return to table of content

Winamp has announced that it is "opening up" its source code

LocutusOfBorges
39 replies
21h2m

Twenty years too late for it to possibly matter, but it's still nice to see.

Interesting that there's no mention of what licence the source is being released under - and it's only available following email enquiries, of all things. I'm surprised they're even bothering, at this point - the software's so obsolete that it's not like it has much in the way of value anymore beyond nostalgia.

bcraven
28 replies
20h59m

I use the community update of Winamp, WACUP, and it's excellent. I've tried other media players but always come back here.

I'm not even one of those people who likes the shitty visualisations, I just think the interface works perfectly.

https://getwacup.com/

QuercusMax
15 replies
20h47m

It's windows-only? Weird.

Lammy
11 replies
20h34m

Weird? It's Winamp lol

xnx
6 replies
20h32m

With the source code someone can port it to make Linamp.

maximilianburke
2 replies
20h14m

There once was xmms

kbenson
0 replies
19h54m

Before that it was called x11amp, and after that it's been succeeded by a fork that ended up being Audacious, apparently.

callwhendone
2 replies
20h32m

don't forget Macamp.

nathell
0 replies
20h7m

Remember that before Winamp, there was DOSamp! I used to use version 0.8. Playback was jerky on a 486DX2/66 but once I upgraded to a Pentium, it was smooth sailing.

m00x
2 replies
20h29m

Who's gonna build TempleAmp?

aleph_minus_one
1 replies
19h12m

Music does not sound good on a PC speaker.

Dwedit
0 replies
18h31m

There are DOS-based MOD and MP3 players that output to the PC speaker.

kbenson
0 replies
19h57m

Yeah, if you want something similar for other systems, try x11amp.

(Yes I know it's not called that anymore and I'm showing my age).

Dwedit
1 replies
19h56m

There have been Linux-based clones of Winamp for a long time, such as XMMS (which directly supports Winamp skins).

gunapologist99
0 replies
18h24m

XMMS is the O.G. but audacious and Qmmp now also support classic winamp skins.

stuaxo
0 replies
20h29m

It's Windows only for now.

The architecture of Winamp is made of various plugins. WACUP is replacing them bit by bit.

Once everything is replaced then porting could be possible, though it's been only built for Windows so there must be a lot of Windows-isms in there.

babypuncher
9 replies
20h22m

Have you checked out foobar2000? To me, it always felt like the true successor to Winamp.

koito17
3 replies
20h17m

foobar2000 has been my go-to player on both Windows and Mac for about a decade now. Particularly, I like the dense (yet uncluttered) interface and functionality I take for granted, like selecting a dozen files and editing metadata all at once.

A few of my friends complain that the layout "sucks" or foobar lacks functionality they need, but for my use case, it's in a Goldilocks state. With that said, for people used to the functionality of Winamp, I think MusicBee is more likely to be the successor, in terms of out-of-the-box functionality and layout extensibility.

babypuncher
1 replies
19h50m

A few of my friends complain that the layout "sucks" or foobar lacks functionality they need, but for my use case,

I see these complaints too, and I find them funny. The layout is what you make of it. I don't care for any of the layout presets presented in the "Quick Appearance Setup" dialog, but the default UI component is very easy to customize almost any way you want. There's even a scratchbox feature that lets you experiment with building a whole UI from scratch without messing with your current layout.

As for the functionality they find it lacks, well, there's probably a component for that.

Frankly I find foobar2000 comes with a ton of functionality out of the box that other media players don't have, like the very robust features found in the "Tagging" and "File Operations" context menu entries.

zem
0 replies
18h38m

to be fair, it's a lot easier to tell if you do or do not like something than it is to design something you do like. I run into that with vim colorschemes all the time

Scene_Cast2
0 replies
20h0m

I find it amusing that modern foobar2k theming is based around Javascript.

leeoniya
1 replies
20h16m

you'd have a hard time replicating this UI [1] or other winamp skins in foobar2000, so i'm not sure i'd call it a successor except in the sense that it can play anything you throw at it.

