Old 3rd June 2004, 23:33   #1
jkbullfrog
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northwestern US
Posts: 1
Winamp Linux

I was wondering if there is going to be a Linux release of WinAMP 5 anytime soon. I recently switched to Linux because of security issues with Window. Thanks.

JKBullfrog
jkbullfrog is offline  
Old 3rd June 2004, 23:52   #2
sanosuke
Major Dude
 
sanosuke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,891
no

Big-assed signature deleted by errr.. whats his name again??
sanosuke is offline  
Old 4th June 2004, 01:45   #3
Sunookitsune
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 11
The closest thing you'll find is XMMS, which is compatible with Winamp 2.x themes.
Sunookitsune is offline  
Old 4th June 2004, 07:45   #4
javajunky
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 269
*offtopic, interested what do you mean by security issues? Linux doesn't appear to be any more secure than my windows box, I use both regularly, at least with the windows system it can encrypt its files securely ?
javajunky is offline  
Old 4th June 2004, 10:10   #5
CraigF
Passionately Apathetic
Administrator
 
CraigF's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Hell
Posts: 5,438
are you shitting me?

CraigF is offline  
Old 4th June 2004, 10:16   #6
javajunky
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 269
I wish I was, I use both, for security I use gPGP. I don't understand *how* linux is considered more secure. Given physical access to a linux box I can get in far more easily than physical access to a windows box. With the windows one if I wipe the SAN all the encrypted files are unreadable but if I change the root password the files are still accessible..... am I missing somehting stupidly obvious ? [probably]

edit: I guess if by security you mean all the billion and one critical patches you should apply to windows, then I always have a decent firewall running and use firefox as my browser so these issues don't really apply.
javajunky is offline  
Old 4th June 2004, 12:58   #7
DrO
Winamp & SHOUTcast Team
 
DrO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,109
Re: Winamp Linux

Quote:
Originally posted by jkbullfrog
I was wondering if there is going to be a Linux release of WinAMP 5 anytime soon. I recently switched to Linux because of security issues with Window. Thanks.

JKBullfrog
as mentioned i don't know how many times, the answer is no. and the source won't be released and there's no time to do it and however many things.

and please search before posting, no need to have many creating the same thread/question over and over again

-daz

If you have issues with Winamp or still want to get it, ensure
you get v5.666 build 3516 and the required plug-in updates
DrO is offline  
Old 4th June 2004, 23:16   #8
2399Skillz
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 11
Send a message via AIM to 2399Skillz
Just for the record, I'd like to see Winamp on Linux.
2399Skillz is offline  
Old 4th June 2004, 23:24   #9
javajunky
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 269
Then use Wine
javajunky is offline  
Old 5th June 2004, 08:43   #10
WHEREamI
Major Dude
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Wasabidev
Posts: 606
what do you think he's doing?? Whining! hehe.

Reportedly, Wine works for classic skins, but not for modern skins... so you're almost as well off using xmms, except for the media library, I guess.
WHEREamI is offline  
Old 24th February 2007, 11:31   #11
Nucking_Futs
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 11
Wine and crossover don't work very well. There is a better player then xmms scince that is dead. Audaciouse. Just to help the people who go to xmms and don't relise that the project is dead.
Nucking_Futs is offline  
Old 24th February 2007, 17:51   #12
Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 9,909
use amarok in linux or songbird.

both are quite nice.
Rocker is offline  
Old 25th December 2007, 11:23   #13
Domoljub2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2
well i use amarok...

But with Ubuntu the population of Linux users is growing stronger.
Maybe you could do something that it would work better under wine.

Don't need to have open source, there are many closed-source programs for linux.
Domoljub2 is offline  
Old 25th December 2007, 16:15   #14
Sawg
Forum King
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 7,456
Send a message via ICQ to Sawg Send a message via AIM to Sawg Send a message via Yahoo to Sawg
No.

| Brought to you by ^V ^C | The one... the original... no seriously!
Sawg is offline  
Old 26th December 2007, 08:57   #15
Domoljub2
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2
em.................
more i use amarok, better i think it is
has some pretty good functions..
Now some of my friends that have win use amarok....
Domoljub2 is offline  
Old 26th December 2007, 13:34   #16
J_Darnley
Forum King
 
J_Darnley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Belgium, Europe
Posts: 3,619
Send a message via ICQ to J_Darnley
It's fine to use whatever player you want but asking Winamp to run better in Wine is what Sawg was saying no to. It is Wine's job to run Winamp correctly.

