thedoctor_o

4 ms·

1.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
I used to do plug-ins because it scratched an itch to code & provide things that'd be of use to others which when you've got a job to pay for that free time then it's less of an issue. Also the time of winamp & the pl
2.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
There were winamp3 / modern 5.x skins which were freeform in nature so could be all sorts of shapes or not depending on what the skinner wanted it to be like. With 5.x still supporting the fixed form classic / 2.x skins as webamp
3.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
They were never going to remove that as this is all about only them benefiting from free dev resources.
4.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
I didn't see anything wrong with asking about it & I as don't really use HN I'm not sure of what the expectations, etc are on here. So imho its all good from my view point.
5.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
They're very unlikely to have that as I don't remember it falling under the remit of things to be collated when things were sold from aol to what now calls itself "winamp" - they primarily got a stripped down 5.666 &
6.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
It was either sell it & shoutcast or kill both off since aol in 2013 was changing & there's lots of other projects under them at that time which were killed off instead of what was thought to be a better option to keep it going
7.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
They dumped the prior dev team over a year ago (the ones that added the nft plug-in & fanzone crap) & it is mostly a ploy to get a free dev team as was speculated when the whole "source available" thing got announced 4 mon
8.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
They've worded it just as they intended imho (ignoring the confusion over fork aspect) as it's how to ensure that they're still in charge & to prevent anything derivative as they really don't like that based on prior
9.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
It's just a habit I have when I'm replying to things so I'll try to remember to avoid doing it on here.
10.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
The history section just above the prior properties section is what's now the case with winamp & shoutcast under unrelated organisations nowadays. Though it's all a bit murky as radionomy & audiovalley were the same top pe
11.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
llama group / "winamp" don't own shoutcast anymore as that was all sold off a year or so ago to azerion as part of changing audiovalley into llama group. -dro
12.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
Those names were some of the original devs & they're the ones who put it in the easter egg on the about dialog that it relates to as a hacker-like joke. The source code is what aol sold on as a stripped down copy of 5.666 & the
13.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
That'd mean they'd have to do more work then necessary & there'd at most only ever be what went back to the stripped down 5.666 code deliverable they got after it was sold on from AOL at the start of 2014 (was looked into
14.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
What has been "provided" is the stripped down 5.666 source bundle given to radionomy when sold on from AOL & the end result of their iterations up to the 5.9.2 release. So it's made up of the however many years of the 1.x
15.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
No legit project could ever make use of the leaked source code even if it was from just before the end of the pre-sale AOL era so the person who did that never actually helped anyone & imho just hindered things. I can't use it for
16.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
source available is not the same as open source nor have any terms been provided on what that'd actually be other than it's seemingly just about them getting a free dev team or looking to be doing some good from an investors view
17.
by thedoctor_o 2y ago
Because they primarily wanted shoutcast (ironic since they sold that off last year & got played in the process of doing all of that) which meant taking winamp with it. It's all a mess now but most care not for that and just see tha
18.
by thedoctor_o 4y ago
I had been doing that much more early on along with replacing some of the plug-ins & dlls. After a point the reality dawned that I was replacing so much that I was on the road to making my own player. Also how things have gone with the
19.
by thedoctor_o 4y ago
A feature that Winamp has had since September 2005... -dro
20.
by thedoctor_o 4y ago
Most of the crashes tend to be due to the parts re-used from 5.666. Also it's a preview build (aka public beta) so it can & will be unstable. As for what place it has, I'm going to still make it because I've very clearly
21.
by thedoctor_o 4y ago
It's a gradual reimplementation whilst using some of the pre-compiled 5.666 exe / dll (how much depends on the build being used) with the end goal for WACUP to not require the 5.666 files, be plug-in compatible & it's own
22.
by thedoctor_o 5y ago
No offence taken. I would just rather than waiting around for those many willing devs (most of which seem to be web devs rather than native client devs from my past 8yrs experience) to appear I've instead put my time & effort into
23.
by thedoctor_o 5y ago
It is going to end up as a clone (as per the banner text on the site) but when I started out I didn't expect the lot that owned Winamp to fuck it up so much & abandon it. Every build uses less of the pre-compiled exe/dlls that
24.
by thedoctor_o 5y ago
It seems that there's a reasonable implication of nft's or other aspects of the web3.0 stuff based on what's been found recently -> https://www.reddit.com/r/winamp/comments/soqig1/if_you
25.
by thedoctor_o 5y ago
5.666 was the last full release of 'classic' Winamp. What is currently offered is an incomplete 5.8 beta that's "not an on-going project" (which is what was stated on their website for that download for over 3 years
26.
by thedoctor_o 5y ago
What revenue stream? There's nothing from pro licenses now as that was stopped prior to the sale from AOL & thankfully it doesn't seem like they've been forcing in-client adverts (though they'd talked about doing it)
27.
by thedoctor_o 5y ago
The complication is that what's been leaked just can't be used by anything trying to be legit because it was not released in any official manner & so it's license isn't at all clarified even though it's a pre-re
28.
by thedoctor_o 5y ago
AIMP misses the boat on the sort of Winamp plug-ins I still want to have supported whilst not using an actual Winamp itself (as is now the aim for WACUP). Sure it's an option but a limited sub-set of Winamp 2.x era plug-ins isn't
29.
by thedoctor_o 5y ago
It pre-dates the 5.666 release & is of no use to any project trying to do things correctly i.e. whoever did (I have my suspicions) basically shafted a load of projects that could have made legitimate benefit. -dro
30.
by thedoctor_o 5y ago
You've already got an open source Winamp if you're using the likes of xmms, qmmp, Audacious or anything else that effectively loads classic style skins (not that they tend to get it spot in) so does it really matter what the state

More ›