[1] https://getwacup.com/screenshots/

babypuncher
0 replies
20h5m

I consider it a successor in that it's compact with an emphasis on user customization and community-designed plugins/components. Like Winamp, most functionality you get out of the box is provided by bundled plugins, and they can be replaced with alternatives.

Out of the box, you could certainly customize it to have a similar layout to winamp even if none of the dressing looks at all the same.

My layout[1] is certainly very different than Winamp, but still conforms a lot more to the basic shape of Winamp than the usual giant screen-filling squares that are iTunes, Windows Media Player or the Spotify desktop client.

1. https://i.postimg.cc/R0JzVTK8/image.png

spacechild1
0 replies
13h15m

foobar2000 is great! I love the minimal (default) UI. Never even bothered to customize.

dvngnt_
0 replies
18h19m

musicbee is my favorite

cageface
0 replies
17h53m

I'm working on my own cross platform music player that I think has a more polished interface than foobar. I have mac builds now and will start doing windows builds soon:

https://plastaq.com/minimoon

xtracto
0 replies
16h41m

I love QMMP ( https://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/ ). It is compatible with Winamp Skins, supports network playing (shoutcast) and works pretty well in my Linux Mint installations. I may be old fashioned, but man my brain has got so much "muscle memory" on years and years of Winamp use during the 90s ...

I cannot live without stuff like equalizers, visualization plugins, Last.FM scrobbing and even automated track "ripping" of radio stations.

It makes me so sad the state of current audio players like YouTube Music, Spotify, Tidal and the likes. featurewise they are so... bland. Millenials and GenZs just don't enjoy music the same way I used to enjoy it. Maybe it is because there so much of it now that it doesn't matter so much

pessimizer
0 replies
20h43m

They seem to be just as cagey about the licensing. Not that there's any obligation for people to be FOSS if they want to give software away, but the intentional avoidance of the question is always instructive. Just say that it's not FOSS, it's fine.

Will it be free ?

Yes WACUP will be free to download & to use.

This is an independent project & due to the amount of time & effort which is involved, I am accepting donations (and other means of support) to help cover my living costs whilst I'm working on getting this developed & released. As at this time, this is a full-time project for me whilst I see where the future will take me & this project.
RevEng
3 replies
19h30m

I still use it for all of my locally stored MP3s. I haven't seen a music player in a long time that focused on playing music rather than being a media library.

SAI_Peregrinus
1 replies
17h21m

Foobar2000?

defrost
0 replies
17h14m

Foobar2K still has an active low key community, it has plugins and a framework that allows tech users to add features and share them, but the main release has the approach I prefer - good display capabilities for media library meta data with flexible layout options .. and it's on the user to populate that meta data with third party tools (or plugins).

Primarily it's just a player, potentially it's a lot.

rocky1138
0 replies
18h7m

They tried to shove that in at the end but it's easy to one click it away the first time you turn it on

TulliusCicero
2 replies
20h24m

Literally just yesterday I was staring at Winamp's basic visualizer because I was trying to make something similar in my Godot game.

I'm still not sure exactly what I'm missing, as I have the "gist" of the visualizer working, but it just doesn't look as smooth as Winamp's. I think I need slight persistence and the little effect with the 'caps' that slowly fall down for each column (right now mine looks too jittery).

ihatehn
0 replies
15h35m

Those might be called peaks or peak indicators: common in audio interfaces to indicate the maximal decibels in each frequency bucket over the last second or so, so that you don't miss seeing a split-second super loud sound.

swatcoder
0 replies
19h39m

It may carry downstream license obligations of its own, that prohibit/complicate public release.

Relatedly, they might be hoping that one of the people looking at it might be willing to buy out or take over contractual responsibility for any components that can't be relicensed to traditional open source. Basically, parading the source around like a debutante because other channels to find buyers haven't panned out.

