Old 31st October 2003, 11:42   #1
toq3r
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 120
An idea to keep winamp free

I heard a rumor that winamp 5 will have a pro version that will cost $15. If i'm wrong so far just disregard this post.

Maybe nullsoft could set up some sort of paypal for plugins. Give authors that charge money an easy way to collect it, take a little off the top to pay for the development costs of the winamp core.

Of course some MBA genius is gonna say, "Why don't we charge for WA5pro and setup a plugin paypal thing?"
toq3r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st October 2003, 13:26   #2
DJ Egg
Techorator
Winamp & SHOUTcast Team
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 35,821
The pro version includes a licence for full burning & ripping features, that's all. Nullsoft has to pay for this licence on a per-user basis.
DJ Egg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st October 2003, 13:28   #3
will
Nullsoft Newbie (Moderator)
 
will's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Sheffield, England
Posts: 5,569
You'd have realised what egg was saying if you'd read my FAQ on the topic: http://forums.winamp.com/showthread....13#post1128513

DO NOT PM ME WITH TECH SUPPORT QUESTIONS
will is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st November 2003, 01:45   #4
toq3r
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 120
Oh no will, dont get me wrong, I totally understand both posts.

What i'm saying though is.. Winamp and some plugin authors offer both public and "pro" versions. I think it would be neat if I paid for winamp "pro" it would be cool if I recieved a few plugins as well, thus giving plugin authors incentive to write pro quality plugins.

Here is what i'm really proposing....
1. Gather maybe 10 of the greatest commercial plugins together. Have the authors sign over the rights to the exe build for a percentage of the gross.

2. When someone purchases winamp pro, let them select from 2 extra plugins from that list of 10. Personally I'd grab DFX, not sure what else.

3. Profit!!

I'm mainly bringing this up because of your post will. It says somewhere in there something about there's only 2 features included right now (ripping, something else). This would be a sure sell way to include extra features.
toq3r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st November 2003, 08:14   #5
toq3r
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 120
I just realized by re-reading my posts I sound like i'm holding a crack pipe in one hand while typing with the other... Just disregard this post.
toq3r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st November 2003, 16:17   #6
killswitch1968
Senior Member
 
killswitch1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sverige
Posts: 434
Quote:
Originally posted by DJ Egg
The pro version includes a licence for full burning & ripping features, that's all. Nullsoft has to pay for this licence on a per-user basis.
Shouldn't the free version include Full ripping into ogg format though? And why can't burning be free?

They say if you play a Microsoft CD backwards you hear satanic messages. That's nothing, if you play it forwards it installs Windows.
killswitch1968 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st November 2003, 16:19   #7
mikm
Major Dude
 
mikm's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: somewhere else
Posts: 1,255
Burning is free. However, it is not very fast.

powered by C₂H₅OH
mikm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st November 2003, 19:06   #8
Sawg
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Ripping is free at slow speeds. Burning is not because Nullsoft has to pay a license for the burning engine on a per-user basis.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd November 2003, 05:43   #9
crazee
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 25
I never did understand why Ripping from CD at max speed wasn't free. I guess its an incentive, rather than a licensing issue (which is all i ever hear in the discussions).
crazee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2003, 09:13   #10
graigsmith
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 72
Send a message via AIM to graigsmith
um.. the people who own mp3, require a licence to be sold with every copy of mp3 making software reguardless who programmed the software. nullsoft has to pay it if they want to include mp3 encoding support. since they can't pay it.. they will let you pay the fee, if you really want to encode mp3's.

if winamp were just to give away mp3 encoding and not pay the licences.. they could get sued.. and then there would be NO winamp. so stop wining about it, or they will probably just remove encoding all together.

if you want to encode for free.. use ogg.
graigsmith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2003, 14:23   #11
killswitch1968
Senior Member
 
killswitch1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sverige
Posts: 434
Quote:
Originally posted by Sawg
Ripping is free at slow speeds.
Why can't we rip oggs at max speeds? Is the RIPPER itself also licensed, or just the mp3 format?

They say if you play a Microsoft CD backwards you hear satanic messages. That's nothing, if you play it forwards it installs Windows.
killswitch1968 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2003, 17:32   #12
WHEREamI
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wasabidev
Posts: 606
my question is, why don't they just use LAME, which is free, and better than the reference encoders.

my guess is that the licensing is for the ripping technology, not so much the encoder. not sure though.

~WHEREamI
WHEREamI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd November 2003, 17:58   #13
evil_oj
Senior Member
 
evil_oj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Canada
Posts: 476
Basically:

Encode MP3 (this costs someone money because it is using technology that has to be licensed)

Rip CDs at full speed (ripping CDs shouldn't and likely isn't going to directly cost anyone anything, since ripping means going down to .wav then encoding to mp3. And if you choose to rip right to mp3, the mp3 encoding stuff is covered above.)

