Thread: Winamp News
View Single Post
Old 8th April 2014, 18:10   #231
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Victhor View Post
But what's passed is passed and there is no point in discussing about how it was or what it could've been. But it does help to see how things can be improved or do better this time (specially if there are still around people like you and Egg, who went through those years inside/along Winamp).
exactly and with what can be done via here (in addition to the other methods of contact as Egg has listed), i am playing devil's advocate of sorts in trying to rattle the cage a bit to see what might be the reaction to possible changes or ideas that are being floated about. and it's not like myself and Egg cannot be asked things (whether we can ask is a different thing, but we've always tried to be as open as was allowed to do) and that we're paying attention to the things that people do ask for and as was seen from 5.64-5.66x, a lot of user feedback was taken into account in the fixes and changes made, which will hopefully continue with newer client releases.


as Winamp realistically has to change, but to do that it needs to be known what users will be ok with as well as thoughts on new possibilities as well as what and how people are / want to use it (skipping over the OS support debate as that's outside of what is being focused on for the time being - be that good or bad, it's just the reality of available resources).

like we could make a dedicated broadcasting setup based on Winamp which is better integrated than what is currently possible (specific skin / streaming features)
or
change it (optionally) into a headerless media server or just a more complete means for accessing media from Winamp on other machines on the same LAN and if needed externally such as on WAFA (with an easy option being an integrated DNAS server - spotiamp showed that there was interest in such a mode)
or
focus on more specific 'pro' type tagging / media handling
or
a super lite version (potentially just mp3 playback and super minimal ui) or just more prominence of the lite version for those who want a 2.x experience
or
a media discovery setup which hooks into other services so you can just find something without having to have a dedicate library
or
anything else really, and so the ideas can go on. but doing one thing is going to be seen as 'bloat' by others or not worth it for them and it's then how to make new Winamp releases worth going through the install process for all instead of the few.


as we could just not bother and leave everyone downloading the last AOL version and leave Winamp as that. which based on the 2.x users (and a lot of the feedback when the shutdown notice was announced) would suit them happily, but obviously not for those who prefer current / updated versions or want to try something different to the existing behemoths.


hence why it's going to be a while before a new non-AOL version is provided whilst things are re-built and also whilst working out the best way to take things from user feedback and how we envision Winamp should become. which i know is going to annoy some people or cause a load of abuse to be posted, but there are reasons why things have to change (which i know some will really not like) and that's just the way it has to go if Winamp is going to survive and remain relevant.

but the key thing is, where feasible (which is not possible in some cases and may even require external downloading of a few things) existing functionality will be remained, though how it's used / accessed may change.
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote