimal or immersive"?
I often have some random media file sitting on my desktop or in my home folder that I'd like to see/hear and then discard. Examples: the random funny video some friend pushed at me, or a screen captured software demonstration. Basically, something I'm going to watch/listen to once before deciding to save or discard it. In these cases I'd like a very minimal and generic "media player" associated with, and capable of playing, as many such file types as possible. Similar to image or document "viewer" applications a "player" should have as little UI as possible. There could be several of these (one for images, one for PS/PDF, one for audio/video). They should be the default file association for their respective types and (this is the important part) they should give the impression not of starting up a new application, but of just taking a look inside that particular file (the window *is* the file and all that). A player/viewer should render the file to your screen or speakers and support navigation through the contents, nothing more.
On the other hand, I have a large collection of audio files (music, lectures, field recordings) and an even larger (in disk space, not number of files) collection of video files. For these I'd like a librarian application in which to tag, annotate, categorize, search, sort, edit metadata, etc. I.e. a "collection-centric" application, as halcyon.corsair calls juK. The librarian could either embed the player or launch it as needed. For example: in the librarian I search / sort / query / whatever to come up with a list of music I'd like to hear, or a sequence of episodic video files I'd like to watch. Pressing play could launch the player in a new window (passing it a playlist / queue) or start it up in a pane of the librarian app.
There are three categories of files for which I'd like to have both a viewer/player and a librarian: documents (multi-page, largely textual), images, and audio/video. Each viewer/player deserves it's own UI for content navigation (ffwd, next/prev page, zoom in/out, etc.) but it should be minimal.
On Mac OS X, Preview.app is the document and the image viewer, and quicktime is the audio/video player. I use BibDesk as a document librarian for academic papers (my own and others). It already does a lot of what I'd like: sorting and searching, launching the viewer, and file management (drag a ps/pdf/dvi file onto Bibdesk and it will move it to your library folder and create a new bibliographic entry). iTunes is, of course, the audio file librarian (embeds quicktime).
On GNOME the players/viewers are Totem for audio/video, Evince for documents, and I haven't even noticed the name of the image viewer (which is as it should be). I haven't chosen librarians yet since most of my files are on a Mac for work at the moment. I don't use KDE daily like the other two, so can't comment on the options there.
For each of the categories above (document, image, a/v) I think it's best to have one viewer, one librarian (possibly embedding the viewer), and perhaps several editors with contextual links between the applications. Link examples: an "add to library" menu entry in the viewer, a "edit in..." menu entry in the viewer and the librarian with a list of editors for that file type, and a "save to library" entry in the editors. This contextual linking across specialized-but-related applications is where integrated desktop projects like KDE and GNOME can really shine. There may be several editors for differing source formats or because there are more or less specific applications (i.e. a generic text editor versus kile for LaTeX documents). I don't have particularly clear ideas how I'd prefer to relate source files (.tex, .xcf, etc.) to rendered files (.pdf, .png, etc.) for things I edit except that perhaps the librarians (or the editors) should have a notion of projects (like some IDE or music authoring applications do).
Basically, anonymous at 2:17 AM hit it on the head. KDE needs a simple video player, a capable media database manager, and a powerful but complex video editor. I think the same for documents and images as well. Plus, I'd lump audio and video together.
Maybe librarians are passe, soon to be replaced by pervasive search engines, automated metadata tracking and inference, and related query tools. Regardless, the viewer / librarian / editor triad is a good separation of concerns for today.
IMHO, IANA{ KDE hacker, usability professional}, etc.
Daniel, if you read how Max introduced Codeine on kde-apps, from the start the plan is to make a simple video player video player and then stop adding features. And that's what he has done pretty much - whats left to be done is some cleaning on the edges and some sort of volume control.
In other words, learning from the example of Kaffeine.
stfn, are you aware of Konqueror's sidebar media player?
Max, I agree with all your reasoning but one: the volume slider. Of course KDE has one, and it's usually in the system tray, but the user might have closed it or just does not connect anything with the speaker symbol in the systray or doesn't even know he has to expect it there.
A volume slider in the player UI is standard. RealPlayer, Windows Media Player, xine, etc all have one, which means that users just expect to find one in the player itself.
Also, you'd probably like to have per-application volume settings. DVD rips e.g. are usually low gain/high dynamic while every recent music CD is recorded full gain/low dynamic. So you need to boost the volume for video and to dampen for music. If you only have a system-wide volume, you end up adjusting the volume a lot.
