Pros of Meting

• More actively maintained with recent updates
• Supports a wider range of music platforms (10+)
• Better documentation and examples for integration

Cons of Meting

• Requires PHP 5.4+ while Music works with PHP 5.3+
• More complex setup process
• Larger codebase, potentially harder to customize

Code Comparison

Music:

$api = new \Metowolf\Meting('netease');
$data = $api->format(true)->search('Hello');

Meting:

$api = new \Meting\Core();
$api->setFormat('json');
$data = $api->netease()->search('Hello');

Key Differences

• Meting uses a more object-oriented approach
• Music focuses primarily on Chinese music platforms
• Meting offers more flexibility in output formats
• Music has a simpler API but fewer features

Use Cases

• Choose Music for basic integration with Chinese platforms
• Opt for Meting for a more comprehensive, multi-platform solution

Community and Support

• Meting has a larger user base and more active issues/discussions
• Music has fewer contributors but a simpler codebase for quick fixes

Pros of listen1_chrome_extension

• Cross-platform compatibility as a Chrome extension
• Supports multiple music streaming services in one interface
• Active development with frequent updates

Cons of listen1_chrome_extension

• Limited to Chrome browser environment
• May require more system resources as a browser extension
• Potential for breakage if streaming services change their APIs

Code Comparison

listen1_chrome_extension:

const playlistTypes = {
  'netease': 'netease_playlist',
  'qq': 'qq_playlist',
  'kugou': 'kugou_playlist',
  'kuwo': 'kuwo_playlist',
  'bilibili': 'bilibili_playlist',
};

music:

$music_type = [
    'netease'    => '网易',
    'tencent'    => 'QQ',
    'xiami'      => '虾米',
    'kugou'      => '酷狗',
    'baidu'      => '百度',
];

Both projects use similar approaches to define music service types, but listen1_chrome_extension is implemented in JavaScript for browser environments, while music uses PHP for server-side processing.

listen1_chrome_extension offers a more comprehensive solution for cross-platform music streaming, integrating multiple services into a single interface. However, it's limited to Chrome users. music, on the other hand, provides a server-side solution that can be integrated into various web applications but may require more setup and maintenance.

Pros of YesPlayMusic

• More active development with frequent updates and bug fixes
• Modern and visually appealing user interface
• Cross-platform support (Windows, macOS, Linux)

Cons of YesPlayMusic

• Larger codebase and potentially more complex to contribute to
• Focused primarily on NetEase Music, less flexibility for other sources

Code Comparison

YesPlayMusic (Vue.js):

<template>
  <div class="player">
    <Cover :url="currentTrack.al.picUrl" :playing="isPlaying" />
    <div class="info">
      <div class="title">{{ currentTrack.name }}</div>
      <div class="artist">{{ currentTrack.ar[0].name }}</div>
    </div>
  </div>
</template>

music (PHP):

<?php
function mc_song_urls($value, $type = 'query', $site = 'netease', $page = 1)
{
    if (!$value) {
        return;
    }
    $result = mc_get_song_by_id($value, $type, $site, $page);
    if (empty($result['url'])) {
        return;
    }
    return $result;
}

Summary

YesPlayMusic offers a more polished and actively maintained solution with cross-platform support, while music provides a simpler PHP-based implementation. YesPlayMusic's modern interface and frequent updates make it more appealing for end-users, but its larger codebase may be more challenging for contributors. The music project, being PHP-based, might be easier to integrate into existing web applications but lacks the rich features and UI of YesPlayMusic.

Pros of NeteaseCloudMusicApi

• More comprehensive API coverage for NetEase Cloud Music
• Actively maintained with frequent updates
• Extensive documentation and examples

Cons of NeteaseCloudMusicApi

• Focused solely on NetEase Cloud Music, lacking multi-platform support
• More complex setup and usage compared to music

Code Comparison

music:

$api = new \Metowolf\Meting('netease');
$data = $api->format(true)->search('Hello');

NeteaseCloudMusicApi:

const { login_cellphone, user_cloud } = require('NeteaseCloudMusicApi')

login_cellphone({
  phone: '手机号',
  password: '密码'
}).then(result => {
  console.log(result)
  user_cloud({
    cookie: result.body.cookie
  }).then(result => {
    console.log(result)
  })
})

Summary

NeteaseCloudMusicApi offers a more comprehensive and up-to-date API for NetEase Cloud Music, with better documentation and active maintenance. However, it's limited to a single platform and has a steeper learning curve. In contrast, music provides a simpler interface and supports multiple music platforms but may lack some of the advanced features and regular updates found in NeteaseCloudMusicApi.

Pros of lx-music-desktop

• Cross-platform desktop application (Windows, macOS, Linux)
• More feature-rich UI with playlist management and lyrics display
• Regular updates and active development

Cons of lx-music-desktop

• Larger file size and resource usage due to being a desktop application
• More complex setup compared to the web-based music project

Code Comparison

lx-music-desktop (Vue.js):

import { createApp } from 'vue'
import App from './App.vue'
import store from './store'
import router from './router'

createApp(App).use(store).use(router).mount('#app')

music (PHP):

<?php
require 'vendor/autoload.php';
$api = new Meting('netease');
$data = $api->format(true)->search('Hello');
echo json_encode($data);

Summary

lx-music-desktop is a comprehensive desktop application for music streaming, offering a rich feature set and cross-platform support. It provides a more robust user experience with playlist management and lyrics display. However, it requires more system resources and has a more complex setup compared to the web-based music project.

The music project is a simpler, web-based solution that can be easily integrated into existing websites. It has a smaller footprint but offers fewer features compared to lx-music-desktop.

Both projects serve different use cases, with lx-music-desktop being more suitable for users looking for a standalone music player, while music is better for web developers wanting to add music functionality to their sites.

Pros of mdui

• More comprehensive UI framework with a wider range of components
• Better documentation and examples for developers
• Actively maintained with regular updates and improvements

Cons of mdui

• Larger file size and potentially more complex to implement
• Focused on Material Design, which may not suit all project styles
• Steeper learning curve for developers new to the framework

Code Comparison

mdui:

mdui.snackbar({
  message: 'Hello, world!',
  timeout: 3000,
  position: 'bottom'
});

music:

$music = new Music();
$result = $music->search('Song Title', 'netease');

Summary

mdui is a comprehensive Material Design UI framework for web development, offering a wide range of components and tools. It provides better documentation and is actively maintained, but may be more complex to implement and has a steeper learning curve.

music is a simpler, more focused project for searching and playing music from various sources. It's easier to integrate for specific music-related functionality but lacks the broader UI components and design system offered by mdui.

The choice between these repositories depends on the project's specific needs: mdui for a full-featured UI framework, or music for a targeted music search and playback solution.