Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Winamp > Winamp Discussion

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 22nd November 2013, 10:15   #81
fernandot
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1
Signed!

I've registered on the forum only to sign, i've been using winamp since the 90's, it is a shame that it will die.

Please AOL, release the code so we may keep it alive...
fernandot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2013, 10:43   #82
rmpp
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 2
Signed!!!
rmpp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2013, 12:02   #83
Raj_09
Member
 
Raj_09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 84
I have read rumours that MS will buy Winamp. That will be a disaster. They already have a media player so buying Winamp will just mean acquiring all its good features for WMP and killing good old Winamp. Can't beat to see that. Winamp has to go opensource. I signed the petition
Raj_09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2013, 13:01   #84
Koogle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 258
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raj_09 View Post
I have read rumours that MS will buy Winamp. That will be a disaster. They already have a media player so buying Winamp will just mean acquiring all its good features for WMP and killing good old Winamp. Can't beat to see that. Winamp has to go opensource. I signed the petition
Don't make me laugh, MS doesn't know what a good feature is if it hit them in the head, and if they do add a useful feature it would be underdeveloped garbage with very little customization or control options for it, just the bare minimum crap.

Besides they trashed there own WMP I never even heard what they did with it for win8, probably the same shit, or worse its gone an had a metro designed lobotomy failure like the rest of the OS and for the simpleton users its clearly targeted at.

My signature was just too damn good to be seen here..
Koogle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2013, 17:14   #85
D2600
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1
maybe it's even better

if this company gets to to release the code, just imagine the possibilities, for example in finally to use winamp linux or MAC, it would be great
D2600 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2013, 17:24   #86
Plague
f(caffeine){
return wasabi;
}
(Forum King)
 
Plague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 3,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koogle View Post
Don't make me laugh, MS doesn't know what a good feature is if it hit them in the head, and if they do add a useful feature it would be underdeveloped garbage with very little customization or control options for it, just the bare minimum crap.

Besides they trashed there own WMP I never even heard what they did with it for win8, probably the same shit, or worse its gone an had a metro designed lobotomy failure like the rest of the OS and for the simpleton users its clearly targeted at.
Microsoft would probably just use Shoutcast for their Xbox music thing and bury Winamp for good. Possibly keep Winamp's name for a Metro app. But there is no way in hell they would let Winamp continue in it's current form or any recognizable form at all.

Microsoft buying Winamp would absolutely mean the final nail in the coffin and then setting the coffin on fire and then repeatedly run over the ashes with a bulldozer and then set the bulldozer on fire and then drown it in the Mariana Trench, all while laughing maniacally...

IF another big company is to buy Winamp, I would much much prefer it be Google. They atleast would likely open source the application itself and keep the services proprietary.

Not to mention the irony of Microsoft buying the tech from a company whose name was a ploy on Microsoft's name (Nullsoft).
Plague is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2013, 17:35   #87
Plague
f(caffeine){
return wasabi;
}
(Forum King)
 
Plague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 3,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by D2600 View Post
if this company gets to to release the code, just imagine the possibilities, for example in finally to use winamp linux or MAC, it would be great
That was gonna happen with Winamp3, but since it was forced out the door too early in an unfinished state and no more versions were officially released (alphas and betas had plenty of releases and they were ALOT better than the only officially released build #488), people got the wrong idea and hated it, thus causing Nullsoft to merge the two codebases and Winamp 5.x was born.
The problem with that is that the Winamp 2.x (and thus parts of Winamp 5.x) codebase is too tied to Win32 that it would be very hard, if not impossible, to port it to Linux and Mac.
Wasabi (the technology behind Winamp3), was crossplatform and would be easy to get running on pretty much any platform.

This is partly why I've always praised Winamp3/wasabi.player and why I've always wanted a clean break from the 2.x codebase.
Skin and plugin compatibility was being worked on as Wasabi components.
I personally worked on the Winamp2 skin component for Wasabi.player after the Wasabi SDK sources were released.

