Less important than a web browser, but probably next on the list of mainstream fundamentals is a music player. It's the only other thing I run daily that I haven't already mentioned. Even handy stuff like Wireshark (which gets an exemption from criticism in this series because it's by nerds for nerds) only gets run once a week.
I've said in the past that Rhythmbox is okay, but that was before I was using it as my only mp3 player, rather than as an occasional stand-in. In practice, well, it has a large number of small but annoying flaws. I'm not going to mention them all here. Just a representative sample.
Let's start near the top of the UI: Rhythmbox uses a slider to show how far through the current track you are. This has the annoying consequence that your clicks are interpreted as meaning "move one 'page' in the direction of the mouse", rather than "move to the time corresponding to the location of the mouse". This is completely useless; it might make some sense if clicking to the left of the knob meant "back 10s" and to the right meant "forward 10s", but the time skipped being proportional to the length of the track makes it useless.
I could ignore the fact that a standard slider looks wrong, but it's hard to ignore that it feels wrong. Only, this being the Linux desktop, it gets worse. For some reason, if you actually try to drag the slider, it has a habit of locking up playback. The work-around seems to be to switch to another track, and then switch back, and start playing from the beginning, having learned your lesson. Absolute positioning in the track just doesn't work, so the lesson is "don't touch the slider". Awesome. Anything that works that badly should probably just be left out of the interface until the first version where it actually works. Not having the option of spoiling playback and annoyed by a control that doesn't move how I want it to would be less distressing than just not having any pretend control at all. (GNOME bug 437987 and GNOME bug 445764 may be this.)
An alternative improvement would be to disable the slider, making it evident that it's only useful for showing how far through the track I am. (Funnily enough, I found a bug suggesting that the slider be made worse rather than better: GNOME bug 389170.)
An annoyance that's interesting for what it says about how Linux lowers one's expectations is that there's no visible suggestion that the "media keys" on the keyboard work, and I consider that a problem. The stupidly large toolbar (GNOME bug 343660) and the menu mention the more awkward keyboard equivalents; stuff like alt-space for playback (an annoying difference from iTunes' unmodified space, for no obvious reason, even though unmodified space isn't taken and would make iTunes refugees feel more at home at no cost to anyone else), but there's no suggestion of the media keys.
I realize it's deeply sad that I can't just assume they work, but this is Linux, and it wasn't many releases ago they didn't work. And it's worth bearing in mind that I had to write a custom rc.local script to get my keyboard to work at all with Ubuntu 8.04! (I actually installed KDE and tried amaroK, and note that my media keys don't work there.)
The search field is in the wrong place, too. Where do search fields go? In the top-right of your window. I've made this UI mistake myself in the past, but it's a well established convention now. Firefox uses it (for searching the web, rather than the current document), as does Safari. iTunes uses it. Ubuntu's Add/Remove Applications uses it and Ubuntu's help browser uses it. Microsoft's developer documentation for Vista explicitly says "thou shalt". But Rhythmbox just kind of hides it in the middle of a bunch of other UI clutter.
(GTK+ apps in general make very poor use of empty space; the widgets seem to enforce large amounts of arbitrarily wasted space around themselves, and developers seem, perhaps in reaction to this, to use it only rarely in ways that actually help convey meaning. Mac developers tend to be best at this, perhaps because Apple over-exaggerated in early versions of Mac OS X to get the point across. Good Mac apps tend to have far fewer controls and preferences, of course, which gives developers more room to play with.)
Did I mention that the window manager's stupid "top-left corner" behavior is exacerbated by Rhythmbox not explicitly repositioning itself where it was last? GNOME bug 502827. (Sad, of course, that individual applications need to work around systemic lameness, but remembering your last window position is a good basic feature to have anyway.)
There's advertising in the UI, too. In the latest version, two net music stores have appeared. I thought one advantage of not using iTunes would be to not suffer that crap, but I was wrong. To be fair, judging by the text that disappears before you have chance to read it (and how do you get it back?), Jamendo is actually a "store" for Free music; Magnatune not. But it's unclear, and feels like thin ice that really needs better explanation. Unlike iTunes, the "stores" aren't very store-like, either. They look just like your normal music collection, which isn't a very accessible way to browse unfamiliar music.
But what drives me mad the most (worse than even the slider) is the overall window behavior. When you start Rhythmbox, an icon appears in the top panel, which generally signifies some kind of "background" application; the kind of application whose window you can close without thereby quitting the application, because you can click the panel icon to get the window back. But no, clicking the close icon quits Rhythmbox. No more music. You can click the window's minimize button, but that still wastes space in the list of windows at the bottom of the screen.
