>Banshee by default, C’mon not all of us have 4 GB of memory!

>I read this (http://mrooney.blogspot.com/2009/05/karmic-desktop-uds-run-down.html) and quite like almost everything I see.

Pidgin being replaced by Empathy is somewhat sad (I really like Pidgin), but the reasons are quite good.

Disclaimer: I am quite against any Mono (the technology beyond Banshee/F-Spot/Tomboy) applications being on the Ubuntu Desktop CD for other reasons. You can likely read why somewhere else :P. This isn’t necessarily about Mono.

Banshee replacing Rhytmbox on the other hand, not so much.

However, it does seem to use 3-10x more memory than RB which is very troubling (60-300MB compared to RBs fairly consistent 25MB),

Please, Please think of those of us who only have 512 Mb of ram in a laptop, or even those with less.

But clearly Banshee will get better memory usage over time..?
I reviewed it’s memory usage (and others) about 2 years ago (Banshee was in dead last, then). http://gquigs.blogspot.com/2007/12/more-players-out-in-memory-performance.html

And yes, I realize Rhytmbox isn’t going away, but development seems to slow in applications that lose “default” standing in Ubuntu.

Other items I am curious about: replacing gnome-pilot with multisync? any screensaver (removing) discussions? Remote desktop viewer vs terminal server client?

47 thoughts on “>Banshee by default, C’mon not all of us have 4 GB of memory!

  1. >I think this is also outrageous to change from rhythmbox to banshee, there is indeed a big difference in memory usage!

  2. >I’m getting sick and tired of gnome distros to be honest.

    Just use rhythmbox or exaile ffs.

    I think GTK+, Gnome and Mono should just roll over and die.

  3. >I feel for your situation. However, the decision is a sound one; Banshee is a far more usable media player than Rhythmbox, and very few machines have so little RAM anymore. Even laptops these days usually come with 4 gigs of RAM.

  4. >I have a library of about 5000 music files.

    I compared the memory requirement of Banshee and Rhythmbox, both right after startup, and after playing a few songs.

    Banshee *did* use more memory, but the difference was nowhere near as large as stated above. Banshee used 15-20% more than Rhythmbox (46MB vs. 39MB)

  5. >Same here, banshee’s been up for 6 days now playing music in my 10,000 song library and its still hovering around 50MB of RAM. Personally I can’t wait for banshee which packs a whole load more features then rhythmbox with a slicker interface

  6. >16327 items in Banshee library (70GB), podcasts off, lastfm off, Banshee memory 63MB. not a big problem really.
    Really Big Problem : NO Music Folder watching/rescanning is working…
    Also NO “Search by Genre”.
    does this really takes us ahead in Ubuntu ?? probably not.

  7. >I haven’t actually tested the current memory usage myself.

    @Patrick@
    I don’t want to buy a new laptop!

    You can’t be serious with no folder watching…right?

    Oh, and Joe, good job so far!

  8. >Rhythmbox have problems with deleting music from player. Rhythmbox has no equalizer. Sometimes Rhythmbox freezes on my Q6600 for no reason. No wonder it is being replaced.

  9. >I strongly agree with you. 4GB of ram is a dream that only the richest countries supply for, will Ubuntu developers ever get in touch with the real world??? They should develop this thing to cover for real needs, and that includes legacy computers. By the way, are all the computers sold last year in my country considered legacy? Or should I move to a richer country, get a better job and then run Ubuntu? IMHO, Ubuntu folks are getting to develop their own version of a GNUVista engender. Please, Bryan, ask them loud to come down to Earth where people need their box to work, not to be outdated every six months.

  10. >Imho Banshee makes a saner default then Rhythmbox, its more featureful (despite the lack of folder watching), its still being actively developed (Rhythmbox is dead in the water already) and as you pointed out RB isnt going anywhere it’ll take all of a minute to uninstall one and install the other :)

    BTW if your really against mono you should check out fedora :)

  11. >@ “Also NO “Search by Genre”.
    Thats completly false.
    Just left click on the magnifier and choose “Genre”.
    Works like a charm.
    Banshee rulez

  12. >gQuigs, you making a benchmark of latest banshee v1.5 vs rhythmbox 0.12.2 would probably do lots more in making sure ubuntu team is doing the right thing ;-P memory usage is a valid argument but reflection won’t happen until somebody does a proper benchmark.