But this is a long time ago, and today it would be very hard to make a Wasabi.player from the current Wasabi codebase, as it's so mashed-up with the Winamp2 codebase. But it would not be impossible.
Plague is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2013, 17:41   #88
Koopa
16-Bit Moderator
 
Koopa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,341
I agree with Plague, they'd use SHOUTcast in their XBox and may MilkDrop, but if there is room for Winamp, I personally doubt it.

Microsoft tried anything to push their wma format during the years, I doubt that there ever will be any MS application which would allow playback of Vorbis/Flac or other formats. Just look at their poor implementation of a MP3 encoder.

I'm also hoping that Google would buy it, but it's just wishful thinking.
Koopa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2013, 17:49   #89
Koogle
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 258
"example in finally to use winamp linux "

lol linux finally getting some decent apps.. would be a good thing windows is going down the trashcan anyway

My signature was just too damn good to be seen here..
Koogle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2013, 17:58   #90
OlexijL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 101
Send a message via AIM to OlexijL Send a message via Yahoo to OlexijL
Signed, but it would be better to let it like this for another decade.
OlexijL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd November 2013, 22:15   #91
Raj_09
Member
 
Raj_09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koopa View Post
I agree with Plague, they'd use SHOUTcast in their XBox and may MilkDrop, but if there is room for Winamp, I personally doubt it.

Microsoft tried anything to push their wma format during the years, I doubt that there ever will be any MS application which would allow playback of Vorbis/Flac or other formats. Just look at their poor implementation of a MP3 encoder.

I'm also hoping that Google would buy it, but it's just wishful thinking.
That could be a good thing. Google has got google music and its own hardware in the form of Android phones and tablets as well as Chromebooks. With Winamp, they have the software side covered. It could work - I would prefer seeing Google branding in Winamp than damn AOL. I can't imagine my life without Winamp
Raj_09 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2013, 17:54   #92
Brunorc
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1
Pleeeease from Brazil!!!!
Brunorc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2013, 18:14   #93
ant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: An Ant Farm
Posts: 101
Open source it please.

--Ant @ Ant's Quality Foraged Links (http://aqfl.net) and The Ant Farm (http://antfarm.ma.cx).
ant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd November 2013, 19:55   #94
ant
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: An Ant Farm
Posts: 101
Signed! Open source it please, but I doubt it will happen since too many stuff cannot be open sourced. Maybe AOL can release just Winamp only? Let people deal with the addons and stuff.

--Ant @ Ant's Quality Foraged Links (http://aqfl.net) and The Ant Farm (http://antfarm.ma.cx).
ant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2013, 06:41   #95
kpederson9999
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 3
Signed!!
kpederson9999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2013, 07:46   #96
Smelter
Major Dude
 
Smelter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,141
This is the company that the winamp creators left a very long time ago for reasons that would strongly indicate to me that there is NO CHANCE IN ANY REALITY that aol would open source anything. First come layoffs, and if they had decided to open source it, there would be nobody that could push the buttons. And as many said before, the licensed and proprietary tech inside would leave a useless exorcize in nostalgia..
Smelter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2013, 10:19   #97
ShadowHarlequin
Senior Member
 
ShadowHarlequin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 171
Signed

please please!

"human is the music, natural is the static..." - john updike
[Set Zero] [themilkFACTORY]
ShadowHarlequin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2013, 11:45   #98
Plague
f(caffeine){
return wasabi;
}
(Forum King)
 
Plague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 3,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smelter View Post
This is the company that the winamp creators left a very long time ago for reasons that would strongly indicate to me that there is NO CHANCE IN ANY REALITY that aol would open source anything. First come layoffs, and if they had decided to open source it, there would be nobody that could push the buttons. And as many said before, the licensed and proprietary tech inside would leave a useless exorcize in nostalgia..
AOL already did open source alot of Wasabi about ten years ago, with the Z-lib (BSD-style) license by the way, so there is absolutely a chance in this reality that they would be willing to open source more code.
The proprietary plugins though, not so much, as AOL are not allowed to open source those.
Plague is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2013, 12:47   #99
Plague
f(caffeine){
return wasabi;
}
(Forum King)
 
Plague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 3,984
That gives me an idea by the way...

