Old 12th August 2012, 00:03   #1
Nedward
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1
Winamp for Ubuntu

i was thinking it would be a great idea to add Winamp to the list of media players for ubuntu and possibly other Linux Distros. Winamp is so configurable and people who use Linux would be very happy to use it.

Unless I'm wrong and its already been talked about.
Nedward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th August 2012, 20:14   #2
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
it's been talked about ever since Winamp was created. either use Winamp under WINE or use one of the many competent players designed to work on Linux - porting Winamp to Linux would not be the same as the Windows version - the Android version has clearly proved this point which has been mentioned for the decade i've been around these parts.

-daz
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th August 2012, 03:59   #3
MrSinatra
Forum King
 
MrSinatra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: WKPS, State College
Posts: 5,596
Send a message via AIM to MrSinatra
interesting...

what about porting the android ver to linux? the base version is free already, so why not?

PENN STATE Radio or http://www.LION-Radio.org/
--
BUG #1 = Winamp skips short tracks
Wish #1 = Multiple Column Sorting
Wish #2 = Add TCMP/Compilation editing
MrSinatra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th August 2012, 08:33   #4
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
no idea as even that would likely need to be re-worked to make the core work on Linux properly i'd expect (even though Android is basically Linux) - but as it's not something i've got any interest or need to work on, i could be wrong. but it's still the same thing in that it's not going to be like Winamp proper as people seem to want (i.e. skin and plug-in support).

-daz
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th August 2012, 19:25   #5
MrSinatra
Forum King
 
MrSinatra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: WKPS, State College
Posts: 5,596
Send a message via AIM to MrSinatra
i understood, but seems like an opportunity to be big on a platform that otherwise doesn't have great options. potentially i could see them buying pro versions as well. yes, smaller market, but also they have far fewer choices.

PENN STATE Radio or http://www.LION-Radio.org/
--
BUG #1 = Winamp skips short tracks
Wish #1 = Multiple Column Sorting
Wish #2 = Add TCMP/Compilation editing
MrSinatra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th July 2013, 17:08   #6
Kilobyte
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1
Ok, i know this topic is a bit older already, but i am wanting a native linux version too. Regarding wine: Winamp seems to not run that stable in Wine. Also, some GUI elements do not show (Time counter, time slider, the entire media library). You already ported it for OSX, so why not linux. There are probably many more people out there who will agree with me.
Kilobyte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th July 2013, 18:02   #7
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
the Mac client is a completely different code base to the Windows version. if Wine doesn't work well then that's not our fault as we only support Windows, not Linux. i realise people want a linux version but like with everything else that's been created, it would not be the same as the desktop version and there's just not anything to warrant the massive undertaking for such small usage compared to the platforms already supported.

and that's not forgetting all of the Winamp clones (as isn't it really just having the Winamp look anyway since the code is going to be different under the hood). so i think a linux version is pretty much never going to happen.

getting the Android core to run on it also involves a lot of work (though less than porting the Windows codebase) and that's before even considering the UI element of things. i can go on more if wanted as to the impracticalities for such a move and really if it was going to have happened, it would have done so by now and there are plenty of good audio players on linux without having to make another one and go through the pain of new code.
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2013, 07:11   #8
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Closer to the mark is that Winamp is so embedded in Windows code, that it would be nearly impossible to re-create it for linux. There are alternatives for linux. You got juk, vlc, xmbc, banshee, nuvola, spotify, clementine, rhythymbox and maybe a dozen others.... or if you'd got some juice... you can just run windows under linux with virtualbox.

I never had much luck with wine running Winamp, but I haven't tried it in a couple years. My recommendation at this point would be xmbc. This "open" stuff changes, so there may be better alternatives I haven't played with.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2013, 07:55   #9
ravermeister
Senior Member
 
ravermeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cologne
Posts: 198
Send a message via ICQ to ravermeister
when I had a Kubuntu System I was most satisfied with
amarok --> http://amarok.kde.org/
and
xmmp --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMMS

I think it is not really neccesary to port winamp to linux, as
there are plenty of good open source player out there, and
as stated above, it would just take too much time and power.