Burn CDs at full speed (if they are using that "Sonic Powered" burning plugin, then they need to license this also).

What I don't fully understand is:

If it costs Nullsoft money to license Mp3 and burning technology, then how are they able to give out low-speed versions of these things to everyone for free? Do the licenses not apply to restricted speed burns/mp3 encoding?

5
3 I encode my music in Ogg Vorbis
2
I know enough about music and computers not to like computerized music.
evil_oj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2003, 08:16   #14
RIV@NVX
Senior Member
 
RIV@NVX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Rijeka, Croatia
Posts: 396
Send a message via ICQ to RIV@NVX Send a message via AIM to RIV@NVX Send a message via Yahoo to RIV@NVX
I am wondering how can foobar2000 do the sam thing for free.

DriverHeaven Moderator
kX Product Quality Tester
RIV@NVX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th November 2003, 17:00   #15
Sawg
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
They haven't been sued yet.

Free does not mean legal.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th November 2003, 22:06   #16
winamp5fan
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally posted by evil_oj
Burn CDs at full speed (if they are using that "Sonic Powered" burning plugin, then they need to license this also).

What I don't fully understand is:

If it costs Nullsoft money to license Mp3 and burning technology, then how are they able to give out low-speed versions of these things to everyone for free? Do the licenses not apply to restricted speed burns/mp3 encoding?
Unrelated post, but the Sonic Engine belongs to Sonic Solutions, makers of RecordNOW Max. Info: http://www.sonic.com/

And I don't see why can't they do the same free 2x rip for MP3? They just chose to do that to AAC instead. To do that in Winamp5 requires you to pay up right away.
winamp5fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th November 2003, 22:35   #17
CraigF
Passionately Apathetic
Administrator
 
CraigF's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Hell
Posts: 5,435
mp3 costs money, no matter what people say.

LAME is free to use with your application, however, it isnt free to distribute. so the question arises, how do you get lame on your pc in the first place?

the simple answer is, you must have got it with an application that paid thompson money. if that didnt occur, it was illegal.

foobar2k? yes, again, thats not legal.

CraigF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th November 2003, 09:40   #18
toq3r
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 120
DIE DIE TOPIC DIE!!
toq3r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th November 2003, 16:46   #19
peter
ist death
 
peter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 3,704
Quote:
Originally posted by CraigF
mp3 costs money, no matter what people say.

LAME is free to use with your application, however, it isnt free to distribute. so the question arises, how do you get lame on your pc in the first place?

the simple answer is, you must have got it with an application that paid thompson money. if that didnt occur, it was illegal.

foobar2k? yes, again, thats not legal.
Speaking of illegal, I request that you stop bundling all my code you don't own, including Winamp2 version of out_ds.
peter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th November 2003, 19:41   #20
El-LoCo
New Winamp
Rocks Army (Alumni)
 
El-LoCo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: a comfy chair
Posts: 238
Hi peter, thanks for crashing my mirc last time i saw you on irc.

that about sums it up doesn it?
El-LoCo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th November 2003, 00:56   #21
PatrickXuji
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 44
I like free softwares!
PatrickXuji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th November 2003, 11:26   #22
CraigF
Passionately Apathetic
Administrator
 
CraigF's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Hell
Posts: 5,435
have to correct myself, and somewhat riv@nvx here. something i really wish peter had corrected me on.

Foobar2000 does not include mp3 encoding as standard. It is only available as a third party download. Hence, foobar, its creators, nor hosts are not required to license mp3 encoding patents from thompson at all. so I stand corrected.

Thanks Thor.

CraigF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th November 2003, 12:28   #23
Thor
Major Dude
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Gent, Belgium (Europe)
Posts: 968
Send a message via ICQ to Thor Send a message via AIM to Thor
Here's to full story...

The foobar2000 component this is all about is called foo_lame.dll. This component was made and is maintained by Janne Hyvärinen (aka "Case"), who is the developper of a whole bunch of official foobar components that ship with foobar2000, and some others that don't.

Foo_lame is one of the later kind, it does NOT ship with any of the official foobar2000 distributions (Normal/Lite), it's only included in Case's personal (authorised but not official) foobar2000 distribution (the "Special installer").

But even if foo_lame would be included in the official distribution(s), that would still be perfectly legal. Because this dll does not contain any MP3 encoding implementation of any kind, it is merely a frontend to lame.exe, which is NOT shipping with it (nor in the zip file on Case's site, nor in the special installer).

So if anything this discussion should about the legality of LAME, not of foo_lame or foobar2000, besides there are COUNTLESS numbers of LAME frontends available everywhere.