    Also, moving to Banshee might be a good thing for rhythmbox on the long run. As others have noted in this thread, recent lack of development in the project leaves a lot to desire. Ubuntu moving to Banshee might be a “motivation factor” for the anti-mono folks to spend less time in flaming wars and more into bringing life back into the rhythmbox project.

  13. >There is a patch to do Folder watching that is mostly complete, I suspect it will be in by the next release. In the current release there is a menu option under tools to rescan media library so there is something…

  14. >As your music library gets larger, because it uses a stock GTK list view, Rhythmbox begins to require a LOT of memory. It must store EVERY item from your library in memory for the list to function. Banshee has its own custom list view widget which must store only the visible items + 10 above + 10 below (for smooth scrolling), making it scale to large libraries MUCH more efficiently.

    So, uh…no, Banshee’s more memory efficient.

  15. >Is there actually any baseline/target for memory usage of Ubuntu desktop system? For boot time there was a goal of 25s for Jaunty and now (I think) 15s for Karmic; is there some similar developer goal like “must work smoothly at 512MB RAM + 512MB swap”?
    Would be really useful to have, esp. as the System Requirements page states something like “384MB RAM required for Ubuntu Desktop”. I wonder how that statement works in reality…

  16. >No way, XMMS is way better at memory than RB or Banshee could ever imagine to be. :-)

    Anyway, I won’t be able to run any of this on my Pentium II laptop so once again I’ll be sticking with XFCE and XMMS for listening to my music on the go.

    I really do have a Pentium II laptop as my only laptop, but I gave up on trying to have a recent mainstream distro long time ago so I just take all this with a smile. Slackware 12.2 FTW!

  17. >I just checked because I was curious. I have 17700 tracks approx. Banshee: 205MB, Exaile 164MB, RhythmBox 93MB. Whenever I run Rhythmbox, it crashes after a while though :) I’m a Banshee user, and I enjoy it. I used Exaile for a while, but i found it struggled with a large library – this may have improved. I think all of these are pretty reasonable choices for a modern desktop OS. After all, we are only talking about the *default* here, and that has to be one which makes sense for the majority of users. I’d suggest as people get more powerful hardware and bigger collections, you have to choose accordingly. On my old laptop which runs Arch Linux and Openbox, I use mpd and ncmpc (or Sonata). The distros are free to suggest what defaults they like, we can always choose something else (or a different distro!).

  18. >thanks for the “search by genre”.
    i missed that one.
    hopefully folder watching will hit the master branch soon.

  19. >If Banshee is that memory hungry I hope they will keep Rythmbox in the Netbook Remix, netbooks are usually shipped with 512-1024 megs.

  20. >After the OS and the DE, I think the music player generates the hottest discussions. /me is happily using Decibel Audio Player :-)

  21. >On the machine I used that had 512 MBs of RAM, I used XUbuntu. ^.^; It came with a different media player by default, and I think I installed Rhythmbox on it.

    They’re getting rid of gnome-pilot? o.o How am I going to sync my Palm Centro?

  22. >I have 500 MB of RAM on my Ubuntu Gnome desktop and I use Banshee.

    It's acceptably responsive. Any less RAM, though, and I'd have to use something else.

    Functionality—rather than lightweight-ness—should be Ubuntu's primary concern, to cater for the majority who have >1 GB of RAM.

    The minority can use Xubuntu, or a smaller non-default app in Ubuntu.

  23. >http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=7088980&postcount=1

    I have no idea where the "4 gig" number came from, I can't find any relationship between it and reality.

  24. >There are a lot of vague claims about the majority. Can anyone back them up with numbers?

    Several laudable projects focus on recycling older hardware for use by low-income users (even in richer countries). All justification aside, choices that increase the typical Ubuntu memory footprint place these users behind those with newer hardware.

    I’m not saying that it’s necessarily bad or the wrong direction, but to make such choices one must be prepared to admit, “I am more concerned with the user experience of those who have just bought a new computer than those who use an older or recycled machine,” and live by that.

  25. >currently i’m running banshee 1.4.3, its only taking up a mere 49.3megs of ram, now i understand back in the day banshee was a hog, but today its lean fast and a good replacement for the average user.