lastfm.rimkus.it - last.fm Youtube Radio (buy me)
www.rimkus.it - Contact Music & More
ravermeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th July 2013, 21:09   #10
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Ubuntu now ships with Unity desktop. You could use Amarok or xmms, but you'd be using kde libraries, which is kinda loading up stuff that didn't need loading. Xmbc is probably the closest to the feature set you'd find in current Winamp, including visualizations... etc.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th July 2013, 09:45   #11
ravermeister
Senior Member
 
ravermeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cologne
Posts: 198
Send a message via ICQ to ravermeister
xmms and amarok support visuals as well,
through libsdl I think.
with this lib, the milkdrop clone works too
have a look at: http://projectm.sourceforge.net/

lastfm.rimkus.it - last.fm Youtube Radio (buy me)
www.rimkus.it - Contact Music & More
ravermeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21st July 2013, 06:09   #12
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
libsdl doesn't ship with Ubuntu. I'd call it deprecated.

The move is, for better or for worse, platform and hardware independent code. Your web browser will display it, or it isn't relevant.

The question for Microsoft and Apple is: How do we sell something that isn't worth anything anymore?

Play with a Chromebook. You'll see what I'm saying.

Visualizations, playing HD video, rendering fast graphics? A miracle ten years ago, now just a common function of a web browser. Will the browser I have perform the functions of html5 standards? If it won't, it's ready for the bin.

Microsoft just found that out when they lost 750 million on the Surface tablet. Windows 8 has nearly formed a lynch mob. Developers are fleeing IE 10 if they can help it.

Firefox is trying to pretend it's Eric Snowden.

Winamp? In a few years it will either run on your toaster while cooking a pop tart or?

BTW. If anybody that matters reads this, I have truly been enjoying your Android app. Thanks.

Last edited by rockouthippie; 21st July 2013 at 08:11.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2013, 00:25   #13
alex25502
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 1
I would love to have a "WinAmp for Linux"!
alex25502 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2013, 00:45   #14
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
sure... i hope your pockets are deep enough to pay for all of the development that's needed to create a Winamp branded Linux client that'll take a few years to do and to keep it going afterwards as i expect you'd not want others to have to pay anything to use it?

or... rather than asking for something that won't fit what you think you want (as we've already seen, the other clients in the family don't bear much resemblance to the desktop client) you look at one of the many media players already available on Linux than trying to get something to happen (which pretty much won't). just having something with Winamp officially on it won't make it super lovely - we still haven't got the desktop client right after 16+yrs so think about how long it'd take to do anything for Linux (and compare how long it's taken to get WAFA to where it is for Android...).

and also see my signature (which is really the only reason i decided to post a rambling rant in this thread) to point out that WinAmp is not something that has existed for over a decade!
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th August 2013, 03:07   #15
Victhor
Late skinner & Moderator
 
Victhor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Argentina
Posts: 1,606
A bit offtopic; I've just saw your signature, kinda funny, some years ago I would thought "why so much trouble for capitalisation??" but now I know where it comes from.. I've read the other day "internet turned people into stupid", it's kinda true, but I think it actually put together normal/user/non-tech-guy with developer and professionals, all together in (almost) the same space, inevitable result is the former asking a lot of un - thought stuff to the latter, usually ignoring the big effort, years of experience and the money (among others..) needed to achieve things. They kinda think that, because "computer achieve wonder", developer can too, effortlessly, quick and at zero cost (cause "it doesn't take mo' than typin' and clickin' ya know?").

So, anyway, winamp for Linux would be cool, a winamp mp3 (physical) player would be cool, winamp for Smart TVs would be cool, etc, but that's on an ideal world, enjoy what it is now and learn to do the rest if it's really your desire (kinda like the Xion's guy did), asking for it won't make it to happen (unless...)
Victhor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2013, 21:40   #16
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
Here's Winamp running on Ubuntu. Actually it's Xubuntu running Vista with Virtualbox, which is running Winamp. It works fine, except Milkdrop doesn't work. AVS and everything else works perfect.

rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2013, 21:45   #17
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
*shudders*
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2013, 22:29   #18
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
The state of virtual machines is that they have become quite usable. If you haven't visited one in a while.....
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2013, 22:35   #19
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
i use VMs everyday so i'm fully aware of their usefulness (especially as it saves on having 4 real machines as i had before i virtualised everything). what makes me shudder is having a Vista VM to run Winamp under on a linux distro - should have gone with XP or Win7 as the Windows version to use in the VM.
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th August 2013, 22:44   #20
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
It was an extra copy I had lying around. If it fries, I've cloned a copy. Vista wasn't the worst OS MS ever put out. Of course, the rule is MS releases a good operating system every other time.