Winamp ATF ReferenceMy cPro timer widgetMy port of AVS
Do NOT email me with tech support questions.
J_Darnley is offline  
Old 26th December 2007, 14:16   #17
Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 9,909
(speaking to the general public)
if you wanted winamp for linux, you shouldn't have complained about winamp3 and aol should not have shoved it out the door, it was not ready for general usage.

There probably will not ever be a winamp2/5 for nix because of winamp high usage of the win32 api. Winamp is beyond reasonable portability and would have to be rewritten from scratch. This would break all compatibility with current plugins and the developers would probably break the skinning system to remove some of its bugs and limitations so no skins either.(that just wouldn't be winamp would it)

The only alternative for a portable winamp would be to perform more work and put more resources into the old wasabi(winamp3) project in which aol is likely to fund only if hell freezes over.

feel free to utilise the old wasabi player codebase for your own portable winamp(it has been open sourced with the proprietary parts removed google it) it needs and some components for a gui and components for just about every other function which made it what it was.
There are a few wasabi based apps around on the net but they arn't media players.

alternative open source media players actually work, and are usually very portable between operating systems.(although some of them have a case of the uglys)

i hope this clears a few things up so another linux/winamp thread won't be made.
Rocker is offline  
Old 27th December 2007, 18:38   #18
opioid
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1
Quote:
Wine and crossover don't work very well. There is a better player then xmms scince that is dead. Audaciouse. Just to help the people who go to xmms and don't relise that the project is dead.
My goodness. Misinformation about Linux abounds! First of all, Wine and Crossover work very well, but remember that each application has its strengths and weaknesses. Why anyone would prefer Wine or Crossover to xmms or another Linux media player is beyond me.

Second, xmms is decidedly NOT dead, in the sense that xmms is being depcrecated in favor of the new and improved and completely, from scratch, REWRITTEN xmms2:
http://wiki.xmms2.xmms.se/index.php/...ewrite_XMMS.3F

Third, by "Audaciouse" I will assume that you meant Audacious:
http://audacious-media-player.org/in...itle=Main_Page

Another excellent music player (console only) for Linux is cmus (C* Music Player):
http://cmus.sourceforge.net/

That one is my personal favorite



Good luck,
/O
opioid is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 06:47   #19
brittdun
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 9
Re: Re: Winamp Linux

Quote:
Originally posted by DrO
as mentioned i don't know how many times, the answer is no. and the source won't be released and there's no time to do it and however many things.

and please search before posting, no need to have many creating the same thread/question over and over again

-daz
I find this shameful. 'no time to do it' the programmers are just lazy and don't want to have to allow the rest of the free world to use your product. OR you dont have programmers that know what they are doing (in regards to linux).

To me, it sounds like you have a contract of sorts with Microsoft.

Ha. Well at least I haven't used winamp in about 4 years. I don't need it. Nor, now, do I want it.

Good day.
brittdun is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 08:41   #20
Sawg
Forum King
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 7,456
Send a message via ICQ to Sawg Send a message via AIM to Sawg Send a message via Yahoo to Sawg
There really is just one main programmer. And maintaining and adding new features does take up time. Not sure why Linux fan boys think porting something to an entirely new OS takes no time at all and anyone unwilling to do it is "lazy." of course, these are the same people who think Linux has actual market share or that anyone gives a crap about them.

| Brought to you by ^V ^C | The one... the original... no seriously!
Sawg is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 13:10   #21
brittdun
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally posted by Sawg
There really is just one main programmer. And maintaining and adding new features does take up time. Not sure why Linux fan boys think porting something to an entirely new OS takes no time at all and anyone unwilling to do it is "lazy." of course, these are the same people who think Linux has actual market share or that anyone gives a crap about them.
Actually, for people who understand and embrace the security, stability and ease of use of linux, it is a big thing for programs to be ported to linux. If a company refuses to do so, it's considered discrimination in my book.