Question for DrO and/or DJ Egg:
Does the source code for Winamp3/Wasabi.player still exist somewhere deep down in the version control system?
If so and if it's impossible to open source Winamp in any functioning state, maybe it's easier to get the source code for Winamp3/Wasabi.player?
The last build was Wasabi.player #499g from 2003-12-03.
Most of it already is open source and not much proprietary tech was in it yet afaik.
Just strip out the MPEG and wma/wmv Wacs and release the rest..?
Pretty much what is missing is the skinning stuff (WasabiXML, Maki, etc) and the core as far as I can remember.

I know it's not the same thing, but atleast it's something, and it can be made compatible with Winamp plugins (it already had Wacs for that, they ofcourse need to be updated though) and skins (I still have the source code for the almost finished Wac for classic skin compatibility and modern skins are natively compatible but need to be updated with latest features ofcourse).

I would definitely be interested in helping with an effort like that and there are probably more people that would.
Plague is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2013, 13:06   #100
synthetiq
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 153
I've been using winamp since my first PC, Its my main media player.
This can t be the end... I dont have words to describe this.... Please maintain the rage, llamas!
synthetiq is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th November 2013, 23:12   #101
janebo
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: ontario, canada
Posts: 6
Big NO to MS

Omg, please do not even consider that!! I can't think of a worse disaster other than Winamp disappearing altogether...

Very sad to see the end of the Best media player I've ever had on all my pcs since 1999, the only one that didn't crash, try to rewrite, lock up, trash or do any other ugly nasties that I've experienced (the ones like, you know, that MSMP for one...& I won't even go into that Apple mess!)

I haven't posted a lot of messages here but that didn't mean I wasn't lurking around from time to time and I've used Winamp itself almost every day since I found it, so long ago. But this is different! I understand the reluctance to go open source, but after all your hard work it seems almost blasphemous to just let it end here. In any case, thank you very much for your creation, it has entertained me for years. It has been & still is the best player around.

PS: petition signed
janebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th November 2013, 00:19   #102
Obsdark
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 75
Winamp, my respects &

For your long & Sucessfull life
Cheers

If can be open source, can be him salvation
i Sign

PS: Petition Signed
Obsdark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th November 2013, 13:03   #103
hkdio
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 6
Signed
hkdio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 12:51   #104
bonacker
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16
Ars Technica article on open sourcing Winamp

Ars Technica article on open sourcing Winamp

http://arstechnica.com/information-t...n-source-code/
bonacker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 19:02   #105
seyss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Brazil
Posts: 142
signed... greedy AOL bastards never liked nor cared about Winamp. They wanted to make MONEY out of it, nothing else.

now they want to kill it, which just corroborates the story above. BASTARDS!!
seyss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 19:10   #106
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
seyss: and those "BASTARDS" as you put are the ones who've kept it alive longer than it probably should have been as well as giving it away for free since v2.5. just because you're annoyed, doesn't mean you cannot look at the facts subjectively. and software generating income is not a dirty thing as how else are you going to pay for the people to work on things? everything has a cost and 'free' has to be paid for somehow... and software comes and goes with everything having it's time, now is Winamp's and if it's just meant to be a niche player again (as user numbers have been indicating for the last few years) then so be it.
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 19:46   #107
Globe199
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrO View Post
seyss: and those "BASTARDS" as you put are the ones who've kept it alive longer than it probably should have been as well as giving it away for free since v2.5. just because you're annoyed, doesn't mean you cannot look at the facts subjectively. and software generating income is not a dirty thing as how else are you going to pay for the people to work on things? everything has a cost and 'free' has to be paid for somehow... and software comes and goes with everything having it's time, now is Winamp's and if it's just meant to be a niche player again (as user numbers have been indicating for the last few years) then so be it.
No doubt that "free" has a cost. However, AOL could decide to be good netizens. They could figure out a way to release the source and allow enterprising individuals could pick it up.