It actually seems to work really well. I can also boot Windows 7 on this machine. It is the Windows u want. For virtual, Vista is ok.

Phenom II X6 @ 3.5 Ghz w/16GB ram.

Edit: Oh... and Windows XP is shortly going to a "no support, no security updates, no nothing" status. 04/08/14 and that's all she wrote. I think you'd be a fool to run it after that. Vista gets security updates until 2017.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th August 2013, 04:40   #21
MrSinatra
Forum King
 
MrSinatra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: WKPS, State College
Posts: 5,596
Send a message via AIM to MrSinatra
pretty cool man. I wonder what winamp is like on those android/google play laptops?

PENN STATE Radio or http://www.LION-Radio.org/
--
BUG #1 = Winamp skips short tracks
Wish #1 = Multiple Column Sorting
Wish #2 = Add TCMP/Compilation editing
MrSinatra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th August 2013, 05:41   #22
rockouthippie
Banned
 
rockouthippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 11,002
It's not the same thing as desktop Winamp. It is cool. I put it on a Kindle Fire.
rockouthippie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th August 2013, 05:46   #23
MrSinatra
Forum King
 
MrSinatra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: WKPS, State College
Posts: 5,596
Send a message via AIM to MrSinatra
I have it on my phone. but what I mean is I wonder what its like on an actual desktop pc or laptop pc? (I fully realize its different from windows winamp)

PENN STATE Radio or http://www.LION-Radio.org/
--
BUG #1 = Winamp skips short tracks
Wish #1 = Multiple Column Sorting
Wish #2 = Add TCMP/Compilation editing
MrSinatra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th August 2013, 10:37   #24
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockouthippie View Post
Vista wasn't the worst OS MS ever put out. Of course, the rule is MS releases a good operating system every other time.
i used it until i could move to Windows 7 so i know what Vista can be like (good and bad) and i only use it when i absolutely have to (only triaging bugs occasionally).

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockouthippie View Post
Edit: Oh... and Windows XP is shortly going to a "no support, no security updates, no nothing" status. 04/08/14 and that's all she wrote. I think you'd be a fool to run it after that. Vista gets security updates until 2017.
i've been keeping my head in the sand and just ignoring that whole fact

personally i think Vista is overkill to run Winamp in a VM based on what i've seen between my XP, Vista and Win7 VMs - where the XP one is a lot tighter on memory usage and if that's all it's being used for i.e. just using Winamp then i'd go with XP and disable network access on the VM (as i have done - same as i've done for the Windows2000 VM i also had as well once that was EOL).

but it's your setup, your licenses, so you can do as you wish as you please (unless you want to be brow beaten into the madness of running a VM for a media player when there's plenty of good native ones on Linux...).
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24th October 2013, 05:20   #25
Victhor
Late skinner & Moderator
 
Victhor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Argentina
Posts: 1,606
This guy claims (in spanish) he found a program that behaves almost exactly as winamp (with the limitation that it only supports classic skins, not modern's), it's called Qmmp and it works under Ubuntu, Debian and others.

I don't know much about Linux distros (almost nothing actually), maybe someone can try it and leave here some feedback about how much "winamp" it is (the author of the linked note says it's practically "a winamp in linux").
Victhor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th November 2013, 16:53   #26
WhammyDroid
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 20
I think Winamp for Linux would be a great idea. I do not know what the level of effort would be to do this or what time of marketshare Winamp currently has/what they could gain by doing this. However, it would certainly could be better some of the alternatives.

And for those who state to use Wine instead, it does not work in a cases/instances.
WhammyDroid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2013, 04:39   #27
thinktink
Forum King
 
thinktink's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: On the streets of Kings County, CA.
Posts: 3,008
Send a message via Skype™ to thinktink
I was actually running a SHOUTcast station with Winamp+SHOUTcast DSP on Ubuntu 10.something (if memory serves) in Wine. There were a number of glitches though but I managed to get around them over time. Only in classic skins though (but that's only what I use anyway so it didn't bother me.) Had WebJockey and LiveWire and I think I even used JackAudio with LiveWire for voice overs and automated announcements. Ran Slicko and my Socket Policy Server program under Wine (had to run Wine as root though of course.) Then had the SHOUTcast tools running linux native. Had it all on one box.