People make programs for Windows all the time without thinking of the benefit of porting it to linux or the Mac. Linux people are people too, with just the same needs and wants that windows users have. We even hold our programs at a higher standard because we know how a program should work and if it doesn't work as advertised, we don't just complain, we fix it.
brittdun is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 14:36   #22
DrO
Winamp & SHOUTcast Team
 
DrO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 27,109
you also have to bear in mind that coding for linux requires learning new ways compared to that of windows which if there's effectively one person working on the project then a) you end up with an even slower development process and b) makes it just a lot more of a hassle to do so and c) who's going to fund it? (since there's a lot of licensed proprietry code which prevents it from being OSS'd)

the best compromise would be to work with people involved with wine to make it more compatible with winamp rather than just porting winamp over (which was done for Winamp3 and look where that went).

either way, winamp as it currently stands will not be ported to linux (which is basically a re-code no matter what due to the mass differences) and what is the purpose of doing it? just for the skins? since none of the plugins will work and that then cripples the player. it's the same for people wanting x86-64 builds of winamp, although that would be easier to do you still loose the legacy input plugin, etc which people expect from the extensibilty of the player. people have never given a valid reason as i see it as to why the player should be ported to any of the other operating systems since there's already a load of native players which have the look of winamp or is it just to have a nullsoft name on the product (which pretty much has meant nothing since those who originally formed nullsoft all left in 2003/2004)

and as a point, OSS isn't always the best way for a lot of things - the situation with winamp itself and it's two main visualisation plugins proves that - people demanded them be OSS'd and then there's been effectively no work done (bar some on milkdrop (MD1) which then was messed up with the implementation of MD2 which isn't OSS to my knowledge).

-daz

If you have issues with Winamp or still want to get it, ensure
you get v5.666 build 3516 and the required plug-in updates
DrO is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 14:44   #23
brittdun
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally posted by DrO and what is the purpose of doing it? just for the skins?
-daz [/B]
Personally, I'm not a big fan of skins and crap. I like a player to look one way, a comfortable, clean interface.

I loved winamp on windows. It was clean, fast, and fun to use. I always switched from Windows Media Player to Winamp because WMP is bogged down with visual prettiness. It slows it down and the computer as well. I rarely had winamp crash. WMP crashed quite a bit.

That's the reason I liked Winamp.

No frills, pretty, fast and reliable. That's what you wanted, right? Good reasons to use winamp.

Personally, I hate using wine. It is unreliable even for the most simple windows applications. And yes, I mean simply coded. Perhaps the coding was shoddy in those programs, who knows.

Thats one of the main reasons I like using linux. Linux apps are clean-coded compared to windows. With windows you could setup a first year coder and expect an ok product. With linux, you do that and the program tells ya about it. Error here and there. Windows is a very forgiving OS, in the sense that it's makers are horrible with coding correctly. That's why there are always security updates at least once a week if not more.

With linux, you've got many coders working on the same project, which helps cut down on errors and bad code.

Just a glimpse into the wonderful world of Linux.

BrittDun
brittdun is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 14:50   #24
Wildrose-Wally
The Albertan
 
Wildrose-Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Sunny Southern Alberta
Posts: 6,114
Quote:
With linux, you've got many coders working on the same project,
That's also how you end up with different versions that in the final analyses don't have anything to do with each other (anymore).
Wildrose-Wally is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 14:51   #25
brittdun
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 9
I've never run across that.
brittdun is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 14:54   #26
Wildrose-Wally
The Albertan
 
Wildrose-Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Sunny Southern Alberta
Posts: 6,114
How many different versions of linux are there? Wich one do you install? Will programs work on all of them, or will some programs work on one version, while other programs will need another version?
(I really don't know that, so I'm asking.)
Wildrose-Wally is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 15:05   #27
brittdun
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 9
Basically linux is linux. There are different brands (if you will) called distributions. On some distributions you install programs (packages) via rpm files. Some you install via deb files. RPM stands for Redhat Package Manager. Deb represents Debian packages. Redhat-type distributions use rpm files. Debian-based distributions use deb files. BUT the thing is - most of the distributions use a collective source of files in the respective package formats.

I personally use a debian-based distribution. For the majority of the linux community you have a 'stable' release of that distribution, a 'testing' version and an 'unstable' version. The stable distibutions use packages (programs) that have been around long enough and de-bugged as much as possible. You will find many packages for the many architectures of computers. But they will all be the same version - just written for the various package groups. The programs have a version number associated with them so you know which version you are getting. The coders work on one version of a program collectively, testing it, the other person tests it so you have many people working on ONE VERSION of a program at a time.

There are CVS and source-code builds sometimes nightly that are the 'testing' version of the program. SO if you need a later version than the current 'stable' release of a program, you can build it yourself from the CVS area on the download site.

There are always version numbers associated with any program in the linux world. That way, you know that say 'version 1.33.4 of a program is the stable release (or it could be the most current... depending on the program).

