"Winamp will open up its code for the player used on Windows, enabling the entire community to participate in its development," said the company. "This is an invitation to global collaboration, where developers worldwide can contribute their expertise, ideas, and passion to help this iconic software evolve."
https://about.winamp.com/press/article/winamp-open-source-code
Headline says "Dec 16", so I googled for mentions. Nothing. I assume it is just a mishap for "May 16"? If the news has been up for five months without anyone noticing, it would be quite telling about what Winamp isn't anymore.
Also telling, it must be deliberate how unclear they are on whether the source will be open indeed, or whether they merely use the "open" buzzword for an "invitation to see the source and work for free for us".
Winamp will remain the owner of the software and will decide on the innovations made in the official version"
I predict Winamp will boldly go nowhere. Way too little, way too late, imho. Kinda sad because I remember when Winamp was a godsend.
@spoon Hi
what a beautiful news , a legendary audio player
may I ak you if WACUP is the open source evelution ?
just because english is not my native language , and seems even in preview ,seems the new winamp evolution
thanks
Well, according to many (here (https://www.osnews.com/story/139715/winamp-to-open-up-its-source-code/) for example), the problem is the license that will be chosen for sources release: it'll not be FOSS very likely - since they consciously dribbled the "open source" term in this announcement - but proprietary, so this sounds a bit like "our software is definitely drowning, is anyone interested in relaunching it (for free) ?"
Nowadays it would be MUCH MORE interesting to have the foobar source code (under a FOSS license), IMHO.
Winamp is not open-sourcing its code. As this misconception has been circulating, it's important to set the record straight. The current owner, Llama Group, has plans for the app that are not open-source compatible. Instead, as Winamp CEO Alexandre Saboundjian said, "Winamp will remain the owner of the software and will decide on the innovations made in the official version." The sort-of open-source version is going by the name FreeLLama. While Winamp hasn't said yet what license it will use for this forthcoming version, it cannot be open source with that level of corporate control.
~ https://www.zdnet.com/home-and-office/home-entertainment/winamp-is-not-going-open-source-heres-what-it-is-doing-and-why/
https://about.winamp.com/free-llama
Winamp is not open-sourcing its code. As this misconception has been circulating, it's important to set the record straight. The current owner, Llama Group, has plans for the app that are not open-source compatible. Instead, as Winamp CEO Alexandre Saboundjian said, "Winamp will remain the owner of the software and will decide on the innovations made in the official version." The sort-of open-source version is going by the name FreeLLama. While Winamp hasn't said yet what license it will use for this forthcoming version, it cannot be open source with that level of corporate control.
~ https://www.zdnet.com/home-and-office/home-entertainment/winamp-is-not-going-open-source-heres-what-it-is-doing-and-why/
https://about.winamp.com/free-llama
That
writer appears to neither know the term "source-available", nor understand what "open-source" means or entails.
https://github.com/WinampDesktop/winamp
Spammers are abusing the issues section presumably not happy with the somewhat restrictive license. :D
4 . Contributions
Contribution to Project: You are encouraged to contribute improvements, enhancements, and bug fixes back to the project. Contributions must be submitted to the official repository and will be reviewed and incorporated at the discretion of the maintainers.
Assignment of Rights: By submitting contributions, you agree that all intellectual property rights, including copyright, in your contributions are assigned to Winamp. You hereby grant Winamp a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use, copy, modify, and distribute your contributions as part of the software, without any compensation to you.
Waiver of Rights: You waive any rights to claim authorship of the contributions or to object to any distortion, mutilation, or other modifications of the contributions.
5. Restrictions
No Distribution of Modified Versions: You may not distribute modified versions of the software, whether in source or binary form.
Official Distribution: Only the maintainers of the official repository are allowed to distribute the software and its modifications.
So who's up for contributing something meaningful? :))
Is that the "owners" who run that repository? If not, it should be removed.
https://github.com/WinampDesktop/winamp/issues/6
Edit: Apparently it is. Winamp's "CTO". (https://github.com/jfmauguit)
Does it implement any real technological know-how anyway that isn't present across other players at this point, like foobar2000, strawberry, mpv, et cetera?
Yes, it does for sure, that is why its still so popular.
Yes, it does for sure, that is why its still so popular.
Is it anything more substantial than skins? There's a plugin system which might be valuable, but surely if there was a killer feature that winamp or a plugin provides someone would have implemented it elsewhere by now.
Swiney snout smells sarcasm's sweet scent.
does this include winamp aac encoder? that'd be something
Swiney snout smells sarcasm's sweet scent.
Ah yes. I must have a cold today
Is it anything more substantial than skins? There's a plugin system which might be valuable, but surely if there was a killer feature that winamp or a plugin provides someone would have implemented it elsewhere by now.
Nostalgia is the feature :D
(and almost everybody fails to implement such thing :P)
> does this include winamp aac encoder? that'd be something
https://github.com/WinampDesktop/winamp/tree/9c7f91496c56738fd707905f257643b792c05bb9/Src/external_dependencies
nothing relevant in external dependencies
https://github.com/WinampDesktop/winamp/tree/9c7f91496c56738fd707905f257643b792c05bb9/Src/Plugins/Encoder/enc_fhgaac
here is only interface between encoder
that's all I found
> does this include winamp aac encoder? that'd be something
https://github.com/WinampDesktop/winamp/tree/9c7f91496c56738fd707905f257643b792c05bb9/Src/external_dependencies
nothing relevant in external dependencies
https://github.com/WinampDesktop/winamp/tree/9c7f91496c56738fd707905f257643b792c05bb9/Src/Plugins/Encoder/enc_fhgaac
here is only interface between encoder
that's all I found
appreciate the effort man, thanks
The encoder seems to be there as a MSVC library. As well as many other goodies. Complete and utter clownshoes all around. The circus is in town as the issue reports suggest, toot toot!
i've never seen a more rule-violating github repo than this.
i've never seen a github repo with more spammed issue threads than this.
i've never seen a github repo being protested by its open-source community at large owing to its *license* than this.
namesake company had every resource at their disposal to nail this and they just... didn't.
The encoder seems to be there as a MSVC library.
Could you share a link / path to the folder?
It Really Whips the Llama's Ass
It's animal cruelty.
It Really Whips the Llama's Ass
It's animal cruelty.
Flogging a dead
horse llama.
The encoder seems to be there as a MSVC library.
Could you share a link / path to the folder?
Seems the idiots in charge did some cleaning. The very initial commit (which I acquired), had a static FHG AAC encoder. Likewise for the MP3 decoder.
Seems the idiots in charge did some cleaning.
GitHub is anti-cleanness 8)
https://trufflesecurity.com/blog/anyone-can-access-deleted-and-private-repo-data-github
Winamp will remain the owner of the software and will decide on the innovations made in the official version"
I predict Winamp will boldly go nowhere. Way too little, way too late, imho. Kinda sad because I remember when Winamp was a godsend.
I'm using the refreshed Winamp now and thoroughly enjoying Milkdrop. To each their own!
speaking of the small spectrum analyzer thing, isn't the frequency scaling used by this part in Winamp just a glorified Mel scale? I've recently recently made a Desmos graph (https://www.desmos.com/calculator/5ty9w849ma) about this
The encoder seems to be there as a MSVC library.
Could you share a link / path to the folder?
Seems the idiots in charge did some cleaning. The very initial commit (which I acquired), had a static FHG AAC encoder. Likewise for the MP3 decoder.
wow, interesting.
anyway, a little too late I guess, even ignoring the legality perspective, FDK is practically good enough for most use cases including Bluetooth; also for Bluetooth there's zero chance FHG would be (easily) used anyway in the timespan where it matters (and new BT codecs are eventually coming).
Here is the encoder: LOL
https://github.com/WinampDesktop/winamp/blob/9c7f91496c56738fd707905f257643b792c05bb9/Src/Plugins/Encoder/enc_fhgaac/mp4FastAAClib.lib
Wonder how legal would it be to change the wrapper CLI encoder around the Winamp one to use this encoder directly.....
