Which do you prefer... and most of all why? Personnaly I like Winamp 2 better because it's less cumbersome and does all the things winamp 3 does AFAIK except the video which is crappy in WA3 anyway... Even compared to microcraps MP

(yeahaa, first thread in AB Galore )

Have to admit the only version of WinAmp I ever used was some 2.xx which came with Netscape 4.7. After that, never anymore, so I can't really judge version 3. 2 was a decent player, but well - it's spyware, who would use something like that?

Spyware? What do you mean, my Adaware has never ever found even the slightest hint of spyware in winamp...

From what I've read, it includes a program called 'cddb' which looks up information on your system. But as I said - I didn't use it anymore, so I never really checked thoroughly.

cddb doesn't activate if you tell Winamp that you don't have an active Internet-connection... It's just a service to get the titles of your Audio cd's without having to enter them all manually so turning it off doesn't really matter... Turning it on would be unwise however... But it doesn't really count as spyware IMHO because it gives you the choice to use it or not... Unlike that Gator-crap which infested audiogalaxy in the end...

It gives you the choice, yes, but you know as well as I do that 99.999999% of all users will turn it on in the naive thinking it would do them something good

Yes, well that's their problem... If they are to lazy or naive to check it out decently, they don't deserve better in my opinion... 99.999999999% is also too ignorant to be aware of spyware as a whole... Not that spyware should be allowed to exist but it does so it's up to us (the End-user) to protect ourself from it...

That's a pretty egoist point of view. You might be able to 'protect yourself', yet you support programs which are designed to cheat people. Seeing how successful spyware-infested programs are (Kazaa anyone?), why should any company not apply those 'standards'? The only way to fight the whole phenomenon of spyware is not to use programs which include it - no matter if you are able to disable / block it yourself.

Not using programs with spyware might work if the everyday Joe would be aware of the problem but do you really believe that at any 1 point in history their has been a global boycot against a piece of software? I don't think I should stop using a perfectly good mp3-player if not using it wouldn't make the slightest difference except that I would be deprived of a good mp3-player... What mp3-player do you use then?

Determinism now I'm using Noatun. It's playing music, has a playlist and an equalizer. That's all I need.

Edited by Mr Creosote at 19:02 on September, 06th 2002

Checked it and as far as I can see it didn't have any decent dsp-plug ins so that's one con for zero pro's

DSP plug-in? What exactly are you using your player software for? I'm just running it in the background playing some normal tunes. If I want a full-sized stereo, I'm... putting a CD in my stereo

As for 'zero pros' (what is the apostrophe doing there in your post?), what about not spyware?

like I said, it's only spyware when you allow it to be... And my pc is my stereo so...

Another pro: it can make coffee (taken info from its official website - didn't try it myself yet...).

You got me curious: what do you need DSP support for?

1) The site states that it can't make coffee, but you could build a plugin that makes this possible... but Winamp has a comparable, if not better plugin architecture, so that's not really a pro is it?
2) DSP plugins for Winamp are just sound processing plugins, such as filters and better-than-standard equalizers... apart from DFX (spyware!) there are some very solid DSP plugins such as Enhancer, which definitely improves the potential of any amplifier and compensates for the high frequency fidelity loss which is so typical to mp3 compression

1) It is - because you will not be sued if you make a plugin for Noatun, unlike if you do the same for WinAmp (come on, has anyone ever heard of AOL allowing others to screw with their software?)
2) Better equalizers? hehehehehe, that is all?

1) I don't know where you got your info but it is okay to make as many winamp-plug-ins as you like... You can even post them at their official site (which supports Opera unlike the Noatun-site )so...

2) These equalizers aren't just enhanced versions of the classic 10 Band-equalizer but can have very different functions indeed. eg. Harmonic Bass, Harmonic Treble, ambience and resonance, etc... So it isn't about better equalizers but about more functionality

1) I told you - AOL. Have you ever met anyone who has actually made a plugin for WinAmp? Who tells you these aren't all 'official AOL quality'?

2) I don't really see the need for this, especially since it's contradicting your own initial statement about WinAmp 3 being too 'cumbersome'. But each to its own I guess... meaning: I'll let you continue pretending to yourself you need these 'upgrades' and I'll let you continue imagining they make a difference

1) Who tells you they ARE? Why would AOL go through the trouble of making up imaginary plugin authors and make homepages for them on servers across the world? And if you are that paranoid, you could apply the same reasoning to the people who make Noatun...

2) I think WA3 is 'cumbersome' because it uses more system resources by default, and has a bunch of extra's such as the 'thinger' which i don't really care for... although a WA2 plugin also increases the use of resources, you have the choice to install certain components or not... and this has nothing to do with pretending... you just d/l one, install it, and if you like and hear the difference, keep it... if you don't like it, you can always get rid of it

1) I don't know if you see the seriousness of the situation: WinAmp belongs to AOL! AOL! A..... O..... L! What is so unclear about that?

2) Yes, you can get rid off it. But your hard drive and system has already been scanned and the data has been sent