starmanWinamp is not willing to go Open Source
solrizeIs it important? It was a cool program 30 years ago but it’s just a playback UI right?
It’s not the old program anymore, and it already leaked a long time ago. It was obvious that the new one wouldn’t be open.
kirk781The new one is just a web UI with options for streaming music. There were talks of the old original Winamp going open source though, which bought nostalgic memories to many. Eithercase, with so many music players on both Windows and Linux, I doubt Winamp would a niche case to fill.
I wonder how well XMMS would work on mordern Linux
It works quite fine, use it daily. Well, XMMS2 to be pedantic.
Just some shellscripts bound to windows-keys to pause/play and load new files.
But do any of them Whip the Llama’s Ass?
I have the old one (5.x) installed and use it regularly. Is it still available for download anywhere? Would love for that one to be officially open sourced.
There’s WACUP: getwacup.com
Oh, now that is interesting. Thank you for that piece of information!
It’s at best abandonware, but the source will never be released officially as it now belongs to a random megacorp.
It looks like their May 16th tweet stated source code would be made available to developers, and they are clearing up some ambiguity in this new one.
Why would they call the open version ‘openllama’? Isn’t llama that ai model?
"Winamp, it really whips the llama's ass"
The OG llama. Before The Emperor’s New Groove, before Tina in Napoleon Dynamite and before llm’s.
just another devNot before llamas though. They be the most og.
NorgurCease your heresy!
Not before SimCity’s llamas tho.
That's just a lie by the secret llama world government to distract us from whipping their asses.
Or Jeff Minter.
“why would they call the AI llama? Isn’t that an animal?”
Because it has ‘llm’ in it? Makes way more sense than a music player formerly known as Winamp
they always had a llama as a mascot and as part of their slogan
Not always, since the Llama MP3 that came preloaded was introduced somewhere in 1.xx, yet that's still long enough (from 1998 to 2011 or so).
I mean... What contribution would this code actually be to the audio player world at this point?
🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 🏆Does anything else in the audio player world really whip llama asses?
I don't think that you could reproduce the llama ass whipping feature even with all the code available.
I still miss the visualzers.
No need to, check out ProjectM
Love projectm!
And now I’m curious how Winamp actually makes money.
The same ones who still pay for AOL
𝔻𝔼𝕍𝕀𝕃𝕀𝕊ℍWinamp oh winamp…
You still trying to exist even after so much other music player out there like AIMP, QMMP, CLEMENTINE, ELISA, etc…
Maybe back in my childhood days you’re king…but nowadays nah…
You still trying to exist even after so much other music player out there like AIMP, QMMP, CLEMENTINE, ELISA, etc…
Maybe back in my childhood days you’re king…but nowadays nah…
You know you only need one period to end a sentence, right?
Need? We’re talking winamp… We are far beyond need
This does not whip the llama’s ass.
It might wipe it though.
No, it teased that llama’s ass.
Ha ha ha, playing your cards close. Only three steps away from profit.
LainTrainJust use WACUP
Even outside of this obviously either clueless or AI-fabricated post, I’m still not convinced that it’ll be OSS, in the way that we expect it to be. The phrasing used in announcement leads me to believing that they’ll use some license, that allows them draconian control over the source. It’ll be “open” as in being able to see it, but not really fork, or meaningfully contribute.
Reverse engineer it.
Make an open source version that does the same.
Ai now makes it possible, since ai generated content is not copyright able
There’s countless desktop music players out there, so there’s no real need to reverse engineer it
And it’s not a particularly interesting application anyway. I’d only want to hack on it for nostalgia, and if there are any barriers to doing that, I’ll just use a different app.
WinAmp making their source code ‘source available’ instead of open source, and then dropping this phrase:
The release of the Winamp player’s source code will enable developers from all over the world to actively participate in its evolution and improvement.
Yeah I don’t think so
Yup, as much as I like Grayjay, I’m not going to help development much because it’s “source available” instead of open source. There was an annoying bug I wanted fixed, and I was willing to go set up my dev environment and track it down, but they don’t seem interested in contributions, so I won’t make the effort.
Likewise for WinAmp. The main benefit to it being “source available” is that I can recompile it and researchers can look for bugs. That’s it. They’re not going to get developers interested.
Even if they accept patches, contributing still sounds like a bad deal. It’s free labor for some company. FOSS at minimum means the right to fork, precisely what “source available” seeks to deny.
Leaving aside the question of winamp vs comparable programs, does anyone even care about desktop music players any more? I’m a throwback and use command line players, but I thought the cool kids these days use phones for stuff like that.
I understand there is some technical obstacle to porting Rockbox to Android, but idk what it is and haven’t tried to look into it.
sorghumI look at ‘source available’ software as the right to review the code yourself to ensure there’s no malicious behavior, not for community development.
You mean if you build it yourself? I guess that is something, but it is still conceivable to sneak stuff in. Look at that xzlib backdoor from a few weeks ago.
xavier666Is there any way to verify that the product in deployment is built from the same source? I’m guessing hash values but I still think it can be faked.
Yep. I will happily contribute to something with community ownership that I believe in. I will not, under any circumstances, provide free labor to a private entity.
It’s simple. They want the free labor provided by the community with the ability to keep all of the profits they can potentially reap from said labor.
What are some projects which have “source available”? Can someone get the source and upload or will it violate some NDA? And what kind of licence is associated with this?
KevinUnreal Engine is a major example, you get access to a private repo containing the engine’s source code but you’re bound by an agreement regarding what you can do with it IIRC
For example terraform changed their license to a non open-source license, and everyone hated it. Then a fork was created, which used the code before the license change which was still licensed under an open source license. The fork “OpenTOFU” is now ‘owned’ by the Linux Foundation
opentofu.org/…/opentofu-announces-fork-of-terrafo…
Same for redis, there is also a fork called Valkey now, which is also ‘owned’ by the Linux Foundation:
OpenTofu Announces Fork of Terraform | OpenTofu
Two weeks ago, HashiCorp announced they are changing the license to all their core products, including Terraform, to the Business Source License (BSL). In an attempt to keep Terraform open source, we published the OpenTofu manifesto, and the community response was huge! Over 100 companies, 10 projects, and 400 individuals pledged their time and resources to keep Terraform open-source. The GitHub repository for the manifesto already has over 4k stars, and the number is growing quickly!
Oooooh they were just looking for free labor! Pass
Guess I’ll stick with foobar!
Milkdrop even works in foobar!
Same… I’ve had Foobar set up the way I like for about a decade now.
Been wanting to flip to the x64 version, but USF components (N64 music) doesn’t play.
InterSynthWhy would you want to switch? Legitimate question. 32-bit version seems to be working just fine, I doubt a music player needs the extra juice a 64-bit version provides.