  26. >In the comment thread, I read things about majority of users with 4GB et a minority with little memory. I have read comments about being in the 21st century and so on.
    I'm afraid this is a rather tight view of reality, I can even say that this is a "Western" point of view. Ubuntu is for all Human Beings, from all around the World!
    Second, even if I had 4GB on my computer, I'm using virtualisation at work. I must use windows, but I have several virtual OS that I can run. Each configured with 512MB of memory which is really comfortable. So even in the 21st century, it is nice to have a lean OS that can be easily virtualised without harassing too much the host OS.

    So having a lean OS is better for environment (less waste, less energy), is better for all Humans (you would be astonished of how many people have 128 or 256MB of memory only and still want to have a free/libre OS), is better for the geeks who need virtualisation.

    My view is: keep it lean, if a user has more space then offer him an easy way to install the memory-eating components.

  27. >@Jean-Christophe

    We have that already. That's what people use Xubuntu for – and XFCE itself, even. An Ubuntu desktop is filled with terribly bloated apps (I got to the office today to find my Evolution process had hit 1.1 GiB). Banshee is not a bloated option – and as people have said, is fine on a 512 meg system.

  28. >YOU IDIOTS!!!

    Just stop using any distro that comes with all the crap.

    For gods sake, this is opensource that you are talking about. Nobody points a gun at your head and force you to use it.

    Don't like mono, then a distro that comes without mono.

    Can't find gnome without mono, then just junk gnome and use something else like KDE, XFCE, LXDE, or even configure your own environment with openbox, fluxbox …….. just shut up and walk the walk.!!!!!!!!!!

  29. >I 2nd that! That is suppose to be the "FREEDOM OF CHOICE" with our Open Source world that we have at our disposal this day & age!! Take advantage of it people!!!

  30. >I do not like Mono and what it represents either.

    I found Songbird to be the nicest player so far for me. It's based on Mozilla Gecko, works with my 4th Gen iPod Nano and doesn't use Mono.

    It is easy to remove Mono if you don't like it but I do wish they took it away from the default install.

    Cheers.

  31. >from the original mrooney article:

    "Ekiga will be dropped from the CD to save 10 megs"

    why not save lots of megs by leaving out mono/banshee/tomboy?

    there's gnote to replace tomboy, and banshee doesnt appear to be fully functional..

  32. >"I do not like Mono and what it represents either"

    on 2 counts,
    1) its bloated M$ code from a proxy (Novell) that is not FOSS
    2) Yes Banshee is more feature laden, but not nearly as memory efficient as Rythembox; part of the reason I went to GNU/Linux was to get away from bloated apps that try to have everything in favor of lean quality open source that does the basics well….

  33. >@Catherine etal

    YOU GO Catherine and everyone else, making sense and saying JUST NO MONO!

    @JOsheilds and other Microsoft monkeys(yo ape!)

    ..we dont need no..MONOSOFTWARE!…….we dont need no THOUGHT CONTROL!!

    …hey..MICROSOFT… (& their wannabe's),,,,LEAVE OUR STUFF ALONE!!!

    TC: The Linux WALL

  34. >I have always thought that the community is key to what makes Ubuntu great but sometimes is can just be frustrating :-) . 99% of people commenting on mono are not programmers so by definition they simply do not know what mono is and how most of the arguments they use against it are completely and utter hypercritical garbage (not IMO, in cold hard fact). If you want proof don't ask me to list points one by one, learn how to program – it will make you less of a noobish troll (preps fire extinguisher). If you don't want to actually learn some programming skill and actually be able to compare the programs then why on earth do you spend your time commenting on blog posts about a programming language?

    Banshee is a better media player than Rhythmbox, Period. For new users it provides a more intuitive, friendlier and more modern interface. Once again please don't ask me to prove it because that is neither my job or how I want to spend my weekend. Just look at the programs or sit a new user down in front of both. Even if Banshee is bloated (which I do not believe it to be) then you could just as easily say that as w3m is less bloated than firefox (which actually does use upwards of 300mb of RAM at times) then we should use that be default. This would be simply untenable as they just are not comparable (OK, this is more obvious in this case but the principle is still sound).

