the music player that never disappoints, also shout out to the guy who made Giorgia UI skin
Foobar2000
181–190 of 193 posts
Re: Foobar2000
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
There was no store in iTunes when it was released in 2001, and those of us using SoundJam MP knew there would be no further updates so we started using it and enjoyed its bulk metadata editing and album art embedding capabilities, with an interface that was intuitive for managing playlists and music. And scriptable!
It wasn’t until two years later that the store was integrated as part of an update.
Although there was an (Carbon?) OS X version for a while, Winamp was Windows-only from what I knew, so my opinion of it was always coloured by having to use Windows to interact with it, although I used CrossOver on Mac and Mint as well.
Re: Foobar2000
#183I like the concept of directory players. I don't want playlists, my files are arranged in directories just fine.
I use players like 1by1, VUPlayer, Resonic. Straightforward, usable players.
I miss this functionality in foobar, implemented as native, not cumbersome plugins that need a lot of tinkering.
Re: Foobar2000
#184It's kind of strange I have never seen any other player where you can just click on a folder and play music from it. Like two clicks, one on a folder (which loads the list of tracks) and second to start playing this list of course it's doable in any player but not with such ease
Before foobar2k there was an outstanding player named Apollo[1] with almost a perfect UI: basically, just a playlist grid. It supported associating with directories, of course, so playback was also two clicks away. Just checked, it still works great, although, the limited codec support and no scrobbling is a dealbreaker for me. Same reason I had to ditch it years ago. Would love to peek at the source code of that pro…
Hardly ironic. It's not a stretch to say they were right, Spotify is pretty synonymous with digital music even for all of its flaws. (Disclaimer, I don't use it myself.)
Re: Foobar2000
#185I used to use xmplay on windows back in the day.. Anyone remember that one?
I do -- I use WinAmp myself, mostly, but xmplay was updated as recently as 2020 so it's still a thing.
Re: Foobar2000
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
Before foobar2k there was an outstanding player named Apollo[1] with almost a perfect UI: basically, just a playlist grid. It supported associating with directories, of course, so playback was also two clicks away. Just checked, it still works great, although, the limited codec support and no scrobbling is a dealbreaker for me. Same reason I had to ditch it years ago. Would love to peek at the source code of that pro…
Hardly ironic. It's not a stretch to say they were right, Spotify is pretty synonymous with digital music even for all of its flaws. (Disclaimer, I don't use it myself.)
What's ironic is that the tone of that message is pretty positive, even though it comes from an author of a pretty successful freeware media player for a PC. You'd think they should have known better.
Re: Foobar2000
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hardly ironic. It's not a stretch to say they were right, Spotify is pretty synonymous with digital music even for all of its flaws. (Disclaimer, I don't use it myself.)
What's ironic is that the tone of that message is pretty positive, even though it comes from an author of a pretty successful freeware media player for a PC. You'd think they should have known better.
If you liked Apollo then you might like Boom now - https://perkele.cc/software/boom
No scrobbling (that I now of), codecs up to August 2022, and recommended by the maker of Foobar2K as "more minimal, simpler, uncluttered" than F2K.
Re: Foobar2000
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
A remnant of simpler times. Foobar and VLC, any other software that has always worked and remained pretty much the same?
IrfanView. I tried replacing it several times with something slicker-looking, but no other picture viewer is as fast as IrfanView.
I was a fan of AcdSee, currently using DirectoryOpus, never got close yo the feel as in tbose days... so I get it...
Re: Foobar2000
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be honest, while I used and loved Winamp for a long time and it would be nice to have the sources even for a 2.x version, the reason it was popular back in the day was because it was the only one (or close enough). Nowadays there's a million ways to play audio files. Audacious even has a mode that imitates the Winamp aesthetics, and I think it can even load Winamp skins. There's not much value in the Winamp source…
Winamp also had visualizations. It seems that none of the modern players have that.
VLC has 5-6 audio visualizers built-in that you can make fullscreen.
Not sure about anything else being discussed (Audacious, etc) but im guessing there mist be visualizer plugins for foobar.
Re: Foobar2000
#190It's kind of strange I have never seen any other player where you can just click on a folder and play music from it. Like two clicks, one on a folder (which loads the list of tracks) and second to start playing this list of course it's doable in any player but not with such ease
>I have never seen any other player where you can just click on a folder and play music from it. VLC. Right click on folder > Play with VLC media player
yes, but this requires alt-tabbing from VLC first, so more than two clicks.