Or it's just real-world commercial code and is kind of embarassing by the standards of public open source projects.

davidgerard
0 replies
20h48m

I was surprised to find how many people still use Winamp now.

callwhendone
0 replies
20h31m

took them 20 years to figure out that they can't monetize their media player

renegade-otter
17 replies
20h56m

I remember as a hobbyist Windows programmer (Borland C++ Builder) I was really envious of the skills required to build something like Winamp - especially the UI. Back then, advanced learning resources and examples were effectively non-existent or at least, hard to find and stitch together.

yazzku
9 replies
20h54m

The fact that you can re-skin it at runtime with such a wide variety of skins and load such a variety of plugins puts modern software to shame.

mesh
3 replies
19h12m

I owe my entire career to the fact that Winamp added the ability to re-skin.

I had just graduated graduate school for international economics, and was working for a government contractor who only hired me because I had a masters (they could charge the government more). Because of this, I literally had nothing to do and would just sit in the office.

I eventually figured out an excuse to get my employer to buy Photoshop for me and I started learning it on company time. When Winamp came out with the update to add skins, I ended up making one of the very first skins (meshAMP) which became really popularly.

https://archive.org/details/winampskins_meshAmp

(I am cringing looking at it now)

This led to contract job with STB (to design interfaces for a TV Tuner card they had) and eventually 3DFX (paid in 3d video cards), and eventually a career change and a job as a graphic designer.

Except, I was not a good designer, so I quickly learned to program (ASP.net and then JAVA), which led to Macromedia Flash, which led to Macromedia Generator, which eventually led to a job offer from Macromedia (now Adobe), where I still am (sadly, sans Flash).

Anyways, thank your WinAMP!

nextaccountic
1 replies
18h34m

Did you create Macromedia Flash? Or otherwise worked on it

Anyway your winamp skin is cool

mesh
0 replies
13h31m

I worked with the team and had input on the Player, but my job was in community / evangelism.

rocky1138
0 replies
18h5m

I've felt for a long time that hacker News was dead, then I read your post and it made me warm inside

renegade-otter
0 replies
20h49m

Dockable UI, fast, stable, form and function. Really a masterclass in software design to this day.

pjbk
0 replies
20h29m

I think those of us who use the REAPER DAW and its customizable themes are the main beneficiaries of that functionality.

dale_glass
0 replies
20h23m

You can reskin a lot of modern software, it just went out of fashion.

bredren
0 replies
20h26m

It was really cool.

Skinning was pretty easy to do. The packaging format was a zip archive with a renamed extension. You could do a lot with a little photoshop skills and trial and error.

So many people used it that skins would get a lot of distribution, too.

RevEng
0 replies
19h26m

That's one of the biggest reasons I still use it. Other music players have strictly fixed UIs that often focus on organizing a music library rather than actually playing your music. I'm quite happy organizing my music using the file system.

GeoAtreides
4 replies
20h28m

(Borland) Delphi also made creating non standard form shapes; the secret was in leveraging the win32 api, which was really easy to do in Delphi.

Here's an example: http://www.delphicorner.f9.co.uk/articles/forms4.htm

cellularmitosis
2 replies
20h23m

Strange that they didn't include a single screenshot on that page.

taspeotis
0 replies
18h44m

Screenshots might take 10’s of kibibytes. Not very baud efficient. Use the webring links at the bottom of the page to find another website that has pictures. Sign their guestbook as thanks.

drekipus
0 replies
20h15m

Very common for older projects

worik
0 replies
18h12m

I found the secret to C++ programming for Windows was using the C API.

It was a long time ago, but IIRC I was using Visual C++ (a very nice compiler that was the first to implement the STL as written) having abandoned Borland Foundation Classes (? name ?) which was dreadful. Woeful.

