WACUP
Replacing native Winamp code with modern code with frequent updates by one of the most prolific classic Winamp developers.
It's fantastic.
this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2024
326 points (98.8% liked)
Technology
58713 readers
6547 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm surprised they kept it up for so long honestly. It was very clear they had no fucking clue what they were doing. What with the nonsensical license that violated Github's tos, the Dolby Code they leaked, and the fact they kept every commit public for everyone to see.
Can someone explain me what's the business model of an app that's free for three decades? They claim to have 100 devs, how can they pay them?
I'm using foobar2000. Should I be using something else?
I'm an old soul so I use music bee with the Tron skin, it's very 2000s
Foobar is still the best there is, although the classic style interface might not appeal to younger people.
Still miss foobar which isn't on Linux, though deadbeef is fairly similar at least. Never got the hang of all the beautiful themes/skins users put together for foobar but it was still my go to music player. Excellent layout customisation, tagging and conversion UI, as well as as nice range of plugins
I really like deadbeef, coming from fb2k as well. Someone recommended it to me two weeks ago, and I've immediately recognized the similarities.
Foobar's Dev should have just taken their project open source imo. Although I suspect winamp's lawyers would have jumped on that.
I use Audacious with the original classic winamp skin (which it supports natively).
I think QMMP also supports the winamps themes, and they both work well in Linux (which is all I run these days).
Well, that really sucks the llama's ass.
Uhhh
Unsurprising given that their repo's license was a contradictory mess
Anyways I'd recommend using Strawberry instead
It's an actual Free and Open Source music player:
...That site's UI looks like someone saw the marketing literature for the Frigidaire produce preserver and said, "Yeah, that'll do."
load more comments
(5 replies)
Lovely that it is open source, but dear lord that UI is a blast from the past 😂😂 👴👵🏚️
It's an Amarok fork, so yes
So that's why I thought: finally a viable Amarok replacement.
Most players out there seem to be built for like 40 songs?
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(26 replies)
Is it still possible to get the source code? I never knew it was available.
What is this "AtRiskRepos" thing? 👀
It's a place for software that comes from a broken home and would otherwise be hanging out on the street in high-crime areas.
I just use Audacious with a winamp skin. Looks identical but actually FOSS.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I think I tried Winamp back in the day but never really understood it.
One has to admit it's good that they released the source code (while it was available) so users can learn what their software is actually doing on their computer. Better for yourself as a dev too: you will probably avoid including other people's work in yours. However, wanting contributions while retaining the exclusive right to distribute the software is anti-collaborative. I'm reluctant to say it might as well be proprietary again but since it doesn't meet the standard of software freedom then it's equally not worth trying on my computer.
In its day Winamp was the most comprehensive media player and users were super into its skinability which was a big deal at the time. Nowadays the "plays everything" throne is very firmly occupied by VLC, with a little cushioned stool next to it for Media Player Classic to sit on. However, neither of them offer the user interface experience that Winamp does/did.
Winamp was iTunes before iTunes. It was Spotify before Spotify. It did an excellent job of managing the hordes of totally legitimate MP3's we all had back in the day, and did so with an aplomb that nothing else seemed to manage. Really, its playlist and library management was top notch. Newer apps still piss me off because none of them do it the way Winamp did.
Side note, if you have an old iPod kicking around and don't feel like dealing with Apple's ecosystem, Winamp can still, to this very day, stick music on your device natively without having to install or use iTunes. Just saying.
But this source code release thing really baffles me. I have no idea what the point of that was supposed to be.
Really, its playlist and library management was top notch. Newer apps still piss me off because none of them do it the way Winamp did.
It's why I still use winamp.
It did an excellent job of managing the hordes of totally legitimate MP3’s we all had back in the day, and did so with an aplomb that nothing else seemed to manage. Really, its playlist and library management was top notch.
This is why I'm still on the eternal search for a replacement. Library management was really, really good in Winamp. I use Strawberry these days and it's absolutely great at playing stuff but the playlist management is just 'good enough'.
If you're running Windows you can still use old versions of Winamp.
On Linux, I dunno. I'll bet you it'll run in Wine.
load more comments
(3 replies)
I'd say that mpv also has a place near VLC when comes to playing everything.
However, wanting contributions while retaining the exclusive right to distribute the software is anti-collaborative. I’m reluctant to say it might as well be proprietary again
As you describe it, that is proprietary -- no "might as well be" qualification necessary. Just because you can read the source code doesn't make it Open Source; you've got to have all Four Freedoms for it to count.
the users have the freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software.
Is it not actually four or are they counting some of these as the same thing?
I think I tried Winamp back in the day but never really understood it.
What was there not to understand? It was a basic music player with playlist functionality, a plugin infrastructure to support playback of pirated music in underground formats like MP3, at the price of completely free and no ads (the website had banners but not the player).
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›