Of course it was not stable but it worked 'till I got a second machine to run the Windows software on.
thinktink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2014, 08:43   #28
Xylemon
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3
I'm generally shocked at how a Linux client would "require years of development" when going from Mac to Linux is generally a simple recompile. Obviously there is a great lack of understanding how this works if that's what you think. I hope with the new company taking over, the dev team will reconsider their decision and move to Linux.
Xylemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2014, 09:21   #29
DJ-Garybaldy
Major Dude
 
DJ-Garybaldy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Harpurhey, Manchester UK
Posts: 1,100
I run Winamp In wine Linux quite well. using version 2.91 with no issues. It's only the later versions I have issues trying to run.
DJ-Garybaldy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2014, 10:49   #30
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylemon View Post
I'm generally shocked at how a Linux client would "require years of development" when going from Mac to Linux is generally a simple recompile.
you are so wrong as you're assuming a lot of things without knowing the code base, what has been used and how tied to the OS things have been made.

and that's not forgetting that people expect the complete feature set of the Windows client (which is not in the Mac client - meaning time to implement those if at all which was not happening and as i saw too often, people just said it was like iTunes with Winamp branding) and for it to be just like the Windows client but on a different OS (with its different dependencies, APIs and aspects) means time.

so it's not a direct re-compile even with the Mac client to Linux (as with what i know of it, that wouldn't work anyway) and seeing as how the Mac client was a flop (and that has a greater market share over Linux), i'd not expect to see an official client for either platform.

and yes 'years' is the correct time scale as you have to port things, test things, re-test things and so on and as Winamp only ever had a small team with finite time, 'years' is what ends up happening and don't suggest throwing tonnes of developers at doing it as that makes 'years' even more likely. look how long it's taken the Windows client to get to where it is, the same for the Android app and neither of them are perfect and have recurring issues which either haven't or wouldn't be fixed and you're claiming that a re-compile of one product will just miraculously work...? i suggest you come back to the world of reality or make your own client... which has been done countless times on Linux and very few make it and... oh wait, they've taken years of development to get to their current states in most cases.
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2014, 12:15   #31
MrSinatra
Forum King
 
MrSinatra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: WKPS, State College
Posts: 5,596
Send a message via AIM to MrSinatra
I have no bona fides to contest any of that, its all certainly well taken.

but it was winamp afterall who decided to attempt a mac app. personally, I would love to see a mac/Linux/android app, meaning one that was developed so that the majority of the core code could be applied to all 3, and then "wrapped" to work on each.

and then the devs, imo, should announce that this is a DIFFERENT client, one that will not be equal to the windows client, but more stripped down. if they managed the expectations from the outset, it would be accepted.

I would also implement a "winamp store" for it, so you could do in app purchases to extend its power, not only by the devs but 3rd party devs too. it could serve as a test ground to figure out how to get a workable winamp store in windows winamp.

I know that's all pie in the sky, but I do at least attempt to propose new revenue to cover dev costs.

PENN STATE Radio or http://www.LION-Radio.org/
--
BUG #1 = Winamp skips short tracks
Wish #1 = Multiple Column Sorting
Wish #2 = Add TCMP/Compilation editing
MrSinatra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2014, 12:30   #32
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
all of which was attempted but never came to fruition though not helped by user expectations vs what was viable with resources available and purposeful design decisions made (some to rectify the issues with Winamp 'proper' and some just not making much sense).

either way it doesn't matter now as it's all under new ownership and direction changes is all that is certain now it seems (after filtering out all of the crap from rumours, etc floating about).
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2014, 13:09   #33
Xylemon
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrO View Post
you are so wrong as you're assuming a lot of things without knowing the code base, what has been used and how tied to the OS things have been made.

and that's not forgetting that people expect the complete feature set of the Windows client (which is not in the Mac client - meaning time to implement those if at all which was not happening and as i saw too often, people just said it was like iTunes with Winamp branding) and for it to be just like the Windows client but on a different OS (with its different dependencies, APIs and aspects) means time.

so it's not a direct re-compile even with the Mac client to Linux (as with what i know of it, that wouldn't work anyway) and seeing as how the Mac client was a flop (and that has a greater market share over Linux), i'd not expect to see an official client for either platform.