    I understand that end users want many things from an operating system like better, faster and more open applications but it is stupid to suggest that they control how it is programmed. If an application which developers have spent their free time making then it should be considered based on its merits, not on some baseless, unfounded FUD and the assumption that Microsoft has anything other than a purely technical connection with Mono. Mono is not inherently slower or more bloated, that is a lie that people turn to when they know their main reason for disliking it is simply not logical or more importantly true.

    At this stage I assume you (and the rest of the we hate mono club) are dying to write a uninformed and illspelt comment about how I am a Microsoft fanboy and enquiring as to how much I am being payed to post this. Firstly I assure you that I have no fondness what-so-ever for Microsoft and have in fact won awards for my hatred of them. I also believe that Mono/Banshee is an exemplary example of what makes open source software in its inclusiveness how it empowers great software to be made. This week I got a new phone and decided to have a look at the source code of Banshee to see how I could get it to work as a MTP (a documented standard) device as some problems in all media players prevented multiple MTP devices from working (e.g. the internal memory and SD). In the end I found there was not much I could do as the main problems lay in the underlying libmtp but I was struck by just how easy it is to download, compile the source of and potentially contribute to Banshee compared to my past attempts with other parts of gnome. Mono code is just easier to read and get into than C (which is actually what I am most experienced in) and it empowers developers to join projects and MonoDevelop is simply an excellent IDE. In all honesty if I were writing a new desktop application I would not write it in Mono – not because it is not technically superior, easier or open source but because that it would run the risk of being disregarded or worse pointlessly rewritten (gnote?) in the name of "freedom".

    Right, that is enough ranting for now. I wish everyone a good weekend in the Ubuntu community and urge you to think before you rubbish developers for great programs they make in their free time.

  35. >@tom wright,

    Blimey, you make some daft comments there. I suggest you just go get a life.

    Mono is not a "programming language". It is a framework that drags Microsoft technology into Linux. Something that an awful lot of people do not want for many reasons. These reasons may, or may not be to do with programming but that is irrelevent, the fact is that *many* people do not like Mono. People who are not enamoured with everything Bill Gates does suggest that Mono not be used by default in Ubuntu. Fedora are adopting this strategy already and Canonical have stated recently that will review the issues surrounding Mono.

    If you like Mono then fine, but it is a bloated framework that – currently by default – provides users with two rather unspectacular apps one of which can now be transparently replaced with a native C++ alternative. Many would ask why a not taking app is included by default anyway…

  36. >language/framework, I really do not want to get into a huge debate over the semantics. Basically whatever it is it should not matter. Tomboy, Banshee and FSpot are all very strongly arguably the best applications in their categories. I think it would be very insulting to the Tomboy project, one supported by a wide community of developers who have put a lot of work in to simply replace it because of some technical/political detail.

    Would Microsoft stop shipping apps by default just because they are written in Java. Yes, absolutely as has been revealed in anti-trust cases – they did not want them to be multiplatform.

    Whether or not "the great satan" had a role in its creation is irrelevant as long as it is free and open source now. In fact the FSF tried to build something similar them selves: http://www.gnu.org/software/dotgnu/
    'If on the other hand Microsoft is successful with their .NET technology, the competition from the DotGNU project will ensure that Microsoft cannot simply use .NET to end "the era of 'open computing'".'

  37. >@tom wright:

    I am a programmer. However, I'm a KDE guy so I'll stay out of the Mono muck since qyoto isn't such a headache for us, since very few people use it.

    I wanted to address specifically community issues. I think the core debate is that Ubuntu is looking to make Banshee the default. Making something the default tells to your users a direction that you intend on heading.

    There are people out there that may not like the direction that a specific distro is taking. They're free to change distros at any time and you should encourage them that if Ubuntu doesn't fit their needs maybe some other distro will.

    Blaming lack of technical skill as a reason to not complain won't help any situation. Me and you don't know these people, they could very well be programmers but their so mad it may make some of their replies a bit … illogical.

    I'd like to think of the article that everyone is leaving comments for, as satire. Really, Banshee doesn't take up 4GB of memory. But I think it draws up the point that distros are becoming more memory hungry as we go.

    Prices of memory aside. I would draw a parallel of kids growing up. At first they get large and quick. As time goes on they hit a leveling off point for growth in the physical sense. For Distro, I see the same results. We get new technology and we grow rapidly with it.

    There in lies the heart of the issue. At some point the people who make up the distro must decide to cast off, by default, the older users who's hardware has not grown to fit their favorite distro.

