Does anyone know if there is a Pandora (the online music service) client that works in suse? (obviously I can use a browser but that’s not the goal here.)
I’ve heard about pithos but haven’t looked at it as it’s not part of the suse distro and I can’t even find it in there software archive. If there is nothing in the distro. that will act as a pandora client then someone’s best recommendation would be appreciated.
I did previously have Pandora One installed with Adobe Air but having just looked at the Adobe website (this is a new computer) it looks like Air is no longer supported for Linux so I would prefer to find an alternative.
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 02:26:02 +0000, Reg gie wrote:
> Does anyone know if there is a Pandora (the online music service) client
> that works in suse? (obviously I can use a browser but that’s not the
> goal here.)
>
> I’ve heard about pithos but haven’t looked at it as it’s not part of the
> suse distro and I can’t even find it in there software archive. If there
> is nothing in the distro. that will act as a pandora client then
> someone’s best recommendation would be appreciated.
>
> I did previously have Pandora One installed with Adobe Air but having
> just looked at the Adobe website (this is a new computer) it looks like
> Air is no longer supported for Linux so I would prefer to find an
> alternative.
As Pandora requires AIR, it would seem the answer is “no” - Pandora is a
closed system, so it would require using an app that Pandora has created.
You might try running the Windows version of AIR under WINE, or you’ll
just have to use the browser (any reason why that ‘isn’t the goal’ -
isn’t the goal to listen to Pandora?)
I really don’t want to put wine on my system. Besides, I have already seen people claim to do it, just do a google search with the keywords “pandora” and “linux”. As I mentioned previously pithos is one of the names that comes up. There’s also a plugin for chrome that claims to do it but that defeats the purpose of trying to find a non-browser app. What I was really asking was does anyone know of an app. readily available in suse. If not I’ll try the pithos and whatever else I come across.
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 05:26:03 +0000, Reg gie wrote:
> I really don’t want to put wine on my system. Besides, I have already
> seen people claim to do it, just do a google search with the keywords
> “pandora” and “linux”. As I mentioned previously pithos is one of the
> names that comes up. There’s also a plugin for chrome that claims to do
> it but that defeats the purpose of trying to find a non-browser app.
> What I was really asking was does anyone know of an app. readily
> available in suse. If not I’ll try the pithos and whatever else I come
> across.
I guess that’s the app to try for now, thanks. I’ll let you know how it goes.
FYI: I don’t mind using wine at all but my guess is that wine has to be pretty beefy in terms of resources as is the nature of emulators. To use something like that for just one app. that streams music seems to me like overkill unless you’ve already exhausted the alternatives.
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 13:26:03 +0000, Reg gie wrote:
> FYI: I don’t mind using wine at all but my guess is that wine has to be
> pretty beefy in terms of resources as is the nature of emulators. To use
> something like that for just one app. that streams music seems to me
> like overkill unless you’ve already exhausted the alternatives.
WINE isn’t an emulator. It’s an implementation of Windows APIs - which
is not emulation.
It’s not very heavy. In fact, when I first used it to run NeverWinter
Nights (a game from Bioware) years ago, the game ran faster on Linux
than it did on native Windows.
LOL, maybe I should have done a little research on it before making any statements since the wine people they say they are not an emulator and that’s what the name implies (I checked after reading your post).
I installed it and had a quick look, I’ll probably play with it some day but I’m a little busy right now. Some technical points though since I did take the time to learn a little bit about it. True, it is not a “byte code” emulator. It is however an emulation of the Windows environment and therefore it is an emulator, regardless of what they say.
It is also true that when they can, they will and should, make direct translations between Linux’s native code and Windows API calls as this will be the thinnest fastest code. However, it is also true that their will be many API’s that are not directly translatable because Linux is not Windows and they will be emulated in a less clean way simply because there will be no direct Linux translation available.
From what I have read so far it probably isn’t all that slow and worth a look sometime so thanks for pulling me up on that.
FYI: the description of wine directly from the YaST (openSUSE 11.4) software management tool:
An MS Windows emulator, consisting of both runtime and source compatibility functions. You can run your MS executables with it and write your Windows programs under Linux and link against the WINE libraries.