Greetings,

-Thor
Thor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th November 2003, 12:37   #24
DJ Egg
Techorator
Winamp & SHOUTcast Team
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 35,821
Hi Thor

Thanks for helping to clear this up. Yay!
DJ Egg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th November 2003, 23:19   #25
Alltaken
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 215
MP3's are So LAME, (sorry couldn't resist)

anyway nothing less than FLAC does it for me, not even a 350Kbps average VBR MP3 will satisfy me, not even a 350Kbps VBR Ogg file will satisfy me LOL

800 Kbps VBR Flac is what gets me going and that stuff is free, and full speed
Alltaken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2003, 00:00   #26
Thor
Major Dude
 
Thor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Gent, Belgium (Europe)
Posts: 968
Send a message via ICQ to Thor Send a message via AIM to Thor
Quote:
Originally posted by Alltaken
MP3's are So LAME, (sorry couldn't resist)

anyway nothing less than FLAC does it for me, not even a 350Kbps average VBR MP3 will satisfy me, not even a 350Kbps VBR Ogg file will satisfy me LOL

800 Kbps VBR Flac is what gets me going and that stuff is free, and full speed
Does this have ANYTHING to do with this thread?!? I think not.
Besides, does the word PLACEBO ring a bell?
Thor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2003, 00:53   #27
UltraZelda64
Senior Member
 
UltraZelda64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alliance, Ohio
Posts: 390
I don't get it. Are you saying that using LAME 3.9whatever is illegal? And that to legally encode MP3s you have to pay?
UltraZelda64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2003, 00:56   #28
CraigF
Passionately Apathetic
Administrator
 
CraigF's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Hell
Posts: 5,435
Lame is not an mp3 encoder

CraigF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2003, 01:00   #29
UltraZelda64
Senior Member
 
UltraZelda64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alliance, Ohio
Posts: 390
Huh? Are you saying that, as its full name says, it's NOT a real MP3 encoder? Okay... I'm lost.
UltraZelda64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2003, 02:08   #30
QuietBritishJim
Member
 
QuietBritishJim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: London
Posts: 65
Send a message via Yahoo to QuietBritishJim
Distributing (and creating, in the case of the author(s)) the source code for LAME is legal. Creating or distributing a binary compiled from them is illegal, except when you're already licensed properly by Thomson. This is why you won't find anything except source code on the official lame site.

LAME isn't an mp3 encoder in as far as, strictly speaking, it's just the source code for an mp3 encoder.
Quote:
Originally posted by UltraZelda64
And that to legally encode MP3s you have to pay?
Yes, definitely.
QuietBritishJim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2003, 03:41   #31
UltraZelda64
Senior Member
 
UltraZelda64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alliance, Ohio
Posts: 390
Interesting. That's something I didn't know. I thought LAME was just a free, open-source way of creating MP3s. And I've created TONS of MP3s with it, which I still play in my car on audio CDS. I'll make sure that I remember this page tomorrow, 'cause right now I'm drunk as hell right now. Well, anyway, thanks for clearing that up. I'll check this tomorrow (when I'm not wasted...)... what should I do to create MP3s? Just keep using LAME, or use something else? Or use something else? Massive confusion here.............
UltraZelda64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2003, 06:06   #32
WHEREamI
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wasabidev
Posts: 606
There's about a one in a billion chance of you getting sued for royalties for using an mp3 encoder, LAME or otherwise. Most low-profile encoding software doesn't have to worry either. However, a high-profile piece of software, like Winamp, can't get away with not having a lisence and paying royalties. Keep using whatever you have.
WHEREamI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th November 2003, 18:02   #33
UltraZelda64
Senior Member
 
UltraZelda64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Alliance, Ohio
Posts: 390
Okay, I kinda understand now. And yeah, I was gonna keep using LAME 3.93.1 for my car anyway... heh. It's a CD/MP3/WMA player, and there's no way in hell I'll use WMA. I know the difference in the two (MP3/WMA) on my computer, but it might be interesting to see what the difference is with two 12" subs and 1500 watts of power.
UltraZelda64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2003, 19:51   #34
starwiz
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 51
Here's my question: my understanding of the site QuietBritishJim linked to tells me that an MP3 encoder costs $2.50 to $5.00 per unit.

Winamp Pro costs $15.

Where are the other $10 - $12.5 going?

It's not important, because you can always use CDex or EAX, but I'm still curious as to where that other money is going...
starwiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2003, 19:59   #35
Reaper
Forum King
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,928
Quote:
Originally posted by starwiz
Winamp Pro costs $15.
No official price has been confirmed yet.

ml_iPod - [Homepage] | [Forums] | [Wiki]
Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2003, 20:00   #36
starwiz
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 51
Okay then...still...will it cost more than 2.50 to 5 dollars?
starwiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2003, 20:06   #37
Reaper
Forum King
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,928
Quote:
Originally posted by starwiz
Okay then...still...will it cost more than 2.50 to 5 dollars?
Like I said, no price has been confirmed yet so we can't be sure yet on any pricing details.

ml_iPod - [Homepage] | [Forums] | [Wiki]
Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th November 2003, 20:08   #38
starwiz
Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 51
Okey dokey then...thanks.
starwiz 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