Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Foobar2000

foobar2000.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 193 posts

Re: Foobar2000

#161

Post by raxxorraxor »

imiric wrote: post #26

It's great to see that fb2k is still around and well :) It's remarkable how they've kept the same UI since its inception, 21 years ago. It was clean, simple and intuitive back then, and still is today. Same goes for the website, now that I think of it. A true testament that simplicity trumps trend-chasing. It was my main music player after Winamp released the awful version 3.0, and I never looked back. I don't use Wi…

It also just has superior functionality.

Want to mirror your front channels to your back channels? Easily done in foobar2k, while many other media players already fail here, even those whose main task is to do audio output.

Re: Foobar2000

#162

Post by voxic11 »

lproven wrote: post #129
athoscouto wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't consumed audio and video from files for a while now. Streaming has become so convenient (partly because of internet prices and availability) that I don't see myself coming back.

I hear this a lot. I find it always leaves me bemused. The main time I want music is at times when I can't stream: for instance, when travelling, especially when on planes. I specifically want my own music for when I don't have internet. When I do have internet, I mostly listen to digital radio. I have no streaming accounts with anyone, except free accounts. I do not have any payment method set up on my Apple account…

How do you even buy music these days?

Re: Foobar2000

#163

Post by voxic11 »

lproven wrote: post #129
athoscouto wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I haven't consumed audio and video from files for a while now. Streaming has become so convenient (partly because of internet prices and availability) that I don't see myself coming back.

I hear this a lot. I find it always leaves me bemused. The main time I want music is at times when I can't stream: for instance, when travelling, especially when on planes. I specifically want my own music for when I don't have internet. When I do have internet, I mostly listen to digital radio. I have no streaming accounts with anyone, except free accounts. I do not have any payment method set up on my Apple account…

How do you even buy music these days? I know of Bandcamp but its kind of limited in the selection.

Re: Foobar2000

#164

Post by rchaud »

imiric wrote: post #26

It's great to see that fb2k is still around and well :) It's remarkable how they've kept the same UI since its inception, 21 years ago. It was clean, simple and intuitive back then, and still is today. Same goes for the website, now that I think of it. A true testament that simplicity trumps trend-chasing. It was my main music player after Winamp released the awful version 3.0, and I never looked back. I don't use Wi…

> It's remarkable how they've kept the same UI since its inception, 21 years ago.

Easy to do when you don't have bosses breathing down your neck about adding in podcasts and audiobooks, then nudging users into engaging with that stuff first so that they don't have to pay as much to the music rights holders.

Re: Foobar2000

#165

Post by lproven »

voxic11 wrote: post #163
lproven wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear this a lot. I find it always leaves me bemused. The main time I want music is at times when I can't stream: for instance, when travelling, especially when on planes. I specifically want my own music for when I don't have internet. When I do have internet, I mostly listen to digital radio. I have no streaming accounts with anyone, except free accounts. I do not have any payment method set up on my Apple account…

How do you even buy music these days? I know of Bandcamp but its kind of limited in the selection.

Well, anachronistic as it may seem, I buy physical media, and rip them. I know it sounds very 20th century, but it works, you really own the stuff in an irrevocable sort of way, and second-hand CDs and DVDs are really cheap these days. I fill about 75% of a 128GB SD card with MP3s.

I like paper books, too. I have many thousands of them.

Re: Foobar2000

#166

Post by rchaud »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #45
imiric wrote: post #26

It's great to see that fb2k is still around and well :) It's remarkable how they've kept the same UI since its inception, 21 years ago. It was clean, simple and intuitive back then, and still is today. Same goes for the website, now that I think of it. A true testament that simplicity trumps trend-chasing. It was my main music player after Winamp released the awful version 3.0, and I never looked back. I don't use Wi…

Despite somehow liking WinAmp 2 more than WinAmp 3, I could never understand why do people consider WinAMP 3 awful. Nevertheless I just switched to foobar2000 on Windows and DeaDBeeF on Linux because their UIs just are perfectly bullshit-free practical pragmatic tools and I came to feel I want a tool rather than a show.

Winamp 3 with its default "Modern" skin was very sluggish, even on decently specced computers in 2003. If you replaced the default with a Winamp classic skin, it immediately sped up, but defaults are powerful, so most users probably left it as is.

Re: Foobar2000

#167

Post by rchaud »

DidYaWipe wrote: post #142
imiric wrote: post #26

It's great to see that fb2k is still around and well :) It's remarkable how they've kept the same UI since its inception, 21 years ago. It was clean, simple and intuitive back then, and still is today. Same goes for the website, now that I think of it. A true testament that simplicity trumps trend-chasing. It was my main music player after Winamp released the awful version 3.0, and I never looked back. I don't use Wi…

Foobar2000 was always better than WinAmp. WinAmp was the best example of why standard UI affordances evolved.

No, Winamp was the last example of broadly used "appliance" software that wasn't inextricably tied into a megacorp's business model. iTunes and Windows Media Player were both bloated because of the e-store baked into the back end.

Re: Foobar2000

#168

Post by fsckboy »

npteljes wrote: post #136
fsckboy wrote: post #90

foo and bar , and foobar , have meanings and utility that is undermined by people giving them new definitions and polluting our public namespace. Instead, call the project "farting in an elevator" because that's what you're doing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metasyntactic_variable * FOO 3. Used very generally as a sample name for absolutely anything.* https://www.dourish.com/goodies/jargon.html A similar injustice,…

Isn't it similar to how your nickname is fsckboy, cleverly iterating over the well-established fsck utility? Or is that something else, because fsckboy is not a published product in the IT space?

fooboy would be perfectly fine: a doghouse is not a dog. and the namespace for humans is much more "lexically bound" so we don't tend to get confused when multiple people are named John, just as we don't get confused with multiple cases of foo used as a metasyntactic variable; in fact, we expect it, unlike foobar2000 which demands exclusivity.

Does the "2000" in foobar2000 qualify it somehow? No. Do you make sure to say Windows NT 3.1 every time you mention it? no, you say only the qualifying part that makes your point: Windows, or NT, or 3.1 because the term is decomposable. fsckboy does not suggest "decompose me" other than etymologically suggesting "this guy uses unix; this guy doesn't use the gui; this guy is a wheel"

Economists use the term "widgets" in their examples. "Let's say a factory makes widgets, and the cost function is given by..." If you as a professor were to say "let's say a factory makes cars..." you would get responses from the class of "that doesn't make sense! cars blah blah blah" it's very convenient to use a variable that does not come freighted with meaning.

then there's the case of Little Bobby Tables...

Re: Foobar2000

#170

Post by hlandau »

anthk wrote: post #119
hlandau wrote: post #16

foobar2000 is so good, and so unmatched, especially with its plugins ecosystem, I use it for my music playback needs under wine on Linux.

Meh. Audacious + pulseaudio/alsa-plugins >>>>> foobar 2000. That for GUI. If you like CLI, mpd+any UI it's a beast. Mocp if you are a minimalist.

The problem (at least for me) is input format support.

Assorted foobar2000 plugins support every obscure tracker format, every obscure video game music format (.vgz, etc.), and then foo_midi lets you render MIDIs not just with Soundfonts but with whatever VSTi DLLs you like. Also support for music files in ZIP files as well as music files in ZIP files in ZIP files (don't ask). That's hard to compete with.

Post reply on HN