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 21:16:02 +0000, Reg gie wrote:
> It is also true that when they can, they will and should, make direct
> translations between Linux’s native code and Windows API calls as this
> will be the thinnest fastest code. However, it is also true that their
> will be many API’s that are not directly translatable because Linux is
> not Windows and they will be emulated in a less clean way simply because
> there will be no direct Linux translation available.
Well, no, it’s not that they’re ‘translated’ - it’s that they’re
reimplemented. Sometimes that means passing things through to similar
Linux APIs, but often times, that’s not the case.
WINE is developed using clean-room reverse engineering as I understand
it. But I could be mistaken about that.
> From what I have read so far it probably isn’t all that slow and worth a
> look sometime so thanks for pulling me up on that.
No problem .
> FYI: the description of wine directly from the YaST (openSUSE 11.4)
> software management tool:
>
>> An MS Windows emulator, consisting of both runtime and source
>> compatibility functions. You can run your MS executables with it and
>> write your Windows programs under Linux and link against the WINE
>> libraries.
Thanks for pointing this out - I’ll get a bug entered so the description
is updated. That certainly isn’t correct.
We’re just going to have to disagree. You (or they) are trying to say that “because we recreated the Windows environment ‘this way’” we’re not going to call it an emulator. Instead we’ll call it a translator or alternative API’s or whatever. I don’t buy into that, nor do I see any reason to deny what it is, emulation is not a dirty word.
You have to have API’s that the Windows app. wants or it won’t run so you are going to create API’s no matter what to emulate Windows, how you do it I don’t playing into what you call the software.
As I see it what we have is:
Hardware -> Linux (or other OS) -> wine (application) -> Windows application
That makes wine an artificial environment (albeit a very good one) that’s an app on an OS. Now if someone told me that wine works like this:
Hardware -> wine -> Windows application
then I could buy that it’s not an emulator, or simulator, (but perhaps still an artificial environment) but until it works standalone on the hardware I’ll just have to disagree with you.
On 2011-11-10 00:26, Reg gie wrote:
> We’re just going to have to disagree. You (or they) are trying to say
> that “because we recreated the Windows environment ‘this way’” we’re not
> going to call it an emulator. Instead we’ll call it a translator or
> alternative API’s or whatever. I don’t buy into that, nor do I see any
> reason to deny what it is, emulation is not a dirty word.
It is an API, not an emulator. Ask the developers. It just looks like an
emulator.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 23:26:02 +0000, Reg gie wrote:
> then I could buy that it’s not an emulator, or simulator, (but perhaps
> still an artificial environment) but until it works standalone on the
> hardware I’ll just have to disagree with you.
“Emulation” has a very specific meaning in computing. MAME is an
emulator - it emulates machines that are not x86 architecture (in that it
emulates the hardware underlying a non-Intel architecture for the purpose
of running ROMs for old arcade machines).
WINE isn’t an emulator - it doesn’t emulate anything. It implements some
of the Win32 API set so Windows programs can run on Linux.
Emulation adds a “translation layer”. WINE doesn’t do that. It
implements Win32 APIs so programs can use them.
On 11/09/2011 10:16 PM, Reg gie wrote:
> FYI: the description of wine directly from the YaST (openSUSE 11.4)
> software management tool:
>
>> > AnMS Windows emulator,
yes, there are folks writing wrong stuff in openSUSE, and everywhere
else…only because they really do not understand …
and when told the facts they want to argue.
i would log a bug against that wrong statement you quote–but, don’t
want to tilt at windmills with someone about what is or is not an emulator…
On 11/10/2011 12:26 AM, Reg gie wrote:
> We’re just going to have to disagree. You (or they) are trying to say
> that “because we recreated the Windows environment ‘this way’” we’re not
> going to call it an emulator.
yes we disagree…
but only because you fail to accept the fact that Wine does not
recreate a MS-Windows environment in any sense of the word…
there is no “windows environment” running, anywhere…
the windows app runs in linux using a compatibility layer…
as the deveoloper’s FAQ says: “Wine can be thought of as a Windows
emulator in much the same way that Windows Vista can be thought of as a
Windows XP emulator; both allow you to run the same applications by
translating system calls in much the same way. Setting Wine to mimic
Windows XP is not much different from setting Vista to launch an
application in XP compatibility mode.” cite: http://wiki.winehq.org/FAQ#head-c9e6502ad636315e905d07f7e44594757a6738e3
so, if you agree Vista is an “emulator” when running XP era
applications, then . . .
