Anyone notice the latest version number of winamp?

SKiller

Senior member
Oct 10, 1999
660
0
0
Hehe AMD Junkie beat me to it.

BTW, make sure you use the decoder from version 2.22 of winamp if you want the most accurate reproduction.
 

kami

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
17,627
5
81
i'm running 2.5 with the fraunhoffer DLL (DLL from 2.22 as mentioned above)... :D
 

AndyHui

Administrator Emeritus<br>Elite Member<br>AT FAQ M
Oct 9, 1999
13,141
17
81
Actually, the Nitrane decoder in v2.666 has been replaced by a new Fraunhoffer codec that is optimised for MMX and SSE.....Almost the same quality as the 2.22 decoder, and MUCH better than the Nitrane decoder. CPU usage is way down on the old 2.22 decoder.

If anyone can remember back that far, there was a Winamp version 1.666 as well.
 

ltk007

Banned
Feb 24, 2000
6,209
1
0
Thanks man, although after what andy said we'll I'm not sure if I want to replace it.

I'll give both a try tomorrow, but right now I'm going to bed!
 

kami

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
17,627
5
81
anyone wanna send me the in_mp3.dll from 2.666? i'd like to try it, but I don't want to install the new version. isn't winamp &quot;aol-enhanced&quot; now? I don't want that crap.
 

AndyHui

Administrator Emeritus<br>Elite Member<br>AT FAQ M
Oct 9, 1999
13,141
17
81
There is no &quot;enhancement&quot; as far as I can see....still the same. No traces of AOHell anywhere.
 

BA

Diamond Member
Dec 3, 1999
5,004
1
0
ah, thanks. Man, that is better. Need some better headphones or speakers now
 

garkman

Member
Nov 10, 2000
172
0
0
They busted out the 666 for halloween, gotta love those guys. Can't imagine how fun it'd be working for a company like them...guess i'll go back to my fortune 500 tomorrow :-( BORING...
 

MR2DI4

Junior Member
Mar 27, 2000
13
0
0
So what, you should see my social security number!

***-66-666*

Talk about creepy!
 

jonnyjack

Platinum Member
Oct 13, 1999
2,162
1
0
thanks SKiller...i was about to ask the other guys to send it to me...and i also wanted to ask the same question Stefan asked...

i have 2.5 though...
 

SKiller

Senior member
Oct 10, 1999
660
0
0


<< what makes this decoder (2.22) better than what I already have (2.64)? >>


There is a bug in decoder specs that incorrectly reproduces certain tones. Check the 2nd link for more.