MFC, the MS C++ offering for writing Windows apps was impossible to use and undocumented at the time. We subscribed to those piles of CDs that MS would send out regularly and I could only find decent documentation for the C API, not the MFC one. Weird.

I used an explicit event loop (simple for a Computer Science graduate like I was) and the C API inside my C++ programme and it worked a treat

Those were (not) the days....

bluedino
0 replies
18h11m

Justin Frank used to hang out on IRC in #winprog or something, and I can remember when he was showing us how he made the UI skinnable. Asking for ideas and input etc.

This was back in 96-97?

adra
0 replies
19h53m

I remember fondly writing a winamp clone in school with a team project. We scraped together a rough plugin based player, input and output plugins (a super limited network streaming variant), etc.. good times grinding on a neat project. Yikes, that was like 25 years ago.

ndiddy
14 replies
20h22m

Some context: Winamp's owners have been going through financial difficulties since last year and as a result have laid off the skeleton crew they previously had maintaining Winamp (their main focus seems to be a streaming service also called Winamp for HTML5 and phones). This looks like they're willing to let the community take over maintenance for PC Winamp, which beats letting it die IMO.

https://forums.winamp.com/forum/winamp/winamp-site-design/46...

peppertree
6 replies
19h34m

Still waiting on KaZaA open source. Kids these days don't know what it's like trying to download a music video and end up watching someone getting beheaded.

giancarlostoro
2 replies
18h44m

Or downloading Windows XP.ISO and booting up Ubuntu. 15 year old me was confused and enraged.

nehal3m
1 replies
18h26m

Denial, anger, bargaining, depression, l33tness.

sexy_seedbox
0 replies
18h8m

So br00tal

wrigby
1 replies
19h12m

I realize this is a joke, but can’t resist mentioning that LimeWire was (is?) open source (or at least used an open network in GnuTella)

mrmincent
0 replies
16h15m

And funnily enough, gnutella being a creation of Justin Frankel, the creator of Winamp as well.

zztop44
0 replies
19h23m

I’m pretty sure kids these days do know exactly what that’s like (although they wouldn’t be downloading the music video and it wouldn’t have taken over an hour for a shitty 2.3mb file)

larodi
3 replies
19h23m

Why does a company has to go bankrupt to open source? It’s like something that owners want to do in order to be able to fork, not something that is being done for the community or open side of it.

cortesoft
1 replies
19h15m

Well, their business model was selling the software… it is harder to do that if it is open source.

Once you are going bankrupt, you are going to lose the asset anyway, so there is no incentive to keep it closed source.

Is it really that hard to figure out why a company open sources when going bankrupt?

talldatethrow
0 replies
18h16m

Wouldn't the lenders be pissed you essentially gave away one of the valuable assets they could have sold off to someone else?

Uehreka
0 replies
18h16m

I just got here from the “DoJ moves to legalize weed” comment section, and I have the same thing to say: I don’t care why people do a good thing, I’m uncomplicatedly happy it happened.

testernews
1 replies
18h24m

that explains why i had such a terrible fucking time with their “creator” side, was supposed to have a rep, help setting up, promotion, etc and they didn’t do fuck all for a year and then tried to charge me for it a year later

trogdor
0 replies
3h22m

Winamp has (/had) a creator side? I thought it was just a media player.

RevEng
0 replies
19h31m

I really appreciate them doing this. I wish more companies would release their source - even as is - if they are dissolving the corporation anyway.

ssahoo
8 replies
21h19m

Good. Love the reimplementation in HTML https://webamp.org/

yazzku
3 replies
20h56m

It's fantastic. I can easily spend hours on the skins website. https://skins.webamp.org/

phatfish
0 replies
19h10m

Anime girls and the Borg lady from Voyager, checks out.

captbaritone
2 replies
20h49m

Hey! That's my side project. So glad to hear people enjoy it.

mybrid
0 replies
16h49m

I just checked it out. Good stuff! I may deploy it.