They won't, but they could.
Globe199 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 20:02   #108
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
everyone is focused on direct source code, there is _nothing_ stopping people from doing replacement plug-ins (Winamp is modular) or making a new skinning engine) or anything else like that. there are claims loads of developers will do x, y & z but look at the plug-in writing community, it's basically dead, look at the skinning community, it's basically dead.

people are saying they want to do all of these different things with Winamp but the very things being talked about are then the things that the other half of users are going to call bloat or worse. no one, not even users know what they want Winamp to be and that is why it fails.

and the more this all goes on, the more i just want to see the core left alone and for people to be ingenious in making new things, not re-hashing what's already there. sometimes it's better to start over than keep working on top of things. but what would i know and now i'll just go back and sit in my corner.
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 20:05   #109
Globe199
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrO View Post
everyone is focused on direct source code, there is _nothing_ stopping people from doing replacement plug-ins (Winamp is modular) or making a new skinning engine) or anything else like that.

the more this all goes on, the more i just want to see the core left alone and be ingenious in making new things, not re-hashing what's already there. sometimes it's better to start over than keep working on top of things. but what would i know.
Sure, Winamp is modular. But it says on the download page:

Quote:
Winamp.com and associated web services will no longer be available past December 20, 2013. Additionally, Winamp Media players will no longer be available for download. Please download the latest version before that date.
So how would anyone get Winamp after that date? This implies that there will be no authorized software download after 12/20/2013.
Globe199 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 20:07   #110
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Globe199 View Post
So how would anyone get Winamp after that date? This implies that there will be no authorized software download after 12/20/2013.
the same way a large proportion of the downloads have always been gotten, from all of the download / old version sites. and that statement means from 'official' download servers, how can any company, even AOL, prevent people from having their own copies or constantly doing download take-down notices on the Winamp installer - it's just not worth the effort or feasible.
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 20:13   #111
Globe199
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 43
Actually, I don't care much about plug-ins, and I don't care at all about skins. I do care about bug fixes and incremental improvements to the core software. Those are the things that will be lost when AOL leads Winamp to slaughter, and that could feasibly be avoided if it moved to open source.
Globe199 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 20:18   #112
Koopa
16-Bit Moderator
 
Koopa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,341
If you don't care about Plugins/Skins you are one of these new users. Winamp became so popular because of the many plugins and lovely skins.

It was always fascinating in the past, you want to play format 'ab'? Just install 3rd party plugin 'xy'.

The plugin api is very powerful, a lot of things could be done via plugins.

Open Source isn't the solution which will fix most things automatically. Even large OpenSource projects like Mozilla would be already dead without tons of money, which they got/get from Google.

Software development and the infrastructure (download, marketing) etc is expensive. Even on projects like Mozilla or LibreOffice are full time paid developers working, that's something many people simply forget.
Koopa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 20:25   #113
Globe199
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koopa View Post
If you don't care about Plugins/Skins you are one of these new users.
I have been using Winamp since the spring of 1997. It's been my primary music player ever since. I have to ask, what is a "new" Winamp user? I would be shocked if anyone under the age of 30 has ever heard of it.

I used to care more about skins, but I found one I like and I just stuck with it. I've added a few plugins over the years, but mainly just to toy around with; there's nothing I use on a daily basis.

Quote:
Software development and the infrastructure (download, marketing) etc is expensive. Even on projects like Mozilla or LibreOffice are full time paid developers working, that's something many people simply forget.
I haven't forgotten that. But at least Winamp could have a chance if AOL let it. Right now it has no chance.
Globe199 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 20:26   #114
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Globe199 View Post
Actually, I don't care much about plug-ins, and I don't care at all about skins. I do care about bug fixes and incremental improvements to the core software. Those are the things that will be lost when AOL leads Winamp to slaughter, and that could feasibly be avoided if it moved to open source.
Well you should care about plug-ins as Winamp _is_ plug-ins and has always been that way and the bits that generally get fixed are it's plug-ins as Winamp at it's core is just a glorified plug-in loader and without those plug-ins, Winamp is not Winamp.