Does that explanation help or was it all over the place?? lol
brittdun is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 15:12   #28
brittdun
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 9
You can go to distrowatch.com and see just how many distributions of linux there are. For newbies, I recommend SimplyMepis 7.0. It's a very easy to use, and understand distribution. It uses deb files (but you don't need to worry about that until you get your hands wet with it. It comes on a live cd that you boot up when restarting your computer. You can play around with it while it's on your cd drive. Then if you decide you wnat to install it you can.

Most windows programs do not work with linux. BUT with linux you get many many open source (free) programs automatically.

OpenOffice.org (basically a MS Office replica, backwards compatable with Office files)

plenty of cool games
media players
download utilities
text programs such as 'notepad' and RTF documents
Internet tools out the wazooo
much much more.

Mostly any linux program can be run on any distribution of linux. The only difference is, how to install it. (RPM, deb, etc... Many programs come in a tar.gz or tar.bz format (like zip or rar) and you compile them (not as hard as it sounds)...

If you are interested in learning more about linux, I suggest linux.org. That site has many good tutorials and helpful tips and it also has a history of linux, and that sort of information.

Good luck.
brittdun is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 15:38   #29
Wildrose-Wally
The Albertan
 
Wildrose-Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Sunny Southern Alberta
Posts: 6,114
Thanks, one more question.

This question is not meant to slam the linux community, but I have to ask it.

If winamp was to be ported to linux, it would be at best a winamp-like program, it would never be winamp. Why do people keep asking for winamp to be ported instead of making their own winamp-like product. The end result would be virtually the same, depending on who programs it and what he thinks should be in the program.
Wildrose-Wally is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 16:16   #30
brittdun
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 9
I believe the reason we want the actual 'winamp' is because it is so stable and very well-liked among those who use it. If someone was to make another winamp-like program it would basically be just another one of the music programs we already have.

By not opening up the source-code to allow linux developers to port it to linux, we have no way of knowing what makes the program so stable, what makes it so good... Yeah we can speculate what the coding is like, but we'll never know exactly what the code is - in order to make a linux version of winamp.
brittdun is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 16:22   #31
Wildrose-Wally
The Albertan
 
Wildrose-Wally's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Sunny Southern Alberta
Posts: 6,114
But you will never get the actual winamp. The best you will get is a winamp-like product, with entirely new code. The windows code does not work very well on linux, so it will all have to be re-written.
Apart from windows, there is no winamp, it does not matter who writes the code.
Wildrose-Wally is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 16:29   #32
brittdun
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 9
Yes, I understand but when you port a program to linux you look at the structure and logic of the code and do the same thing with say C++ or Java or whatever programming language you will use. I don't know what language winamp uses but C++, perl, java, and many more all work on linux computers.

So if you had some code in the windows winamp you would do the same thing with another language or just rewrite the parts that direct where to open ports, how it uses the sound module, etc...
Now, I'm not a programmer at all but I do know some about logic... lol

if x is true when y and z are true then do this... In any language it does the same thing, it just depends on how it's written...
brittdun is offline  
Old 24th February 2008, 16:34   #33
brittdun
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 9
i dont know how music programs work, but say when you click 'open' to open a location, the default location would probably be "/home/username/Music" whereas in windows you'd have it "c:\Documents and Settings\username\My Documents\My Music"
if that's even the correct path in windows. I don't even remember ROFL!

See? The only difference is **where** modules such as sound processing, file locations, etc are coded.

Um. I don't know how it would be coded but in windows the code would someohow make contact with the sound card on it's PCI bus (whatever that location would be) and on linux sound modules and every module, file, folder etc are files on the hard drive. It would point to /dev/snd0 (where 0 is the firstr sound module found to be active) /dev/ is the device directory.
brittdun is offline  
Old 25th February 2008, 09:19   #34
Rocker
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 9,909
Quote:
Originally posted by brittdun
Linux apps are clean-coded compared to windows.
ROFLS!
Rocker is offline  
Old 25th February 2008, 14:36   #35
homes32
Senior Member
 
homes32's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: MN
Posts: 288
Quote:
Yes, I understand but when you port a program to linux you look at the structure and logic of the code and do the same thing with say C++ or Java or whatever programming language you will use. I don't know what language winamp uses but C++, perl, java, and many more all work on linux computers.
Winamp is written in C++. its not the language that makes it incompatible, its the windows API

homes32
homes32 is offline  
Old 4th March 2008, 10:34   #36
CraigF
Passionately Apathetic
Administrator
 
CraigF's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Hell
Posts: 5,438
Linux users who do not know how to code themselves get no valid opinion on the ease of portability with Winamp.

Fin.

CraigF is offline  
Closed Thread
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