Here is the encoder: LOL
https://github.com/WinampDesktop/winamp/blob/9c7f91496c56738fd707905f257643b792c05bb9/Src/Plugins/Encoder/enc_fhgaac/mp4FastAAClib.lib
Wonder how legal would it be to change the wrapper CLI encoder around the Winamp one to use this encoder directly.....
It's not the source code though is it?
What i see looks like a compiled code
Also: https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/25f828a9d5764d4f4ee1027a18bc199c16f426a42dff95e34a60ffb15a7909fa/details
The owners of WinAmp have just deleted their entire repo one month after uploading the source code to GitHub. Lots of source code, and quite possibly, not all of it theirs. The deletion happened soon after The Register enquired about the seeming inclusion of Shoutcast DNAS code and some Microsoft and Intel codecs...
~ https://www.theregister.com/2024/10/16/opensourcing_of_winamp_goes_badly/
Still plenty of forks if people want it. I certainly do not. :P
whoa, didn't expect that they'd just go and wash their hands of this whole "Winamp goes open source!" PR disaster. RIP.
Still plenty of forks if people want it. I certainly do not. :P
Same, I most certainly do not have the initial commit with all the proprietary encoders and things :)
whoa, didn't expect that they'd just go and wash their hands of this whole "Winamp goes open source!" PR disaster. RIP.
Its not Nullsoft, so whats to be expected? Of course the current owners will wash their hands. At no point did they hire a copyright lawyer who knew how to code to vet the source code. Those sort of people especially in large organisations certainly exist.
This repository surely doesn't have forked it either: https://github.com/RealMCoded/winamp-how-bout-i-fork-anyway
I don't understand why an old player like Winamp is so important. No one really needs the source codes. And people keep bringing it up as if it's so important. There are countless open source and closed source players. Just use one.
I don't understand why an old player like Winamp is so important.
Because some of us here started out way back in the original Winamp community; it's simply our history. Indeed, I consider foobar2000 to be the evolved offspring of winamp.
Correct. foobar2000 started as an answer to Winamp's....BS at the time. Why invest time in working on something when you can make your own from scratch to fix said problems?
Many things, if not *all* things I do is like that. I code because I know the powers that be either cannot be bothered to do it right, or cannot do it right either.
I don't understand why an old player like Winamp is so important. No one really needs the source codes.
History. Even if its full of jank.
There are countless open source and closed source players. Just use one.
Likewise can be said about many projects in software. The answer is still
no. Every single bit of software, how jank it may be, has a time and place.
I am not a bigot or fanatic about anything. If a software is good and works for me, I use it, if it is bad or useless, I don't use it. It's 2025 and the bar is much higher now.
Also, everyone agrees that Winamp was very successful for its time. Even now, it is at least much better than something like Foobar2000.
Also, everyone agrees that Winamp was very successful for its time. Even now, it is at least much better than something like Foobar2000.
I mean, with one of your first posts you obviously make your first steps in trolling, so be it... but "better" depends heavily on the important individual aspects of the software. Converter (chains), file mover/renamer/tag editing in Winamp was/is not nearly as sophisticated as in fb2k.
I mean, with one of your first posts you obviously make your first steps in trolling, so be it... but "better" depends heavily on the important individual aspects of the software. Converter (chains), file mover/renamer/tag editing in Winamp was/is not nearly as sophisticated as in fb2k.
I have no intention of trolling. However, if you perceive opinions that seem different to you in this way, that's your problem. But we still have similar thoughts about Winamp and foobar2000. Unfortunately, I could never like foobar2000. Sorry.
Unfortunately, I could never like foobar2000. Sorry.
I have to ask, (well, someone had to.)
Why?
This topic is about Winamp being open source. Without going too far into the subject, I can only say that it is a matter of preference. I didn't say foobar2000 is terrible. I just said that there might be better solutions and that's why I don't prefer it.