Winamp 5.8 Beta leaks online

[Benski]

I can finally strip out the stuff I don't want like video and the web bbrowser

What would you think if Winamp had removed video support altogether? Winamp's video pipeline was already pretty primitive 10 years ago, but it's hopelessly out of date now.

A stripped down version without any sort of browser, video or CD support would be much easier to maintain, that's for sure.

[Benski]

There's doubts that the final version will ever get released, considering they don't even have development team. Best to stick with 5.666, that most likely will be the final version

I had been doing some work in limited spare-time to help them get it ready, alongside a few other community members. When Vivendi bought Radionomy, it created a huge conflict-of-interest for me.

[Victhor]

I had been doing some work in limited spare-time to help them get it ready, alongside a few other community members. When Vivendi bought Radionomy, it created a huge conflict-of-interest for me.

Interesting.. wish you could say more =)

[MrSinatra]

glad to see Benski back posting again!

i don't think anyone serious uses winamp for video, but they might use winamp to play video files not to watch them, but to listen to them, like concert clips or music DVD files, etc. if the audio playback can be maintained when the video is dropped, that would be fine with me. i also don't need CD ripping or CD playback, but i do want to see FreeDB or MusicBrainz / some kind of audio fingerprinting back in, like mp3tag but better. i realize it won't be gracenote, b/c that costs money.

Ben, i wish you could get that R128 RG support in there!

i wonder if anyone else using 5.8 can confirm the window placement bug? i would be surprised to find out that 5.8 for some reason just doesn't remember the size and position last closed, when reopened.

i'm also not surpised that JTFE still works in 5.8, but i do wonder what, if anything is buggy about using it in vers later than 5.666 (and i don't rule out it might have 5.666 bugs as well, but it at least was designed for it. still, unless i hit a bad bug, i would use it in later vers if i needed something from it)

[tistou77]

There's doubts that the final version will ever get released, considering they don't even have development team. Best to stick with 5.666, that most likely will be the final version

New version in 2 days ?

https://www.neowin.net/news/winamp-to-receive-a-major-overhaul-with-a-mobile-app

[musicf8]

New version in 2 days ?

https://www.neowin.net/news/winamp-t...h-a-mobile-app

That was a shock to everyone, but again... 5.8 is more stripped down than 5.666 and it sounds like 5.8 IS the last true winamp, which is insulting.. if you really want new, then start using winamp community update pack (wacup). Its more winamp than 5.8 imo

[tistou77]

That was a shock to everyone, but again... 5.8 is more stripped down than 5.666 and it sounds like 5.8 IS the last true winamp, which is insulting.. if you really want new, then start using winamp community update pack (wacup). Its more winamp than 5.8 imo

I'll see if in 2 days a version 6.0 will be available
And big update planned in 2019

There are update pack for Winamp 5.666 ?

Thanks

[xmuzack]

glad to see Benski back posting again!

i don't think anyone serious uses winamp for video

One of the reasons why I love Winamp is it's ability to play both video and music files from my playlists seamlessly. And yes, that includes watching videos.

[cybersaga]

What would you think if Winamp had removed video support altogether? Winamp's video pipeline was already pretty primitive 10 years ago, but it's hopelessly out of date now.

A stripped down version without any sort of browser, video or CD support would be much easier to maintain, that's for sure.

Back in the day I used to use Winamp for all media - audio and video. I liked the idea of one app playing everything. But then the video support was more and more lacking, so I stopped doing that. I use VLC for video and Winamp for everything audio.

Maybe split the unnecessaries into plugins. Or yeah, get rid of 'em. I never did care for browser support.

[musicf8]

I'll see if in 2 days a version 6.0 will be available
And big update planned in 2019

There are update pack for Winamp 5.666 ?

Thanks

https://getwacup.com/

[MrSinatra]

it seems like this 5.8 would be a better starting point for DrO's fork than 5.666, i'll be interested to see if he uses it or shuns it for some reason, and if that reason is logical or personal.

he seems to think 5.8 is just a kinda precursor to a mobile ver. this would then mean the death of the desktop app, but meant to whet the appetite for a new offering.

idk... i never really liked the winamp mobile app. and i don't really need or want a winamp mobile app. i think if the powers that be want winamp to be used, they should keep developing winamp as is. the desktop/laptop is where i want to run winamp. its just crazy to me some company would buy it only to let it die, esp with how popular shoutcast is.

but what would be cool, would be to see a Winamp64 ver that is platform agnostic, in that it at least works on win, mac, and linux/unix. so same base code, but 64bit, in wrapper specific for whatever its used on. Kodi does this, and for damn near every platform. i would get winamp 5.8 out officially, then put a 6.0 out that puts a neat bow on it, (basically add metadata lookup, and a few small things like that), and then cease 32bit development completely and work towards a Kodi style (meaning, as many platforms as sensible) Winamp64 with one key difference: make the plugins be "in app" purchases that the free core app has a store built in for. this would provide the revenue for the core app, and 3rd party developers.

[musicf8]

I would assume moving to 64bit w/ a wrapper would add tremendous size and overhead compared to what it is now (and without adding anything beneficial on the windows side), and people already complain about 5.666's footprint vs 2.x

[Benski]

I had 64bit builds of Winamp a long, long time ago. The main reason it never went anywhere was plugin support. Because of how plugins work, it would extremely difficult to get 32bit plugins working in 64bit Winamp.

A 64bit Winamp really means the end of third-party plugins.

[ryerman]

it seems like this 5.8 would be a better starting point for DrO's fork than 5.666, i'll be interested to see if he uses it or shuns it for some reason, and if that reason is logical or personal.

Here's a clue: https://getwacup.com/community/index...4.html#msg2944

[Juanus]

I had 64bit builds of Winamp a long, long time ago. The main reason it never went anywhere was plugin support. Because of how plugins work, it would extremely difficult to get 32bit plugins working in 64bit Winamp.

A 64bit Winamp really means the end of third-party plugins.

Would it be the end of third party plugins? Or would Third Party plugins need to be updated to 64-bit? I can count on one hand how many third party plug-in developers have done anything in the last 10 years. I am not sure it would be a huge loss.