einsteinx2
0 replies
5h40m

Whoa! How did you get what looks like the real Milkdrop visualizer working??

semireg
0 replies
20h59m

This satisfied whatever cravings I still had. Thank you!

xxpor
5 replies
21h2m

I'm skeptical this will be a fully free license based on the cagey language in the announcement :/

pquki4
3 replies
20h53m

Very weird. They provide a very specific future date for this, and avoided using the term "open source". I can't recall any other company doing this. Most of the time, companies provide a github repository at the same time they make such announcements. Even for twitter, Elon Musk promised the algorithm would be opened, and then some time later it was just there. While generally it is a positive thing to see code being available, I wouldn't think too much into it until I can see the license and the code.

TillE
1 replies
20h45m

I can't recall any other company doing this

Years ago Microsoft used to do stuff like this, notably releasing .NET Framework under its Reference Source License (you're allowed to look at the code, but that's about it).

nailer
0 replies
19h23m

It’s still happening. Bad companies are swapping between using ‘open source’ inaccurately (to get grants and funding) and saying ‘source available’ (when people call them on their bullshit) now.

swatcoder
0 replies
18h58m

They might not be in a position to relicense all of it, or might not be sure of exactly how to do so appropriately.

Large, living companies like Microsoft can work with their lawyers to confidently understand what they're releasing when opening up old code and indemnify theythemselves appropriately, but a troubled company on its last legs can't nexessarily budget for all that.

Commercial software of that vintage was not built from dependencies that were all open source themselves, nor were there necessarily contributor/contractor agreements that kept copyright in a suitable place for open source relicencing. They might have been prepared for explicit rights transfer to another party, and maybe disclosure as they're suggesting here, but relicensing is a different thing.

0x1ch
4 replies
21h1m

The dozen people still using Winamp rejoice...

dark-star
3 replies
20h47m

I'm one of those 12 people apparently. I don't know, I still listen to mp3 music on my PC almost every day... And I have yet to find another player that is as fast and lightweight as WinAMP

zeroonetwothree
0 replies
20h43m

foobar is great

jerhewet
0 replies
20h30m

Not lightweight, but I've fallen in love with MusicBee (https://getmusicbee.com/) and it's been my only music player for at least the last 10 years. Love everything about it.

devindotcom
0 replies
20h27m

i'm with you my brother

GGO
3 replies
20h55m

why wait this long (until Sept 2024) to opensource the code?

omoikane
0 replies
20h21m

It's also weird that the timestamp on the press release is "Dec 16, 1".

There are 5 press releases total on that site, 2 from 2023, 2 from 2024, and this one from year "1". It just seems very strange.

ndiddy
0 replies
20h34m

Winamp has a ton of proprietary licensed library code (codecs, Gracenote API, etc) that all has to be replaced with open source equivalents before the code can be released. I believe the skeleton crew that they had working on maintaining Winamp a few years ago started on some of this work, but I'm assuming that the whole codebase needs to be audited to make sure that they're legally in the clear.

captbaritone
0 replies
20h50m

Note that they don't actually say "open source" anywhere.

yumraj
2 replies
20h45m

is there a good Mac port that supports newer, especially loss less, codecs?

rocky1138
0 replies
18h2m

Someone mentioned macamp. I have no idea though

captbaritone
0 replies
20h42m

The closest I've seen is https://re-amp.ru. Not sure about codecs

hodder
2 replies
21h1m

It really whips the llama's ass.

yazzku
1 replies
20h53m

Certainly whipped my ass after hearing that intro again 20 years later.

nuxi
0 replies
20h38m

it’s Wesley Willis, all the way down…

hi-v-rocknroll
2 replies
20h29m

Kinda late. Maybe it would've been cool in 2006 when I still used Windows.

But what I really want to know is: will it really kick the LLaMAs ass now with AI features?

babypuncher
1 replies
20h17m

I'm surprised they haven't announced any AI features yet.