I have tried to explain a number of times, that it is possible for 3rd party developers (including ex-devs) who know their way around Winamp would be able to fix things and re-make things as / when needed so that it can keep going on for the small user base Winamp now has.

all that is needed is a winamp.exe that'll load things and is stable... oh wait, we've got that with this last round of updates! from then, you just have to make / re-write the plug-ins as needed and that is why it generally doesn't matter about a lack of source code.

sure you loose official updates, but as so many of the comments in general have been "i'll miss it but i've not used it for years" and as i still keep getting requests from v2.x users, clearly there's still a lot of people out there who don't need / care about current updates as why should they update when v2.x for example already does what they want?


Winamp has tried to be too much for too many and it failed. just let it become niche and curated for by those who care and can give it the aspects it needs which would involve writing new (plug-in) code anyway or write a clone (done to death already over the years) or just use it as-is and let it be.


and i understand why people think source code would be all wonderful and lovely to have (and will not disuade either way the attempts being made), but with a lot of Winamp's deficiencies, a clean-slate is probably better imho.
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 20:38   #115
Koopa
16-Bit Moderator
 
Koopa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Globe199 View Post
I have been using Winamp since the spring of 1997. It's been my primary music player ever since. I have to ask, what is a "new" Winamp user? I would be shocked if anyone under the age of 30 has ever heard of it.
They have. I bet Winamp is used these day from people who are much older than the two of us. The user base changed from advanced users, which used the potential of the plugin system and the flexibility which is given via the many preferences to users, which probably don't know what a plugin is (that explains all of these 'My Winamp doesn't do xyz after update anymore' because they mistakenly unchecked something during installation for example)

3rd party development is almost dead, which also indicates, that many of the advanced users lost the interest over the years.

I can remember times, where tons of 3rd parties were developed, currently I'm aware about 3 active plugin devs.

Winamp was also always a player for features, which are not main stream, e.g. playing old game music etc.

I guess most of the current user base don't care if Winamp has ReplayGain or Gapless playback, most important is lots of eye candy for them. Or they want that Winamp changes into a iTunes/Other Players clone, which will work and look exactly like other players, just labled as Winamp.

I feel often like an old relict from a time, which already ended a long time ago, heh
Koopa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 21:01   #116
Plague
f(caffeine){
return wasabi;
}
(Forum King)
 
Plague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 3,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrO View Post
and i understand why people think source code would be all wonderful and lovely to have (and will not disuade either way the attempts being made), but with a lot of Winamp's deficiencies, a clean-slate is probably better imho.
Which is why atleast I keep bringing up wasabi.player. There's your clean slate right there.

If, somehow, the missing source code that wasn't open sourced ten years ago (december 2003, build #499g) could be open sourced now (shouldn't it still exist in the version control system?), there would be a fully functioning base to start a new direction and Winamp could stay the way it is aswell and continue with 3rd party plugins like you say. Just like it was gonna be back then anyways.

I want to resurrect wasabi.player, I don't care that it's 10 years old code, it may actually be a blessing in disguise as there would be pretty much no ties to current Winamp, except some old parts of Wasabi that formed gen_ff around the same time.

BUT, if it continues to stand like it has for ten years, with missing core, Maki and WasabiXML functionality, it would probably mean a herculean task for a single or few unpaid part-time developers. Just like it turned out in 2003.

I am certainly a better coder now than I was back then and I wanna have a go at it again.
But that missing code is needed to be able to realistically continue such a project.
And if it's ever gonna happen, now is the time to beg for that code, as it may very well be lost forever in a month.

Starting completely fresh (total clean slate) is just an insane amount of work in comparison, and very unnecessary when there already exist a foundation with just a few relatively small bits missing.

