DJ On Linux?

[Colin-Roberts]

Is there a program like sam or winamp for linux to dj on shoutcast?

Closed by Jamesy (Forum Moderator): Off topic/ arguing.

[Blob]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=dj%20shoutcast%20linux

Top result :rolleyes:

Sorry, I didn't read

http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/Winamp-3-for-Linux/1002748075/1

[Jordy]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=dj%20shoutcast%20linux

Top result :rolleyes:That's installing a Shoutcast server, genius.

Refer to this thread it has some suggestions in: http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=519264

[Blob]

That's installing a Shoutcast server, genius.

Refer to this thread it has some suggestions in: http://www.habboxforum.com/showthread.php?t=519264
[/URL]

O crap, sorry.

Yeah im idiot.

Sorry - [url]http://fileforum.betanews.com/detail/Winamp-3-for-Linux/1002748075/1 (http://naiux.wordpress.com/2009/01/24/linux-shoutcast-guide-part-1/)

[Christian]

SAM can run on Linux using Wine I believe.

[Agnostic Bear]

Linux shouldn't be used as a desktop OS. Ever. Do yourself a favour and install Windows 7 and DJ from that, much better driver support and everything should work just fine.

[HotelUser]

Linux shouldn't be used as a desktop OS. Ever. Do yourself a favour and install Windows 7 and DJ from that, much better driver support and everything should work just fine.

Speak for yourself. If he wants to use Linux for his Desktop OS then he is certainly welcome to. Obviously there are scenarios where it might not run as well as we'd like it to, but I've had Ubuntu setups that have worked out beautifully.

[Colin-Roberts]

this computer has no hope it hell at running windows 7. It runs ubuntu like a charm tho

[Agnostic Bear]

Speak for yourself. If he wants to use Linux for his Desktop OS then he is certainly welcome to. Obviously there are scenarios where it might not run as well as we'd like it to, but I've had Ubuntu setups that have worked out beautifully.

Oh no I don't have to speak for myself, it's not meant to be used on the desktop and Sir Torvalds the Grand said so himself.

[HotelUser]

Oh no I don't have to speak for myself, it's not meant to be used on the desktop and Sir Torvalds the Grand said so himself.

I don't care? There's loads of desktop Linux users. There's loads of apps for desktop Linux users. There's forums for desktop Linux users to get support. There's even Desktop editions of certain Linux distros :O.

[Agnostic Bear]

I don't care? There's loads of desktop Linux users. There's loads of apps for desktop Linux users. There's forums for desktop Linux users to get support. There's even Desktop editions of certain Linux distros :O.

Fantastic, it's still not ready for the desktop, and never will be.

[Flisker]

I know a lot of people who use Linux as they main desktop OS. I even have Fedora 11 on another hard drive which I use when I need to. I cannot see your reasoning behind your claims.

[Agnostic Bear]

I know a lot of people who use Linux as they main desktop OS. I even have Fedora 11 on another hard drive which I use when I need to. I cannot see your reasoning behind your claims.

Then read the damn thread, L. Torvalds said it's not, so it's not.

[Flisker]

Then read the damn thread, L. Torvalds said it's not, so it's not.
I did read the damn thread thank you.

[HotelUser]

Then read the damn thread, L. Torvalds said it's not, so it's not.

Bill Gates will say he doesn't like OS X, and he will say to use Windows. I'm still going to use OS X. I form my own opinions.


Fantastic, it's still not ready for the desktop, and never will be.

Your opinion is your opinion. But you only speak for yourself. You cannot say it's a fact that Linux is not ready for the desktop, because that is not a fact.

[Agnostic Bear]

Bill Gates will say he doesn't like OS X, and he will say to use Windows. I'm still going to use OS X. I form my own opinions.

Bill Gates isn't the creator of Linux though is he? :) (Hint: Linus Torvalds is)

And as a result I can say that as it is fact as the creator said so, so nurrrrrrrrrgh

[HotelUser]

Bill Gates isn't the creator of Linux though is he? :) (Hint: Linus Torvalds is)

And as a result I can say that as it is fact as the creator said so, so nurrrrrrrrrgh

I know who Linus Torvald is. Doesn't really matter, though. Bill Gates has done more for the Technology Industry. And his philanthropy work has probably dwarfed what he's done at Microsoft.

Linux has progressed far beyond Torvald, and his initial expectations. Thousands of people use it in a productive desktop environment. myself along with them really don't care what Torvald or anyone else has to say. I for one have never seen an Operating System better suited to run on my Netbook than Ubuntu.

[Agnostic Bear]

I know who Linus Torvald is. Doesn't really matter, though. Bill Gates has done more for the Technology Industry. And his philanthropy work has probably dwarfed what he's done at Microsoft.

Linux has progressed far beyond Torvald, and his initial expectations. Thousands of people use it in a productive desktop environment. myself along with them really don't care what Torvald or anyone else has to say. I for one have never seen an Operating System better suited to run on my Netbook than Ubuntu.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

[HotelUser]

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

Linux distributions being GNU/Linux Operating Systems and being unix alike basically covers most if not all popular linux distributions, and is nothing new. Most of these distributions will look the same (same desktop environment) and will have the same key components and almost exactly the same functionality. Even the Linux website acknowledges these popular distributions as being "Linux operating systems" on their distribution page:
http://www.linux.org/dist/list.html

The under-acknowledgement of GNU in a Linux environment is not the real mystery of Linux. The real question is how people can use KDE? It's the most ugly thing ever.

[Recursion]

Linux distributions being GNU/Linux Operating Systems and being unix alike basically covers most if not all popular linux distributions, and is nothing new. Most of these distributions will look the same (same desktop environment) and will have the same key components and almost exactly the same functionality. Even the Linux website acknowledges these popular distributions as being "Linux operating systems" on their distribution page:
http://www.linux.org/dist/list.html

The under-acknowledgement of GNU in a Linux environment is not the real mystery of Linux. The real question is how people can use KDE? It's the most ugly thing ever.

Learn2skin.

www.gnome-look.org
www.kde-look.org

Also check out XFCE.

Also, take a look at some KDE 4 screenshots, it's the sex.

Also, wow you take things too seriously.

Too many alsos but i cba to retype my post.