and yes 'years' is the correct time scale as you have to port things, test things, re-test things and so on and as Winamp only ever had a small team with finite time, 'years' is what ends up happening and don't suggest throwing tonnes of developers at doing it as that makes 'years' even more likely. look how long it's taken the Windows client to get to where it is, the same for the Android app and neither of them are perfect and have recurring issues which either haven't or wouldn't be fixed and you're claiming that a re-compile of one product will just miraculously work...? i suggest you come back to the world of reality or make your own client... which has been done countless times on Linux and very few make it and... oh wait, they've taken years of development to get to their current states in most cases.
First off, Ubuntu has over 20 million users, which is not a small market at all. Besides Ubuntu, there are tons of other Distros (Debian, Fedora, Arch, etc...) that aren't even counting their numbers.

Secondly, we're both talking about the OS X version correct? When did "Windows specific" features even come into this discussion? I am talking about the OS X port they did, can easily be recompiled on Linux. I may not see the code base since Winamp is Closed Sourced, however what is exactly so tied to Mac OS X that can't be on Linux based Operating Systems? Most components on Mac OS X are already on Linux and most of the Unix based Operating Systems share these components. If you really want to get down to it, there are Open Source implementations of Apple API's such as GNUStep, which would easily take care of the Foundation Kit specific features you speak of.

Thirdly, Time. Yes, I understand testing and marketing takes time. Obviously there are a lot of new issues introduced, a lot of Desktop Environments and Distributions to test on, but inital development would not take years. Getting a completely stable version? Probably could take a year or more, but getting it on Linux should be a large feat for the Dev Team, even a small one.

Forth, there already has been a version of Winamp for Linux back with the 3.0 release. The only reason it was dropped was "lack of interest", which I think would be a much different story today.

Edit: meant to say "shouldn't be a large feat" rather than "should be a large feat".

Last edited by Xylemon; 20th January 2014 at 14:33.
Xylemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2014, 13:40   #34
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
1 - sure that's a lot but when compared to overall OS stats, it's barely anything and tying to make a product pay for itself off a platform that is notoriously not going to bring in any income (as no one will pay for things) is one of the many reasons Linux was never deemed worth the time from a corporate view point. and it's not like there weren't Winamp clones on Linux already... so why re-invent the wheel (again) when it's already been done and someone could just use one of the existing clones or even better, an existing (and supported) Linux player.

2 - it all relates irrespective of the OS version being talked about. yes i brought in the Windows client as that's the base that functionality for anything with the Winamp name is compared against. sure some parts will likely compile fine as-is but with the whole UI aspects (which yes i know things like Qt and the like can be used), it's still bringing in changes and new code and sure it could all be done with one framework irrespective of the versions but that still involves more work and testing.

3 - i'm referring to a stable and complete product, not a beta / unstable thing. yes something could be knocked out reasonably quickly (though i'd still think within a year timescale to make it worthwhile to use depending on the number of people). but people won't want to use it unless it's stable and not being used won't help to get it stable and not being stable will just have people calling it shit and then it dies a death (as happened with the Winamp3 Linux release - though the cancelling of Winamp3 as a whole helped to kill that off).

and that is why i was also referring to the other Winamp branded products as they've had the exact issues i've mentioned where it's "ooh Winamp on X... oh it doesn't do x,y or z and it crashes... this is shit... you suck... etc". as that's exactly what anything else is going to be subject to and it spreads resources too thin overall (it definitely would have with the prior dev team when there was Windows, Mac & Android versions).

4 - there's been far less requests for non-Windows builds than there has ever been in the time i've been around Winamp. sure there is likely to be interest but there's plenty of decent Linux-centric players already out there which fit with the needs of people or they've just moved to other platforms / programs which better fit what they want. or they just run it under Wine / an emulator which is insane but each to their own.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

either way, it doesn't matter what i say (isn't like i know anything from having seen the source code for things as an ex-dev), i've no influence on things anymore and is based on internal and prior experience with this same request and the general outcome that a Winamp for Linux has never been seen as something really worth bothering with (the Winamp3 version was a pet project that no one else on the larger dev team really wanted to bother with).