It seems like every 5 years ago there's a big "Winamp is BACK" announcement paired with some new nonsense related to whatever the big tech buzzword of the day is. Last time it was blockchains.

hi-v-rocknroll
0 replies
15h28m

It's what's left of AOL. Give them another 20 years.

thefourthchime
1 replies
20h20m

About 20 years ago, I almost got hired on the Winamp team. They were busy working on Winamp 3, which, from what I gathered, was a pretty much total rewrite using modern C++.

The previous codebase had been more or less just C, written by Justin Frankel. I think everyone kind of hated Winamp 3. It was very buggy. The plugin framework was extremely complicated. I wonder which source code they'll open up. Maybe both.

boomskats
0 replies
19h52m

I had to re-read your comment because first time round I thought you were suggesting it was JF's codebase they hated. Everything else he's ever worked on has been phenomenal (especially Reaper, from the very start).

So was that at AOL?

solardev
1 replies
20h59m

Maybe now we can finally add RealVideo support to it.

buildsjets
0 replies
20h17m

Let's all take this moment to celebrate 22 years and 230 days of RealNetwork's strong commitment to fucking ugly clunky software.

https://www.bonequest.com/1099

nirav72
1 replies
19h27m

I want to see a wasm version of winamp.

bigstrat2003
0 replies
18h24m

It's no skin off my nose either way, but I don't understand why you would want to take a nice slim desktop application and turn it into another web application that runs in a bloated browser. Seems to defeat the purpose of winamp at that point.

loceng
1 replies
20h19m

I just remembered I used to hangout in an IRC chat with the creator of Sonique as a pre-teen when I first started to teach myself to code - Sonique being the main competitor to Winamp way back when.

Strange how memory works.

serf
0 replies
19h24m

sonique was interesting because most skins ditched 'square-rectangle' all together. Sometimes it was really wacky, like raindrops on your screen. The visulization engine was very milkdrop-y, too.

gerdesj
1 replies
18h13m

"Winamp will remain the owner of the software and will decide on the innovations made in the official version," explains Alexandre Saboundjian, CEO of Winamp."

Which license will be used? "Opening up" is not exactly GPL.

ssl-3
0 replies
18h7m

I also don't know what license will be used, but nothing in the GPL prevents [eg] the owners of Winamp continuing to own Winamp, or from deciding what innovations will (or will not) make it to their own official version.

I'm not sure that "opening up" actually means what you may appear to think that it means.

The entirety of present-day Winamp could be released, with code, under the GPL tomorrow and nothing says the org that owns Winamp will somehow cease to own Winamp, or that they must accept others' changes into their own source tree.

(And that's perfectly OK, even under the restrictions of the GPL.)

chubot
1 replies
19h39m

Wow, for me Winamp was one of the first "enshittified" pieces of software.

I remember one version was fantastic, and then the next version sucked. I'm pretty sure this was due to a change in ownership or something

I remember I used to use http://oldversion.com [1] to download the previous one

Ever since then I have been wary of "improvements" that make software worse, which has been happening a lot recently.

I'd be really interested in seeing the source code to the original. I didn't know much about programming then, and to me that would be similar to reading the original source code of Doom (which I've done a bit)

[1] this site still seems alive? But doesn't even have https?

lmm
0 replies
19h36m

I remember one version was fantastic, and then the next version sucked. I'm pretty sure this was due to a change in ownership or something

Winamp 3 was a major regression that sparked a backlash (in particular it had a new skin engine that probably was a priori better, but broke compatibility all existing skins, which wasn't popular; also performance, which had been a major selling point, was worse), but I don't remember there being any change of ownership or monetization effort. I think it was just a genuine well-intentioned rewrite that ended up worse than the original, like Netscape 4 or KDE4.

nirav72
0 replies
19h20m

The site is not reachable.

xyst
0 replies
20h58m

til: Winamp is still alive and kicking

willcipriano
0 replies
20h18m

I used to love Winamp for internet radio/tv.

Maybe plug-in NewPipe or similar instead and fork it?

uptownhr
0 replies
18h10m

winamp should release an LLM and claim that it really beats the Llamas....

trenchgun
0 replies
13h0m

Linux Winamp?

tiffanyh
0 replies
19h38m

Hope it’s the source for Winamp 2.x (not 3 or 5)

ssahoo
0 replies
13h4m

Also someone has rewritten Winamp in Swift as well. Few days ago it was on Product hunt and got 4 likes.

Check it out https://re-amp.ru

sn0n
0 replies
20h35m

Can we get a Godot port for winamp on all the systems? Kthnx. ^>^

riffic
0 replies
19h38m

didn't it leak some time ago? did AOL ever spin nullsoft back out?

pwillia7
0 replies
20h49m

llama

notfed
0 replies
18h39m

Note their careful wording..."opened up source", not "open source".

nipperkinfeet
0 replies
19h58m

I still use the old Winamp on all my devices. Winamp: old or new is being open sourced? If it's the old one, wonderful! WACUP team are now able to develop a ARM version.

itvision
0 replies
10h27m

No one would ever believe me but last night I had a dream about exactly this.

I was shocked to wake up and read about this in the news.

ilrwbwrkhv
0 replies
19h35m

Oh my God. My favorite piece of software of all time. Would love to read it's source.

gman83
0 replies
19h16m

I've been using WACUP, it's really good: https://getwacup.com/

foxandmouse
0 replies
20h33m

I can't remember the last time I thought of winamp, I moved on to foobar2000 and then to streaming services. Even with this announcement, there's no mention of a licence... Too little too late, maybe if foobar2000 became open source but I'd doubt it.

drc86
0 replies
20h29m

I knew those quotation marks were going to ruin my elation when I clicked the headline.

devindotcom
0 replies
20h24m

Currently dating myself by playing Portishead's Dummy in Winamp 5.66...

Looking forward to this code being lightly maintained for minimal compatibility with future OSes. I dislike change!

dev1ycan
0 replies
19h30m

do people still use winamp over foobar?

desktopninja
0 replies
16h23m

To me the gold version was winamp-v2.94 ... ~1.2MB of magic. I still use it today.

Notable mention on BEOS ... CL-Amp

cyco130
0 replies
18h11m

Heh, I wish Justin had some time to lay his hands on it again after so many years. (On a second thought, I’m happier with him being busy with Reaper).

bdjsiqoocwk
0 replies
19h58m

Questions for the experts: should anyone use this, compared eg to something more modern like VLC?

babypuncher
0 replies
20h13m

For anyone looking for a slightly more modern alternative, I recommend foobar2000[1].

It's not quite as pretty out of the box, but it makes up for it with some insane customizability. It also has a very robust ecosystem of components, and works very well in Wine.

1. https://www.foobar2000.org/

anjel
0 replies
18h27m

AIMP3 is still in regular development for windows and Android and for me at least seems to nicely emulate winamp in UI, skins, plugins and extra features. I have fond memories of Winamp, but I don't miss it.

RobotToaster
0 replies
20h8m

The weaselly wording doesn't make me optimistic, but I hope it's an open source license.

Razengan
0 replies
18h39m

It's amazing… how WinAmp and the other softwares and websites that were so crucial in the rise of the internet AND computers in general, just..faded away like they did, and we got stuck with the Facebook and TikTok and Twitter and Netflix etc bs we have left today..

Andrew_nenakhov
0 replies
19h32m

The most impressive feature of classic winamp were it's skins. You can effortlessly watch them in all their classic glory on WebAmp.org [0].

(There is also some nice music there)

[0]: https://webamp.org/

Am4TIfIsER0ppos
0 replies
18h29m

I hope for the code to read the library database. Perhaps I'll be able to debug what's broken in mine and fix it so I can use it again.