About the user interface itself, I'd say there's a distinct difference regarding UI: A music player must have a playlist, a video player need not. A decent music player must have shuffle/repeat and maybe even an equalizer, but even the most advanced video player needs not. Trying to generalize only forces you to compromise.
matze, really the question is why add volume control at all? I never planned to, I have 2 volume controls in front of me already (speakers + KMix). But eventually I realised you need it sometimes:
1. Relative volume for all audio applications. It is unlikely you want amaroK, system sounds and Codeine to have the same volume levels (ie the hardware PCM volume level). This isn't important to one of my target user groups (those who don't have a music application running 24-7)
2. Some videos have very low volume throughout.
3. Users who don't have speaker volume control and who don't use KMix.
I personally can't believe group 3 exist in huge amount. Group 3 are people who assume all audio applications have volume control and never visit sites that shout "You are a poo-poo head!" at full volume. But still I must cater for them.
Really it's 2 that makes me allow volume control. Codeine's volume control will default with 80% = 100% volume, and 100% = 150% volume. I hope this is clear. It means that if you raise the volume above 80% you'll be "boosting" the volume.
Daniel, I look forward to proving you wrong on all accounts :-P
I totally agree with you Aaron. The best UI is a UI that's not in the way. I've long looked for a video player that, well, plays videos! And I found Codeine thanks to your blog!
I very, very much hope that the simplyness and easyness of Codeine will go into all of the upcoming KDE. I love KDE so much, but it makes me sad that I often see my girlfriend (and even myself) to switch to MacOS if i want something to just work. If I watch a video, I'm booting MacOS, because there it SIMPLY WORKS. I'm astonished about people who constantly care about things like deinterlacing or tweaking all kind of video & audio settings. Damn I want to watch a video! I want to click it, press one single button to make it fullscreen and sit on my sofa and watch, thats all.
Well I think this is a general problem of computers - they are just too complex. All mail programs that I know are over-filled with features, you can tweak this and that, if all I want is to write a message to a friend!
Please have a look at http://kde-artists.org/main/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,48/expv,0/topic,326.15 on kde-artists.org, there are so many good ideas of how to simplify the computer experience and I hope as much of this as possible comes into KDE 4. I want my computer to do my job with, nd not to configure&tweak it all the time!
Tom
@stfn:
I agree with most of what you said. I see three distinct things what you do with files (documents, videos, music etc.):
- View/play/watch/listen to them
- Organize them
- Edit them
For the first thing, all I want (just as you) is a simple, clean PLAYER/VIEWER application. A video player should have not more than play/pause/forward etc. buttons, a fullscreen switch, perhaps a few brightness/volume sliders etc. Thats it. This is all I need when I just want to WATCH a video. The same goes for audio. If I just got a song from a friend and quickly want to listen to it, I don't need something like Amarok, I just want to click it, a small window poping up enabling me to pause/forward/rewing the audio track together with a time display.
The same goes for all kind of documents. I've made a OOo Calc sheet for my semester classes plan, and 99% of all times I just want to LOOK at it, but still I have to fire up the whole OOo Calc with all it's editing capabilities. All it needs would be a window, showing this sheet with a few buttons for prev/next page, zooming etc. The same goes for text documents, PDFs, pictures etc.
Now when it comes to ORGANIZE your files, you need much more of course. One of the best apps in this category is Amarok imho. It's in fact the best music organizer I've ever seen. But, why do we need distinct apps for this? Would a really cool Konqueror/Tenor/Amarok mixture be cool? A file manager, going beyond the usual directory/filename structure? Depending on the file type, it should offer me different functions to organize/sort this stuff, tagging (similar to MP3 tags). In fact, I'd like to see something like Amarok and Beagle (an upcoming Tenor!?) as a file manager.
Now editing files. This is where we need distinct apps for each filetype, just as we know it.
One thing that I dislike on all OSes is that the don't distinct between VIEWING something or EDITING something. When i click on a picture for example (OPEN it), it gets opened in Gimp. What does OPEN mean for a picture? Do I want to VIEW it or do I want to EDIT it? Most of the time, I personally whant to VIEW it, so the right-click menu should offer too menu entries "view" and "edit". I'd configure it to VIEW pictures by default, while somebody else my be an artist so he could config it to edit files by default, open it with an editing app instead with a simple viwer app.
Tom
if amarok does not do video and codeine is meant to stay small. what app is gonna take care Video podcast?
I wish I could launch codeine or something from video podcast in amarok
In response to why Kaffeine has playlists:
I often watch anime or TV series and a playlist is a godsend. Especially when using my remote (Via lirC)
Post a Comment