and as the wishlist is just that, maybe it'll happen though there's stuff that's been in it for well over a decade and never been actioned. so who knows what the new owners will decide to do though my expectation is to see the Mac client being dropped and more focus going on anything to do with mobile OSes.
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2014, 15:05   #35
Xylemon
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrO View Post
1 - sure that's a lot but when compared to overall OS stats, it's barely anything and tying to make a product pay for itself off a platform that is notoriously not going to bring in any income (as no one will pay for things) is one of the many reasons Linux was never deemed worth the time from a corporate view point. and it's not like there weren't Winamp clones on Linux already... so why re-invent the wheel (again) when it's already been done and someone could just use one of the existing clones or even better, an existing (and supported) Linux player.
Ok, this statement is just generalizing Linux users with no proof. Stores like Humble Bundle has proven over and over that Linux users pay, a lot, when things get ported over to their system because they want to support development and are grateful that it even got ported. I've even bought games that I owned back on Windows again when they came to Linux to support the developers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrO View Post
2 - it all relates irrespective of the OS version being talked about. yes i brought in the Windows client as that's the base that functionality for anything with the Winamp name is compared against. sure some parts will likely compile fine as-is but with the whole UI aspects (which yes i know things like Qt and the like can be used), it's still bringing in changes and new code and sure it could all be done with one framework irrespective of the versions but that still involves more work and testing.
I'm still not quite sure at all what you're talking about. You give a very generalized answer such as "UI aspects" which need to be recoded. I already stated you have all you need, your response just comes off as you don't care to put in any effort.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrO View Post
3 - i'm referring to a stable and complete product, not a beta / unstable thing. yes something could be knocked out reasonably quickly (though i'd still think within a year timescale to make it worthwhile to use depending on the number of people). but people won't want to use it unless it's stable and not being used won't help to get it stable and not being stable will just have people calling it shit and then it dies a death (as happened with the Winamp3 Linux release - though the cancelling of Winamp3 as a whole helped to kill that off).

and that is why i was also referring to the other Winamp branded products as they've had the exact issues i've mentioned where it's "ooh Winamp on X... oh it doesn't do x,y or z and it crashes... this is shit... you suck... etc". as that's exactly what anything else is going to be subject to and it spreads resources too thin overall (it definitely would have with the prior dev team when there was Windows, Mac & Android versions).
The logic here is non-existent. You're basically saying because there are going to be problems it shouldn't be done. For some reason you claim it will be a disaster and therefore it shall not be even attempted. Most people on Linux are willing to test and report bugs, I can't imagine you'll have 99% of people who try out an alpha/beta program, knowing well in advanced it's in an alpha/beta state, proclaim, "This is shit because it crashed" and never using it again. As for the fact that the Winamp 3 Linux port failed, I remember Winamp 3 being strongly disliked in general, which I'm sure contributed quite a bit to the port failing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrO View Post
4 - there's been far less requests for non-Windows builds than there has ever been in the time i've been around Winamp. sure there is likely to be interest but there's plenty of decent Linux-centric players already out there which fit with the needs of people or they've just moved to other platforms / programs which better fit what they want. or they just run it under Wine / an emulator which is insane but each to their own.
You don't want to go on Linux because there are other players for Linux? That's like saying I don't want to make a Media Player on Windows because other players exist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrO View Post
either way, it doesn't matter what i say (isn't like i know anything from having seen the source code for things as an ex-dev), i've no influence on things anymore and is based on internal and prior experience with this same request and the general outcome that a Winamp for Linux has never been seen as something really worth bothering with (the Winamp3 version was a pet project that no one else on the larger dev team really wanted to bother with).

and as the wishlist is just that, maybe it'll happen though there's stuff that's been in it for well over a decade and never been actioned. so who knows what the new owners will decide to do though my expectation is to see the Mac client being dropped and more focus going on anything to do with mobile OSes.
Well I'm glad you're not part of Winamp anymore. Maybe the new company will think rationally (and type proper English) than just not go to platforms they can easily support because they're lazy/just don't care. I think I'm gonna stop wasting my time and use one of the "better" alternatives you mentioned.
Xylemon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th January 2014, 15:37   #36
DrO
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,873
i never said i didn't want to see it on Linux, though i personally don't see much point in it other than as a technical exercise (and if anything, i'd rather go from the WAFA code and make a raspberry pi version) and i'd not use the Mac client as a basis to do that as it's more iTunes than Winamp imho.