You can get better behavior by clicking on the panel icon, funnily enough. If the window is visible, clicking the panel icon (somewhat bizarrely, and with visual feedback to emphasize the idea) minimizes the window "into" the panel. Clicking again re-opens the window, as you'd expect. But if you've just been fiddling in the window, which you probably have if the window's visible, you're focus is on the window and your pointer is in the window. Nowhere near the panel icon. So it's way more convenient to close the window, but closing the window, despite the existence of the panel icon, quits Rhythmbox and stops the music. This is GNOME bug 158168 from 2004, which the developers don't think is a bug.
It would appear from GNOME bug 523072 as if Rhythmbox is equally evil if you're ripping a CD at the time. I can imagine that's even more annoying!
I came up with a patch, ran a patched version for a few weeks, and was much happier. But what's the use of a patch when the developers think the current behavior is not just acceptable, but good? The fanboys who say "patches welcome" whenever someone complains miss the point; patching is necessary but not sufficient. Realistically, you probably have to fork, and get your distribution to package your fork instead. And that's not something you can do on a feature-by-feature basis. You could try to file the bug against your favorite distribution instead, and put the maintenance burden onto the package manager, but that really doesn't seem like a healthy way forward.
Am I really destined to end up running Gentoo? Building everything from source and applying my own little set of patches on my local machine? I think I'd rather buy a Zune.
At this point, I should be honest and point out that I simply don't know what iTunes does if you close its window. Mac OS solves the underlying problem in a more fundamental way: command-h gets any application out of my face in a single keystroke. (My complaint there is that, by default, there's no visual indication that an application is hidden, which I find confusing, especially in combination with the way Mac OS' dock shows some non-running applications too. There's a hidden preference to fix that, though, and it's about the only bit of manual configuration I have to do on a new Mac.) It would be great for Linux to have a similar system-wide fix, but this is Linux, so there's no "system" (hell, there's a whole other desktop I haven't mentioned that's the default in some distributions, and there's a third semi-popular one), and Linux has no Steve Jobs insisting that stuff is not allowed to suck.
[I am reliably informed that iTunes does the right thing. Imagine my surprise.]
So given all those Linuxy lemons, you'd be well advised to have your application know how to make tasty lemonade.
Did I mention that Rhythmbox never remembers its window location? This isn't just a problem if you quit and re-start. It's a problem if you click the panel icon twice to hide and then re-show the main window, because that resets the window position to the top-left. Seriously.
Did I mention that if you quit Rhythmbox (which, as I've said, is easier to do by accident than it ought to be) it forgets what you were playing? I'm not asking for fancy stuff like remembering scroll bar positions and search field contents and multiple selections and the like: just remember which track was playing last, please!
Did I mention that the mis-positioned search field isn't activated if you use control-f (or, if you think of it more like Firefox's "Web Search", control-k)? The former does nothing (unless focus is already in a component that has some default behavior for the keystroke), while the latter is "Play Queue as Side Pane". I'm not sure, but I don't think "Play" is a verb in that sentence.
Did I mention that canceling the search field doesn't keep the currently-playing track visible in the table? I realize the "right" behavior is pretty hard to specify if you want to cover all the special cases, but there's value in doing the right thing in the most common case.
Don't get me wrong: I actually quite like Rhythmbox. It's almost good. And I do think it's a case where a bit of "ronco spray-on usability" could make the difference. I bring this up because I don't want people to think that there isn't low-hanging fruit out there. The little panel icon? It's great. I love its little notifications when the track changes, and I love that I can turn it off if I want, and I love that I turn it off in the place where it appears. All nicely done. I want to use it more, and I want Rhythmbox to stop coming across as if it thinks it's the most important app on my desktop, when 99% of the time that little panel icon is all I need to see. If listening to music were my primary occupation, I wouldn't be running Rhythmbox on Linux; I'd be running the iPod software on an iPod.
But back to my patch. My experience has been that, contrary to what you might imagine, sending patches to the most-upstream source doesn't work well. Perhaps because most of my patches fix things so obviously broken that the only reason the patch is needed is because the developers are either actively hostile towards, or simply indifferent to, their users. The distributions tend to be a better place to go. Sure, they apply patches that make your SSH insecure (Debian) or your Perl slow (RedHat), but at least they get things done.
Anyway, I went to launchpad, Ubuntu's bug database. And I found Bug #38512 in Rhythmbox: "Window close should close, not quit". Reading that bug's comments we learn a great many things. I could summarize the thread, but really it's so educational I think everyone who's interested in the state of the Linux desktop should read the whole thread themselves.
If, having read that thread, you want to see the alluded-to tantrum by one of the upstream developers, you should read the upstream bug Bug 318629 - Option to minimize to tray on close or minimize (rhythmbox). (Note that a developer calls a user a "dick" before a user calls a developer a "dick".)
Everything that's wrong with the Linux desktop is beautifully illustrated in those two bug reports.
Problem: everyone wants users until they've got them. When they've got them, they want to reshape them into their own image. When that fails, as it always will, they begin to hate their users.