lubuntu-desktop team mailing list archive

[Julien Lavergne <gilir@xxxxxxxxxx>]

I decided to dig a bit more on this, mostly to close the discussion :)

As the direct performance is the same for the 3 players, I made a review
adding some others features and important informations :

== Performance, using top ==

On a 2 Ghz, 6Gb RAM, 64 bits configuration

VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND           
754m  29m  18m S    3  0.5   0:01.32 audacious 
680m  26m  16m S    3  0.4   0:01.56 deadbeef-main     
584m  36m  22m S    3  0.6   0:01.60 aqualung 

On a EEEPC 701 (1Ghz, 512 Mb RAM, 32 bits)

VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND
176m  27m  13m S 23.5  5.6   0:23.65 aqualung  
163m  16m  11m S 21.1  3.3   0:04.07 audacious2        
184m  22m  12m S 23.8  4.6   0:04.27 deadbeef-main 

==> Not a big difference, audacious a little (but really little) better


== Big playlist loading ==

Trying to load a big collection of music on my big configuration :

Audacious : Fast (a few seconds)
Deadbeef : Slow (many seconds)
Aqualung : No options available to load subdirectory


== Maintained Upstream ? ==

Is Upstream active :

Audacious : Yes (stable, less development)
Aqualung : Yes (stable, slow development)
Deadbeef : Yes (young, development very active)


== Maintained in Debian / Ubuntu ? ==

Is it maintained on Ubuntu / Debian by someone else (it's a good point
in my POV) ?

Audacious : Yes (by the Multimedia teams)
Aqualung : Yes, but not on any team.
Deadbeef : No


== Skin / Themable ==

Is it easy to add a custom theme ?

Audacious : Yes
Aqualung : Yes (but difficult)
Deadbeef : No


== Keybinding ==

Is it able to use key-bindings ?

Audacious Yes (with a plugin)
Deadbeef No (or doesn't work)
Aqualung No


== Notifications ==

Is it using the notifications specs (notification-daemon or
notify-osd) ?

Deadbeef Yes (with a plugin)
Aqualung No
Audacious No


Conclusion : Regarding the direct performance, there is not a big
difference. But IMO Audacious have several advantages over the 2
others :
- More mature + more maintenance on the Debian / Ubuntu side + probably
more users
- Skinnable (which should please Rafael ;-))
- Key-binbings

We have until Wednesday to think about it.

Regards,
Julien Lavergne

Le mercredi 24 novembre 2010 à 08:49 -0300, Jean-Pierre Vidal Piesset a
écrit :
> Hiyas everybody:
> 
> 
> I picked another PC to see how is the resource consumption changing
> depending on the hardware, and the result is this:
> 
> 
> On a new machine (AMD Turion Dual Core M520, 3GB RAM ~ Lubuntu 10.10)
> Aqualung 4%CPU 32RAM
> Deadbeef 4%CPU 25RAM
> Audacious 4%CPU 17RAM
> 
> 
> On my old laptop (P3 700MHZ, 256MB RAM ~ Lubuntu 10.04):
> Aqualung 28%CPU 28RAM
> Deadbeef 16%CPU 24RAM
> Audacious 9%CPU 19RAM
> 
> 
> Freshly installed Audacious consumes a little more RAM, i think
> because is doing something on the background... can you check again
> for it Julien? For me, first run was about 28RAM and minutes later and
> all the runs after that were about 18RAM.
> 
> 
> I'll try to send a report from the computers i have acces to.
> Hope it helps on the decision!
> 
> 
> -- jpxsat
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to     : lubuntu-desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp