Question: so when you say folks are trying to keep the "last version" alive, which version are you referring too since later versions weren’t loved.
https://web.archive.org/web/20131219003849/http://www.winamp...
> What happened to Winamp 4? You're not imagining things. Yes, we skipped a version number for the following reasons: a) Winamp 5 combines the best aspects of Winamp 2 and Winamp 3 into one player. Hence Winamp 2 + Winamp 3 = Winamp 5! b) Who the hell wants to see a Winamp 4 Skin :P c) We think that a Fibonacci sequence for versioning might be pretty damn cool. d)We improved so much in Winamp 5 that we figured it warranted skipping a version. ;)
Edit: Maybe I have to sound it out. Is it because 4 skin sounds like foreskin?
-dro
You don't have to be like that.
I wish the people who named Gimp image editor were this thoughtful! Searching for image masking info has caught me out multiple times :/
My question is: in what English accents do "four" and "fore" *not* sound alike?
> Accents that have resisted the merger include most Scottish, Caribbean, and older Southern American accents as well as some African American, modern Southern American, Indian, Irish, and older Maine accents.
If my understanding is correct, in some accents that don't pronounce their "R"s at the end of words, the vowel shape changes slightly while pronouncing "four," but "fore" is pronounced with a simple vowel.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-language_vowel_changes...
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/fore
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/four
The IPA suggests that pronunciations of the two words are identical both with and without the merger, but I'm no specialist.
In accents with the merger, "four," "for," and "fore" are all always homophones.
In accents without the merger, "four" and "for" are never homophones.
And in some subset of these non-merged accents, "fore" may be pronounced identically to "four" (as listed in the IPA guide in your first link). In another subset, it may be pronounced identically to "for" (as implied by the "Homophones" section in that same link).
It is extremely hard for me to even _imagine_ this, as apparently my native accents both contain this merger. This is a rare experience for me, but a previous occurrence was discussing the rhotic-R phenomenon.
-dro
(None of this is important today, I guess)
I believe there was some drama which resulted in the lead dev for 3 getting fired, and then the skinning engine (which was the most popular part of 3) was grafted onto the 2.x base for version "5".
https://skins.webamp.org/skin/8a466a39534e4be0dc6ca5cc0d6f5a...
(Note: you want to copypaste that link, not click it)
JWZ's hate of HN is long-running and due to a combination of factors, but I reckon his real annoyance is the amount of traffic this site can send to his little servers.
Tiny, fast, simple, does the job.
There's an Android version too, which is my go-to audio player, because of its simplicity.
Both FOSS.
-dro
I apologise for the misleading comment.
-dro
I use Foobar on my PC daily but didn't even know it was available on Android, so thanks! Musicolet is also a great Android player without all the BS (ex: can run mp3 files copied to the device with no internet connnection)
https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/2lepog/til_t...
"McDonalds is a place to rock, It is a restaurant where they buy food to eat, It is a good place to listen to the music, People flock here to get down to the rock music." - Rock 'N Roll McDonalds
"Batman beat the hell out of me and knocked me to the floor, I got back up and knocked him to the floor, He was being such a jack off" - I Whupped Batman's Ass
"This beast killed as many as 100,000 people / It's wings can flap like a bird / It can break a glass / It can also stab you in the ass" - The Chicken Cow
[0]: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=wesley+willis+art&t=brave&iax=imag...
The best feature that it seems no other player has reproduced yet is being able to hit the J key to do an instant search for a song, with 0 latency: the search narrows down the songs as fast as you hit the keys.
But I've noticed that there are now a few files that sound scratch when played, perhaps they're 48 kHz or something...
This can be disabled too.
You will when you get a 4k monitor.
-dro
I had to install milkdrop separately to WinAmp, but honestly, after reinstalling Windows 98 every 72 hours back in the bad old days, it kinda felt natural. Nostalgic.
Despite how powerful modern computers are, I still notice how much lighter 2.x is than 3.x.
I'm guessing they went with version 5, since it looks like versions after that might have been a full rewrite?
It's just... the complete opposite of what Winamp was all about, and it's horrible and leaves a bad taste in your mouth (-100 points for the atrocious "modern" website which loads MBs of Javascript, screams BIG TEXT at you, hijacks your scroll wheel, and still tells you nothing about the actual software other than it will probably suck. Oh and another -100 points for that cookie popup.)
How hard you would actually have to try to make a website as horrible as this, this thing is just a meme.
1.) A subset of modern HTML / CSS, custom Javascript. Remove anything that isn't needed and especially anything that affects rendering negatively for no good reason.
1.1.) Possibly: Provide versioned, vendor neutral versions of js to allow for autocomplete.
2.) Same as 1, but with custom JS. All js must complete in a specified number of cycles. User interaction gives extra cycles.
The point of 1 is to:
- for companies: massively lower the barriers for new browsers (remove lots of backwards compatibility and the huge problem of JS)
- for security conscious users: provide a safer way to browse the web
- for users generally: provide a way to browse the web faster and more comfortably
- the point of 2.) is to provide an approximation of what we have today but in a way that automatically limits developers from abusing JS.
Otherwise, what's the point?
It really whips your browser's ass.
The incorrect hyphen is just irritating as well.
So that time with AOL covers v2.5 when it became free after starting out as shareware through to v5.666 along with the maligned WinAmp3 period. So that's whole a lot of not doing much but still producing releases for almost 15yrs. Winamp (& SHOUTcast) were sold before Verizon did it's thing with AOL.
-dro
That's... almost impressive in how bad that is. I didn't know a website COULD lock up an entire system in this day and age.
I do. 2.95 works fine right up to Windows 10 and probably 11, and still plays any MP3 and pretty much any other format with a plug-in. It even has a double-size display option built right in which makes it perfectly usable on modern 4k resolution.
This reminds me of the realization that modern MacOS apps can have icon sizes larger than the original Mac's screen- 512x512 icons vs. 512x384 monochrome screen.
I'm making something that I want to use (essentially a compatible implementation for my plug-ins to run under) & if it's of use to others then that's a bonus.
At no point has WACUP claimed to be 100% OSS nor should I be expected to do that when I'm the only one working on my Winamp reimplementation. Aspects that need to be done that way are done so accordingly.
-dro
I trust Justin Frankel, I don't know you, previous team or not.. The world can go on using Winamp 2.x forever and be just fine, its GRAS. If you're bringing something that isn't that, previous dev history or not, you're going to have to differentiate yourself from the folks who are also putting out winamp-alikes.
I'm not trying to be a jerk, that's just the reality.
Knowing what the code I'm running is doing is helpful in swaying me to your direction, even if that's not what you claim to be aiming for.
> should I be expected to do that when I'm the only one working on my Winamp reimplementation
Let us know when you want to change that. We're talented, and generally nice. Maybe some day you'll want some help.
It might make more sense for other projects especially those starting out fresh but that's not ever been my mindset with how I've been doing Winamp plug-in related development since 2003 along with the 5yrs I worked on Winamp & if that means people will avoid WACUP then so be it as they're more likely to be sticking with the AOL provided 2.x releases anyway.
Also it goes both ways on the trust aspects & maybe when the likes of fb2k, aimp & musicbee go OSS I might eventually reconsider my dinosaur like approach to development but there has to be a tangible benefit for me to do it.
I've already asked for help over the 5yrs or so I've been trying to make WACUP but the things that need help with doing are also the things that no one really wants to do (e.g. a new good midi input plug-in).
-dro (assuming this reply ever gets posted as I've been trying for over an hour)
Forgive me for asking, but if the reason for you releasing WACUP to the public at all isn't purely personal benefit (if it was only about that might as well keep it to yourself right?) but to help people and share something that you deem useful and let others benefit from it, why would the source code be any different? Put another way: why is releasing the binaries publicly acceptable even if it doesn't benefit you directly, but doing the same thing for the source itself isn't?
That way, if I get hit by a bus, it's fine, The Source Is Out There. If someone wants to send a bug fix or improvement, great, thanks, I'll be glad to take a look. Otherwise, don't bug me.
The idea that "open source" is necessarily a full-time maintenance job with formal processes and expectations is something somebody made up.
This is really cool, can you share a bit about how you do this? Are you using a makefile and putting a gzip as an embed into the setup? Is this a function of the installer you're using? Thanks for any insight.
In the case of one commercial application, there are also binary blobs in the form of DLLs that support custom hardware.
It's not one of those practices that scales particularly well, but it works for me...
No one giving away software has to do anything. Maybe they'd get more donations as OSS or something, but it's no guarantee.
I'd assume that people who make general-purpose open-source software with the intent of it being used by someone other than themselves.
So read the "have to" as "if you want to have people use and appreciate your work, this is a necessary step".
The decision is left to the end user, use it, or don't.
Really don't see a problem here :)
:) Thanks
The thing that I liked about Winamp that stopped being cool were visualizations. net Audio player nowaday are so bland and featureless (including Spotify, Tidal, Deezer and others I've tried).
TIL - Audacious was a fork of XMMS!
Monitor size/resolution has gotten larger which is some of the factor but I think people downplay the shift in common effective DPI which leads to a much bigger perceived change in UI sizing design than there really has been. In the late 90s to early 2000s an effective DPI of 75-85 for a typical home user was not uncommon. Nowadays an effective DPI of 125-135 is pretty standard, many tech folk using an effective DPI of 150 because it gives the effect of having more workspace.
So what may have looked like a half physical inch wide UI element on a standard user's display in the late 90s might look like a quarter inch wide UI element on many HN reader's screens today because nobody likes to set their DPI properly :p.
When WinAmp was big, typical resolution was 1024x768 (XGA). Wikipedia has a nice comparison image to give you a sense of how tiny that was compared to 4K:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_resolution#/media/File...
- running WACUP on Windows 10 for ARM on a Raspberry Pi 4 is now a known to work configuration
- Changed the shared metadata handling to do a better job in skipping trying to process requests for metadata requests that are always going to fail before triggering relatively time consuming calls
- Changed how the CD playback plug-in initialises itself to minimise the delays on loading that it can cause
- Fixed a crash when retrieving the raw lyrics data from a file's metadata tag on opening the Alt + 3 / View File Info dialog
-dro
https://getwacup.com/
It includes a skin that allows it to work on modern display resolutions. It's really interesting to see just how low-res screens were when it was in it's hey-day, given that they are nearly unusable on a 4k monitor.
Edit: I was too young to remember the releases, but replies are indicating that version 5 was in fact, not the most popular :P