is that you appear to be coming at this from a user view point and i'm coming from the corporate view point and trying to cover things from that to balance things out (as much as i'm allowed to directly say) where it was _never_ deemed viable to do.

which is why i tried to clarify that the Winamp3 version was a pet-project and not really official anyway (however broken my native english seems to be to you, you're just going to love the belgian-english of the new owners).


alas you're not going to be happy unless something happens with a native Linux version being produced and so far that seems it isn't going to happen. that is why i suggested using an existing native player as it gives you what you want, just without a specific brand-name on it (just like XMMS and everything based on that was anyway).
DrO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th January 2014, 19:35   #37
fooWander
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xylemon View Post
I'm generally shocked at how a Linux client would "require years of development" when going from Mac to Linux is generally a simple recompile.
As a Linux developer I can assure you, that you probably need to touch a lot of the code to get the OS X version working on Linux. First of all there's some minor work with accessing the audio hardware (OS X version uses probably CoreAudio which won't work on Linux), so you need to add support for ALSA or some higher framework. Next you need to touch the GUI code; winamp for mac doesn't seem to use a lot of the default cocoa widgets, maybe it even does its own drawing, so you need to do a lot of work to get that working. You have to add support for file choosing, maybe font selection, you have to include the menu bar into the GUI and so on.

Edit: And btw. GNUstep is in no way able to get rid of the work mentioned above. It can't handle CoreFoundation, CoreSound, CoreAnimation, CoreGraphics, Core*, Carbon, Quartz, QuickTime and so on.

You can take a look at JRiver Media Center which is being ported from OS X to Linux and it took them a couple of weeks/months to get it compiled and even a couple of months later there are so much features missing, it's buggy, slow and basically months away from being in a usable state.
fooWander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th January 2014, 18:57   #38
TimbreWolf
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 52
Whatever the technical and business hurdles may be I for one feel it is a disservice to Winamp to state that there is no need to port it because sufficient alternatives already exist on Linux. Perhaps a year ago I tried out many different Linux audio players along with half a dozen or more distributions. While perhaps one or two were pretty good, none of them I considered to be sufficient alternatives to Winamp 5.xx. In my experience no other player on any platform offers the flexibility of interactions with an audio library afforded by Winamp. I may well be mistaken and many of the features I missed might be possible with sufficient tinkering but certainly it was not obvious how they could be achieved for any of them "out of the box".

In any case I consider the lack of Winamp support to be by far the biggest impediment to any considered switch for myself to Linux. It is always the first program I start on my computer and the last to be switched off at night.

P.S. With regard to revenue generation in general: How about a cloud service tie in? Instant backup of your entire music collection and device sync.

P.P.S. Number of Linux users (estimated at ~70 million or 2.5% of internet users*) may be relatively small but surely they are far more likely to be tech savvy and considerate of alternative players compared to the majority of Windows and Mac users who just stick to the one bundled with their OS.
*Source: linuxcounter.net
TimbreWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th January 2014, 21:41   #39
fooWander
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimbreWolf View Post
[...]

In any case I consider the lack of Winamp support to be by far the biggest impediment to any considered switch for myself to Linux. It is always the first program I start on my computer and the last to be switched off at night.

[...]
Is there anything in particular you couldn't get done with audio players on Linux?
fooWander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st January 2014, 19:30   #40
TimbreWolf
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by fooWander View Post
Is there anything in particular you couldn't get done with audio players on Linux?
Hi fooWander,

I thought someone might ask. I had avoided mentioning specific examples as my memory is a little hazy on the subject at this stage and I didn't want to get into a debate which would mean having to go test them all again to prove a point. In any case, I believe many of my issues were related to the flexibility of column sorting available in Winamp 5.xxx. For example, say I have 43 minutes free for a nap and I want to find a peaceful album of this length to match? Or in a different vein; say I want to play a random album out of those that have been added to my music collection in the last 6 months? Or; say I want to know what track I was listening to at a particular time yesterday?
These are the sorts of tasks which I find other software to struggle with and yet are right in front of you in Winamp. If you'd like to recommend a Linux player in particular which you think comes closest to Winamp's abilities I'd be happy to try it out and report back.

All the best,

TW
TimbreWolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Winamp > Winamp Wishlist

Tags
linux, ubuntu, valve

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