Edit:
Oh, and fun fact.. You know how people bitched back then about how slow and bloated Winamp3 was? (it wasn't btw)
With todays machines and a 10 years old codebase, that thing would absolutely fly compared to most apps today.
Plague is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 21:19   #117
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
wasabi.player is not a clean slate as it's still covered by the same issues that Winamp proper has and wherever it's sat rotting, it doesn't have any of the fixes, improvements that's been made to the code taken from it. and no one is going to go through the process of auditing a half-complete player to provide it - sorry but that's the reality of that compared to everything else that is going on.

when i'm saying write / re-write things, i'm talking primarily about functionality over form i.e. i'd already been looking at means to aid in running a skinless Winamp as most of Winamp's memory 'bloat' comes from skins (and often is requested to have Winamp be native) and instead doing things for better tag / library / file management over what is currently present. as a pretty player which doesn't do well on functionality is pointless imho.

and it isn't like wasabi style services cannot already be done within Winamp proper as that's been the case since the 5.1x releases and is what drove most of the newer APIs added. and it was that side of thing which was the main aspect taken from Winamp3/wasabi.player into the 5.x clients.


i know you like what wasabi.player could be / mean and i can understand it, but that ship has long since sailed along with a lot of other things. all i'm trying to do is keep people grounded to the reality of things and that a lot of what is being floated about is just dreaming and would never be considered based on reasonable assumptions i can make.
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 21:29   #118
SugarD-x
Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sacramento, California U.S.A.
Posts: 71
Send a message via ICQ to SugarD-x Send a message via AIM to SugarD-x Send a message via MSN to SugarD-x Send a message via Yahoo to SugarD-x Send a message via Skype™ to SugarD-x
Quote:
Originally Posted by Koopa View Post
If you don't care about Plugins/Skins you are one of these new Open Source isn't the solution which will fix most things automatically. Even large OpenSource projects like Mozilla would be already dead without tons of money, which they got/get from Google.
You may be onto something there. Maybe someone should convince Google to buy out Winamp and give it the support it officially deserves. Last time I checked, they haven't made an advancement into media players, other than that proprietary one they had only for Google Video years ago. Let them take over development with a focus on allowing the community to still participate, and you may have some good days in Winamp's future. They can more than afford it, and I'm sure they'd love to compete with iTunes and Windows Media Player on that front. They have the marketing and development power to make Winamp highly popular again, too.

SugarD-x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 21:39   #119
Plague
f(caffeine){
return wasabi;
}
(Forum King)
 
Plague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sweden
Posts: 3,984
I kind of disagree that wasabi.player is not a clean slate, but our definition of it may differ.
I never was happy with the decision to merge Winamp 2.x and Winamp3 codebases. Wasabi.player would just be Wasabi tech, no mash-up, which would, in theory, eliminate atleast some issues.
Sure it doesn't have all fixes of current Winamp, I know that, but why should that stop anyone from wanting to work on it?

Regardless how (and if) Winamp progresses from now on, I still have a major interest in wasabi.player and if there is _any_ chance in hell that it can be resurrected, then why the hell not?

I know it's a very long shot, but shouldn't it be simpler to get such old code released than new code? Especially considering the licensed tech in the current code? (only the mpeg and wma/wmv plugins for wa3 were proprietary afaik, very easy to skip those)

Anyways, can't blame a guy for trying his hardest, right?
Plague is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th November 2013, 22:09   #120
Aminifu
Forum King
 
Aminifu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 4,661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plague View Post
Anyways, can't blame a guy for trying his hardest, right?
You usually find what you look for, meaning those who think it could work can give reasons and those who think it can't can give reasons.

The only way to know for sure is to let those who want to put forth the effort, do so. At this point, what is there to lose?

I just want most of what I've come to love to continue (functional features and UI), major app or niche product. I was very happy with the raw Maiko output plug-in (next to last release) until it started interfering with new Winamp versions. Not only did it solve some technical issues for me, it's exclusive mode sounded better on my system, imo.

Hang on, Plague. It ain't over till it's over, and even then it may not be over (to miss-quote a famous baseball manager).

Winamp Pro v5.666.3516 fully-patched - Komodo X Touchscreen v1.0 by Victhor skin
Windows 10 Home 64-bit v1809 desktop - Logitech Z906 5.1 speaker system
Aminifu is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Winamp > Winamp Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump