8 ms·

Interestingly enough, there has been a community project dedicated to keeping the last Winamp version alive (last version from the original creators), and it re

Interestingly enough, there has been a community project dedicated to keeping the last Winamp version alive (last version from the original creators), and it really great to use. https://getwacup.com/ 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

munificent 5y ago
> 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. 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:Vector_Video_Standards8.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_resolution#/media/File...
danudey 5y ago
> I'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. 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.
- kitsunesoba 5y ago
  The max size for file an app icons on macOS was bumped to 1024x1024 some years ago actually, I think around the time the first retina MBPs appeared. So your point is even more true.
dmt0 5y ago
macOS desperately needs a version of this. Vox is the closest thing I could find, but still isn't the same. Can't stand native Apple apps.
- thedoctor_o 5y ago
  There's also re:amp which is a decent implementation of the Winamp classic skin support. -dro
  - justinfrankel 5y ago
    you can also install reaper and this plug-in and get something highly winampish with its own special authenticity: https://landoleet.org/reaplay.zip https://landoleet.org/reaplay.zip
agumonkey 5y ago
superb also the classic modern skin is great
mvkel 5y ago
I miss apps like this. The UX is just so efficient and perfect. That settings screen is chef’s kiss
tiffanyh 5y ago
My memory is fuzzy on this but didn’t most consider Winamp 2.x the best. Winamp 3.x was considered bloated. So to help rectify the problems of 3.x, Winamp release version 5.x (the best of 2 + 3). Though I recall many still used version 2.x even after the 5.x release. 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.
- habeebtc 5y ago
  I have been running Winamp 2.95 for coming up on 20 years now. So you would be correct on that count. Despite how powerful modern computers are, I still notice how much lighter 2.x is than 3.x.
- samplatt 5y ago
  I just installed 2.95 last night after uninstalling 5.x. 5.x doesn't have [Q] to enqueue within a playlist. I have no idea why anyone would remove such a basic feature... maybe the advent of the "media library" management (at the time a new concept) made them decide to remove it. 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.
- meepmorp 5y ago
  WinAmp 2 was the last "real" version, before the AOL buyout of Nullsoft took its toll.
- krater23 5y ago
  I currently use 2.95 and see no reason to update. But I listen rarely mp3's in the last years.
  - lazyjeff 5y ago
    Same here, using Winamp 2.95 on a HiDPI screen as my main audio player. 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...
cyber_kinetist 5y ago
For context, here's the new revamped(!) Winamp coming up soon: https://www.winamp.com/ https://www.winamp.com/ 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.)
- jmknoll 5y ago
  At the bottom of their site, they have about 30 open full time positions, including Sales, Legal, and Finance. Seems strange for a 25 year old media player. Did they just close a big funding round or something?
  - WorldMaker 5y ago
    I don't recall the full tumultuous journey, but highlights I recall were Nullsoft (original Winamp creators) towards the end were bought by AOL who did them dirty and then AOL forgot about Winamp as a property entirely for something like two decades through the Time Warner merger then divorce then the Yahoo! merger into "Oath" under Verizon. At some point in spinning Oath back out of Verizon and putting Oath's IP on the chopping block someone found Winamp in an old closet somewhere and sold the "brand" to whoever this new company is that so far as any can tell has zero relationship to the original Nullsoft in any capacity.
    - thedoctor_o 5y ago
      The pure Nullsoft Winamp was from 1997 to mid-1999 with AOL having Winamp under it's ownership until 2013 (technically until mid-January 2014) when it was sold to Radionomy (who then were bought by Vivendi but then bought themselves back under the guise of Audiovalley). 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
0des 5y ago
Somewhat worrying that I can't seem to find the source code for WACUP listed anywhere, checked their website, discord, and github. I'd feel a lot better about using it if I could see the source code. Currently using Audacious with a Winamp Classic skin.
- thedoctor_o 5y ago
  Then don't use it if you only want to use 100% OSS. 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
  - caddywompus 5y ago
    Oh hey! Appreciate the work you've done, thanks for keeping the project alive!
  - 0des 5y ago
    Yikes, okay. 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.
    - thedoctor_o 5y ago
      I'm also not trying to be a jerk either but when I'm constantly being told by random people that I have to be OSS when it comes to WACUP that's also not particularly helpful other than introducing more potential work for me to do when there's absolutely no guarantee of a return to that effort. So maybe I'm more terse than I should be about such things but that's also just how I am. 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)
antris 5y ago
The Fatboy Slim album art on the screenshots page... I definitely got taken back :')
Iv 5y ago
But does it whip the llama's ass?
TonyTrapp 5y ago
The WACUP author also discussed the source code leak here a while ago: https://getwacup.com/blog/index.php/2021/04/17/what-does-the-leaking-of-winamps-source-code-mean-for-wacup/ https://getwacup.com/blog/index.php/2021/04/17/what-does-the...
- mkoryak 5y ago
  Reading that blog and not being familiar with winamp's history after winamp2 (which was the best), it felt like there is a good story there about "dro" and the current owners. Can someone point me to it?
- toyg 5y ago
  The fact that he points out what is and is not in the leak, might come back to bite him if the owners get very litigious. He should not have looked at it.
hk1337 5y ago
XMMS was a really nice Winamp clone for Linux way back when. Might be a good starting point. http://www.xmms.org/ http://www.xmms.org/
- Nursie 5y ago
  I liked XMMS, it was very clean. I spent far too long building it for my Sun workstation in about 2004... TIL - Audacious was a fork of XMMS!
- xtracto 5y ago
  I've been using QMMP myself: https://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/ https://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/. It's another WinAmp clone. 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).
- Malakun 5y ago
  And QMMp! https://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/ https://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/
- andrewshadura 5y ago
  Audacious.
zamadatix 5y ago
> 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. 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.
vikingerik 5y ago
Winamp 2.xx was generally the favorite. And there's no reason to talk about it in the past tense -- you can still just use it even now. 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.
ChrisArchitect 5y ago
hm, forgotten about that one. I get why it exists/independent/opensource whatever..... but why does it exist? Far as I can tell the 'official' v5.8 version that's been around for download on the main site and still is for a long time works great. Maybe I've just been using it for so long I don't notice any oddities (or don't need them, it's a music player for godssake), and I guess they've improved interface etc on wacup but....
- thesuitonym 5y ago
  Well, reading the release notes may answer that question. Some highlights: - 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

munificent 5y ago

> 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. 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:Vector_Video_Standards8.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Display_resolution#/media/File...

danudey 5y ago

> I'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. 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.

kitsunesoba 5y ago
The max size for file an app icons on macOS was bumped to 1024x1024 some years ago actually, I think around the time the first retina MBPs appeared. So your point is even more true.

dmt0 5y ago

macOS desperately needs a version of this. Vox is the closest thing I could find, but still isn't the same. Can't stand native Apple apps.

thedoctor_o 5y ago
There's also re:amp which is a decent implementation of the Winamp classic skin support. -dro
- justinfrankel 5y ago
  you can also install reaper and this plug-in and get something highly winampish with its own special authenticity: https://landoleet.org/reaplay.zip https://landoleet.org/reaplay.zip

agumonkey 5y ago

superb also the classic modern skin is great

mvkel 5y ago

I miss apps like this. The UX is just so efficient and perfect. That settings screen is chef’s kiss

tiffanyh 5y ago

My memory is fuzzy on this but didn’t most consider Winamp 2.x the best. Winamp 3.x was considered bloated. So to help rectify the problems of 3.x, Winamp release version 5.x (the best of 2 + 3). Though I recall many still used version 2.x even after the 5.x release. 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.

habeebtc 5y ago
I have been running Winamp 2.95 for coming up on 20 years now. So you would be correct on that count. Despite how powerful modern computers are, I still notice how much lighter 2.x is than 3.x.
samplatt 5y ago
I just installed 2.95 last night after uninstalling 5.x. 5.x doesn't have [Q] to enqueue within a playlist. I have no idea why anyone would remove such a basic feature... maybe the advent of the "media library" management (at the time a new concept) made them decide to remove it. 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.
meepmorp 5y ago
WinAmp 2 was the last "real" version, before the AOL buyout of Nullsoft took its toll.
krater23 5y ago
I currently use 2.95 and see no reason to update. But I listen rarely mp3's in the last years.
- lazyjeff 5y ago
  Same here, using Winamp 2.95 on a HiDPI screen as my main audio player. 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...

cyber_kinetist 5y ago

For context, here's the new revamped(!) Winamp coming up soon: https://www.winamp.com/ https://www.winamp.com/ 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.)

jmknoll 5y ago
At the bottom of their site, they have about 30 open full time positions, including Sales, Legal, and Finance. Seems strange for a 25 year old media player. Did they just close a big funding round or something?
- WorldMaker 5y ago
  I don't recall the full tumultuous journey, but highlights I recall were Nullsoft (original Winamp creators) towards the end were bought by AOL who did them dirty and then AOL forgot about Winamp as a property entirely for something like two decades through the Time Warner merger then divorce then the Yahoo! merger into "Oath" under Verizon. At some point in spinning Oath back out of Verizon and putting Oath's IP on the chopping block someone found Winamp in an old closet somewhere and sold the "brand" to whoever this new company is that so far as any can tell has zero relationship to the original Nullsoft in any capacity.
  - thedoctor_o 5y ago
    The pure Nullsoft Winamp was from 1997 to mid-1999 with AOL having Winamp under it's ownership until 2013 (technically until mid-January 2014) when it was sold to Radionomy (who then were bought by Vivendi but then bought themselves back under the guise of Audiovalley). 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

0des 5y ago

Somewhat worrying that I can't seem to find the source code for WACUP listed anywhere, checked their website, discord, and github. I'd feel a lot better about using it if I could see the source code. Currently using Audacious with a Winamp Classic skin.

thedoctor_o 5y ago
Then don't use it if you only want to use 100% OSS. 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
- caddywompus 5y ago
  Oh hey! Appreciate the work you've done, thanks for keeping the project alive!
- 0des 5y ago
  Yikes, okay. 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.
  - thedoctor_o 5y ago
    I'm also not trying to be a jerk either but when I'm constantly being told by random people that I have to be OSS when it comes to WACUP that's also not particularly helpful other than introducing more potential work for me to do when there's absolutely no guarantee of a return to that effort. So maybe I'm more terse than I should be about such things but that's also just how I am. 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)

antris 5y ago

The Fatboy Slim album art on the screenshots page... I definitely got taken back :')

Iv 5y ago

But does it whip the llama's ass?

TonyTrapp 5y ago

The WACUP author also discussed the source code leak here a while ago: https://getwacup.com/blog/index.php/2021/04/17/what-does-the-leaking-of-winamps-source-code-mean-for-wacup/ https://getwacup.com/blog/index.php/2021/04/17/what-does-the...

mkoryak 5y ago
Reading that blog and not being familiar with winamp's history after winamp2 (which was the best), it felt like there is a good story there about "dro" and the current owners. Can someone point me to it?
toyg 5y ago
The fact that he points out what is and is not in the leak, might come back to bite him if the owners get very litigious. He should not have looked at it.

hk1337 5y ago

XMMS was a really nice Winamp clone for Linux way back when. Might be a good starting point. http://www.xmms.org/ http://www.xmms.org/

Nursie 5y ago
I liked XMMS, it was very clean. I spent far too long building it for my Sun workstation in about 2004... TIL - Audacious was a fork of XMMS!
xtracto 5y ago
I've been using QMMP myself: https://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/ https://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/. It's another WinAmp clone. 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).
Malakun 5y ago
And QMMp! https://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/ https://qmmp.ylsoftware.com/
andrewshadura 5y ago
Audacious.

zamadatix 5y ago

> 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. 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.

vikingerik 5y ago

Winamp 2.xx was generally the favorite. And there's no reason to talk about it in the past tense -- you can still just use it even now. 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.

ChrisArchitect 5y ago

hm, forgotten about that one. I get why it exists/independent/opensource whatever..... but why does it exist? Far as I can tell the 'official' v5.8 version that's been around for download on the main site and still is for a long time works great. Maybe I've just been using it for so long I don't notice any oddities (or don't need them, it's a music player for godssake), and I guess they've improved interface etc on wacup but....

thesuitonym 5y ago
Well, reading the release notes may answer that question. Some highlights: - 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