Do You Guys Like the New Winamp?

[Spooner]

Kind of a pain in the ass if you ask me

 

[tontod]

Not sure if I like it yet. I just installed it a few minutes ago. How do you make the song title scrolling in the taskbar? I know this could be done with earlier versions. I couldnt find that option in preferences.

 

[MaxDSP]

No, but I may be biased. I havent used it yet.



based on reviews so far, Im not gonna upgrade my version 2.7

 

[IBuyUFO]

the new winamp is great. I love the different skins it has although it's slow to load with my computer. Winamp loads very fast with a pentium 2.53 computer. All the people who complain about winamp probably have a crappy computer like myself but I don't whine about it. I really like the program.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: IBuyUFO
the new winamp is great. I love the different skins it has although it's slow to load with my computer. Winamp loads very fast with a pentium 2.53 computer. All the people who complain about winamp probably have a crappy computer like myself but I don't whine about it. I really like the program.

when winamp 2.8 loads 16 times faster than winamp 3.0 (yes, i timed it), and there really aren't that many new features, you have to wonder whether it's the computer, or whether it's the software. on my computer, the load time is almost equal to the load time for adobe photoshop.

 

[CTho9305]

i think it is a bloated piece of crap. it is slow and has way too many features for a stupid music player. 2.x rocks though

 

[Legendary]

Could never load it. Kept on crashing.
Definitely a great sign.

<-- may never leave Winamp 2.82

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: tontod
Not sure if I like it yet. I just installed it a few minutes ago. How do you make the song title scrolling in the taskbar? I know this could be done with earlier versions. I couldnt find that option in preferences.

Preferences -> Options -> Display -> Scroll Song Title in Windows Taskbar




I had Winamp 3 installed for....maybe 10 minutes? Don't like it at all. Couldn't find any of the tweaks or settings I wanted; just didn't like it much at all. I'm back to 2.81 now.

 

[pac1085]

I HATE the playlist editor thingy it has. it sucks!:disgust:

 

[MaxDSP]

Originally posted by: IBuyUFO
the new winamp is great. I love the different skins it has although it's slow to load with my computer. Winamp loads very fast with a pentium 2.53 computer. All the people who complain about winamp probably have a crappy computer like myself but I don't whine about it. I really like the program.

like gopunk said, it all comes down to bloat. Programmers release a great program to the public, it becomes a hit, corporations swoop in and fill it to the brim with craploads of junk.

 

[IBuyUFO]

Originally posted by: gopunk

Originally posted by: IBuyUFO
the new winamp is great. I love the different skins it has although it's slow to load with my computer. Winamp loads very fast with a pentium 2.53 computer. All the people who complain about winamp probably have a crappy computer like myself but I don't whine about it. I really like the program.

when winamp 2.8 loads 16 times faster than winamp 3.0 (yes, i timed it), and there really aren't that many new features, you have to wonder whether it's the computer, or whether it's the software. on my computer, the load time is almost equal to the load time for adobe photoshop.

Notice that I compared it to my computer and a pentium 4 2.53 ghz. Obviously my computer is superslow when running winamp 3, but with a 2.53 ghz cpu winamp 3 loads as fast as 2.8. I say that software advances with hardware and that's what happened to winamp 3. I guess my logic is that software will try to take advantage of newer and faster hardware to give the most bang and that's what winamp does with alpha blending and whatever else it may have in there. Yeah that'll be slow to load up in your old computer but people with the new hardware won't share in your sentiments. As slow as it is to load up I still like it and it works ok when it has been loaded. But if you haven't tried this in a 2.53 ghz comp. you'll see that it loads just as fast as winamp 2.8

 

[erikistired]

i had it loaded for awhile, but i like 2.x better. they are still doing updates to 2.x, so i'm gonna stick with that.

~erik

 

[IBuyUFO]

Originally posted by: MaxDSP

Originally posted by: IBuyUFO
the new winamp is great. I love the different skins it has although it's slow to load with my computer. Winamp loads very fast with a pentium 2.53 computer. All the people who complain about winamp probably have a crappy computer like myself but I don't whine about it. I really like the program.

like gopunk said, it all comes down to bloat. Programmers release a great program to the public, it becomes a hit, corporations swoop in and fill it to the brim with craploads of junk.

I just think that whatever bloat it's included will be handled by a new computer. It'll work great when you upgrade your computer eventually. In reality it's really a moot point to include bloat and new computer in the same sentence.

 

[CTho9305]

Originally posted by: IBuyUFO

Originally posted by: gopunk

Originally posted by: IBuyUFO
the new winamp is great. I love the different skins it has although it's slow to load with my computer. Winamp loads very fast with a pentium 2.53 computer. All the people who complain about winamp probably have a crappy computer like myself but I don't whine about it. I really like the program.

when winamp 2.8 loads 16 times faster than winamp 3.0 (yes, i timed it), and there really aren't that many new features, you have to wonder whether it's the computer, or whether it's the software. on my computer, the load time is almost equal to the load time for adobe photoshop.

Notice that I compared it to my computer and a pentium 4 2.53 ghz. Obviously my computer is superslow when running winamp 3, but with a 2.53 ghz cpu winamp 3 loads as fast as 2.8. I say that software advances with hardware and that's what happened to winamp 3. I guess my logic is that software will try to take advantage of newer and faster hardware to give the most bang and that's what winamp does with alpha blending and whatever else it may have in there. Yeah that'll be slow to load up in your old computer but people with the new hardware won't share in your sentiments. As slow as it is to load up I still like it and it works ok when it has been loaded. But if you haven't tried this in a 2.53 ghz comp. you'll see that it loads just as fast as winamp 2.8

So? I dont want another video player. My OS comes with at least two.... I use windows media player 6.4 (start->run "mplayer2") because the dfeault XP one is bloated. I dont want more functionality for each app. I have SEPARATE apps for songs (winamp 2.x), web (mozilla), email (pine), typing (word, notepad), chatting (aim, icq), and I want it to stay that way. Each program should do ONE thing well.

You seen to enjoy your 2.53 ghz p4. I'm glad you do. My athy 750 is fine for the games I play (UT, half life) and I would think something that can play a game smoothly should be fast enough for a frikken MUSIC player???

 

[poopaskoopa]

The new one's the one that keeps all the playlists on display(by default setting), right? I like that feature. It allows me to easily access different winamp radio stations without losing the previously accessed stations. It does seem to take longer to load, but it doesn't bother me.

 

[gopunk]

Originally posted by: IBuyUFO

Originally posted by: gopunk

Originally posted by: IBuyUFO
the new winamp is great. I love the different skins it has although it's slow to load with my computer. Winamp loads very fast with a pentium 2.53 computer. All the people who complain about winamp probably have a crappy computer like myself but I don't whine about it. I really like the program.

when winamp 2.8 loads 16 times faster than winamp 3.0 (yes, i timed it), and there really aren't that many new features, you have to wonder whether it's the computer, or whether it's the software. on my computer, the load time is almost equal to the load time for adobe photoshop.

Notice that I compared it to my computer and a pentium 4 2.53 ghz. Obviously my computer is superslow when running winamp 3, but with a 2.53 ghz cpu winamp 3 loads as fast as 2.8. I say that software advances with hardware and that's what happened to winamp 3. I guess my logic is that software will try to take advantage of newer and faster hardware to give the most bang and that's what winamp does with alpha blending and whatever else it may have in there. Yeah that'll be slow to load up in your old computer but people with the new hardware won't share in your sentiments. As slow as it is to load up I still like it and it works ok when it has been loaded. But if you haven't tried this in a 2.53 ghz comp. you'll see that it loads just as fast as winamp 2.8

it seems clear to me that the software hasn't advanced, it's just the hardware advancing. if the software were advancing, it would run *faster* than 2.8 without the added hardware. the software, according to you, has just added in more toys. actual efficiency doesn't seem to have changed.

btw, if in fact winamp3 is pushing the limits of hardware capability, that is just ridiculous. there is absolutely no reason why an mp3 player needs to do that. media player 9 has just as many if not more features than winamp 3 yet, it loads up significantly faster.

 

[deerslayer]

I liked the new skins but I also thought it was much slower and bloated so i went back to 2.80. I didn't really like the new features they put in it anyways. Couldn't use the corneramp skin

 

[Martin]

i really have no reason to switch. Skins dont concern me, since I keep winamp shrunk at the top of the screen...

 

[CTho9305]

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak
i really have no reason to switch. Skins dont concern me, since I keep winamp shrunk at the top of the screen...

same. and i want my playlist to be a simple list of files. no more, no less.

 

[Keego]

it died when playing wma files. so I uninstalled it.

 

[thawolfman]

Nope. Installed the Beta, removed it within an hour....same goes for the RC1 and the Final...I'll stick to 2.8x thanks

 

[CubicZirconia]

It didn't do anything for me that 2.8 doesn't. It seemed to have lots of unnecessy extras attached to it I got rid of it and I'm back to 2.8.

 

[Imported]

Haven't even downloaded or tried it. :\

 

[Scootin159]

Originally posted by: IBuyUFO

Originally posted by: MaxDSP

Originally posted by: IBuyUFO
the new winamp is great. I love the different skins it has although it's slow to load with my computer. Winamp loads very fast with a pentium 2.53 computer. All the people who complain about winamp probably have a crappy computer like myself but I don't whine about it. I really like the program.

like gopunk said, it all comes down to bloat. Programmers release a great program to the public, it becomes a hit, corporations swoop in and fill it to the brim with craploads of junk.

I just think that whatever bloat it's included will be handled by a new computer. It'll work great when you upgrade your computer eventually. In reality it's really a moot point to include bloat and new computer in the same sentence.

I have a 1.4Ghz Athlon & I prefer the 2.x version. Just because I have the extra CPU cycles doesn't mean that I want to spend them on winamp. About the only feature I wish they would add was that the skin bitmaps would be designed for "doublesize mode" so that they don't look terrible when you run it in doublesize 'cuz you can't see the fine print @ 1600x1200.

 

[Lucky]

Yeah that'll be slow to load up in your old computer but people with the new hardware won't share in your sentiments.

You are telling me I need to buy absolute state of the art, nearly top of the line computer to get an MP3 player to run fast? Gimme a break.

Its bloated.