    This can be anything from trivial to heart breaking. Some users will just switch to a less "robust" distro, some will feel betrayed and lash out. Point being, we need to support people and give them options.

    I use Slackware as my distro and I would suggest anyone who has limited memory to give it a try. It's not as user friendly as Ubuntu but is very hardware friendly.

    Secondly, suggest way people can go about getting back their old system. They don't have to agree with the default install. Point them out to HOWTOs on removing Mono, Banshee, or any other program they rather not deal with. For those not liking Banshee, may I humbly suggest Amarok or Juk. Both are very good players with many features. If you're looking to rid yourself of some features may I suggest Audacious Media Player? Sometimes less is more and you should give Audacious a try, it won't kill you.

    No disagreement with what new users want (sleeker UI, more features, etc…), but we must remember that we also have old users too. The community isn't just the programmers, or the distros, or the third party's that donate. It's also the end-users, technical or not. I'm not saying that the end-users should dictate what is used to build a distro, but that we should help out end-users by giving them options to disagree with us, and not simply dismissing them as non-technical.

    Also, I'd like to say (since it seemed like you wanted a good complaint about .NET), "what was whoever it was thinking when they came up with LINQ?" I don't know about other people, but I like statements in the form of PREDICATE OBJECT instead of reverse. Maybe it's just me but it's one of my minor complaints about .NET and it's syntax.

  38. >@Just O Bare
    Well if gnome used qt there would be no need for all of these arguments as is so unanimously awesome :-) . Anyway whole performance comparison is flawed as using a tiny amount more memory does not necessary make a program slower to use (often the reverse as data is cached in a faster area). I use Banshee all the time on my eeepc and have never seen any major performance issues (except when on trunk it once wrote 13GB of data to the log file!).

    Anyway it is just frustrating when something as petty as the recurring misunderstandings about Mono hold back such such great potential.

  39. >@tom wright:

    Anyway it is just frustrating when something as petty as the recurring misunderstandings about Mono hold back such such great potential.

    True but it's a fact of life. As frustrating as it is, a pro-active rather than a re-active approach in the end will make better people.

    The person who wrote the article obviously doesn't like the direction that Ubuntu is taking. That's fine for him to disagree. A lot of people, however, in reply to the post are just straight up dismissive of other options.

    For example (Dread Knight):
    I think GTK+, Gnome and Mono should just roll over and die.

    is pretty dismissive and really doesn't help any goal (pro-Mono or anti-Mono.)

    Whereas (Matt):
    Also, moving to Banshee might be a good thing for rhythmbox on the long run. As others have noted in this thread, recent lack of development in the project leaves a lot to desire. Ubuntu moving to Banshee might be a "motivation factor" for the anti-mono folks to spend less time in flaming wars and more into bringing life back into the rhythmbox project.

    It gives people a course of action. If they actually take it or not is up to them.

    So take it from me, or not, this will all pass and people will realign themselves with the project they feel best suits them. I couldn't tell you the number of times I've wanted to scream when someone says Qt isn't standard C++ ergo it is crap. But I've learned to just let go and love the bomb, er, continue doing what I feel is best.

    People are always saying that it's all about the developers to a project with FOSS. I don't disagree with that. But if Ubuntu moves to a Mono heavy platform (or any other one for that matter, it could be Tcl/Tk for that matter) and looses developers because of perceived wrongs with the platform, then Ubuntu devs shouldn't sit there and try to justify their position. Instead count your losses and move on, in fact encourage others who disagree to try coding for a different project/distro/what have you. In the end it only helps the community.

    People argue about fragmentation and how allowing so many projects to exist creates more fragmentation. I hate to say it, but if someone doesn't like Mono because it's a Microsoft created platform. There just isn't much one can do to convince that person otherwise, doesn't matter how false or true the statement is. So people who bicker about fragmentation are only fighting the inevitable. It feels better to just let go sometimes and just keep plugging away at your project.

  40. >Banshee blows out like crazy whenever I do Recsan Library
    It was using 3gig of memory the otehr day, I wondered why mu syem was sluggish and I nearly exploded!

    Its good, I would like to keep on using it, but since the last update and the memory useage Im certainly shopping around (Was an Amarok user previous, but thats also gone to shit now)

Add Comment Register

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>