510
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] 2kool4idkwhat@lemdro.id 12 points 7 hours ago

I am proud to be one of the 2.6k people who illegally forked winamp

[-] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 28 points 21 hours ago

kicked by the llamas ass

[-] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 21 hours ago

I used VLC before and ill continue using VLC

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 6 points 13 hours ago

VLC UX kinda sucks, but it does everything I need it to.

[-] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 13 hours ago

Agreed, considering VLCs functionality it can look ugly as hell

[-] 257m@sh.itjust.works 3 points 14 hours ago

I use audacious. It's perfect.

[-] Sam_Bass@lemmy.world 5 points 21 hours ago

i use musicbee for audio. vlc for video. musicbee is the most like mediamonkey used to be and free. got into vlc because of its better support of the unusual video formats

[-] Mwa@lemm.ee 2 points 21 hours ago

Same even my school used vlc wayy before I knew floss software

[-] celsiustimeline@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 21 hours ago

How does this affect the average music enjoyer who plays mp3s on winamp like it was 1999?

[-] frezik@midwest.social 3 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

It's more likely to survive the company if it's FOSS. The app was dormant for a long time.

[-] ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world 138 points 1 day ago

WACUP

https://getwacup.com/

Replacing native Winamp code with modern code with frequent updates by one of the most prolific classic Winamp developers.

It's fantastic.

[-] skaffi@infosec.pub 14 points 22 hours ago

What a shame that it isn't open source.

I'll happily continue to use Audacious with a Winamp skin.

[-] ocassionallyaduck@lemmy.world 3 points 25 minutes ago

Well, given the very unorthodox nature of it as it is today, I don't know that Dr0 can legally open source it until he's finished replacing literally all legacy functions with new code, even if they wanted to. But I can understand your position.

[-] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 26 points 1 day ago

But does it whip the llamas ass?

[-] nucleative@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] moonburster@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

And you can set the visuals to unlimited fps, which is fun on a good screen

load more comments (2 replies)

Well, that really sucks the llama's ass.

[-] MeaanBeaan@lemmy.world 66 points 1 day ago

I'm surprised they kept it up for so long honestly. It was very clear they had no fucking clue what they were doing. What with the nonsensical license that violated Github's tos, the Dolby Code they leaked, and the fact they kept every commit public for everyone to see.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 10 points 22 hours ago

And it's not like deleting will fix it now, it's been copied millions of times now.

[-] Wispy2891@lemmy.world 62 points 1 day ago

Can someone explain me what's the business model of an app that's free for three decades? They claim to have 100 devs, how can they pay them?

[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago

The current revived version appears to be tied to a content streaming platform for "creators," and also sells NFT's. The mothership certainly gets a cut of all of those sales. Just like seemingly every other techbro venture nowadays, their business model entirely revolves around being a "service," and the media player itself is apparently just a side hobby. (Note that this is basically exactly the same mutation that happened to Napster. That worked well.)

Otherwise, the answer is sponsorship by a corporate sugar daddy. Even the OG Winamp was sponsored by and then ultimately bought outright by AOL.

[-] apostrofail@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago

sells NFTs*

[-] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 51 points 1 day ago

They're sponsored by WinRAR. Those guys are loaded.

[-] P4ulin_Kbana 12 points 1 day ago
[-] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 23 points 23 hours ago

No, sorry, it's a jab about how no one paid for WinRAR either.

[-] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 15 hours ago

WinRAR did make piles of money by focusing on the commercial market. They really didn't care if home users went past the free trial period, but they did care if you were a business.

I don't know what WinAmp does, or ever did.

[-] mckean@programming.dev 9 points 1 day ago

Real player is more of an alternative to winamp, I was surprised to see real.com. So no...

[-] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I'm thinking no.

[-] 0x0@programming.dev 6 points 23 hours ago

And rightly so! Save the Llamas!

[-] recursive_recursion@lemmy.ca 122 points 1 day ago

Unsurprising given that their repo's license was a contradictory mess

Anyways I'd recommend using Strawberry instead

It's an actual Free and Open Source music player:

[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 87 points 1 day ago

...That site's UI looks like someone saw the marketing literature for the Frigidaire produce preserver and said, "Yeah, that'll do."

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] mannycalavera@feddit.uk 33 points 1 day ago

Lovely that it is open source, but dear lord that UI is a blast from the past ๐Ÿ˜‚๐Ÿ˜‚ ๐Ÿ‘ด๐Ÿ‘ต๐Ÿš๏ธ

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (33 replies)
[-] gwen@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 1 day ago

vlc my beloved

[-] AceBonobo@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago

I'm using foobar2000. Should I be using something else?

[-] spyd3r@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 day ago

Foobar is still the best there is, although the classic style interface might not appeal to younger people.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] scytale@lemm.ee 31 points 1 day ago

I just use Audacious with a winamp skin. Looks identical but actually FOSS.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] tabular@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I think I tried Winamp back in the day but never really understood it.

One has to admit it's good that they released the source code (while it was available) so users can learn what their software is actually doing on their computer. Better for yourself as a dev too: you will probably avoid including other people's work in yours. However, wanting contributions while retaining the exclusive right to distribute the software is anti-collaborative. I'm reluctant to say it might as well be proprietary again but since it doesn't meet the standard of software freedom then it's equally not worth trying on my computer.

[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 83 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

In its day Winamp was the most comprehensive media player and users were super into its skinability which was a big deal at the time. Nowadays the "plays everything" throne is very firmly occupied by VLC, with a little cushioned stool next to it for Media Player Classic to sit on. However, neither of them offer the user interface experience that Winamp does/did.

Winamp was iTunes before iTunes. It was Spotify before Spotify. It did an excellent job of managing the hordes of totally legitimate MP3's we all had back in the day, and did so with an aplomb that nothing else seemed to manage. Really, its playlist and library management was top notch. Newer apps still piss me off because none of them do it the way Winamp did.

Side note, if you have an old iPod kicking around and don't feel like dealing with Apple's ecosystem, Winamp can still, to this very day, stick music on your device natively without having to install or use iTunes. Just saying.

But this source code release thing really baffles me. I have no idea what the point of that was supposed to be.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next โ€บ
this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2024
510 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

58737 readers
4118 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS