Foobar or winamp?

M

Mudman

Veteran XX
I'm a long time winamp user. Since my reformat I haven't installed winamp or anything else for that matter. So which one is it TW, foobar or winamp for my music needs? I already know I like winamp, but does foobar bring anything to the table winamp doesn't?
 
I gave foobar an honest try and I concluded that winamp's media library is much better than what foobar does, the plugins are rather lacking.
 
foobar is great once loaded, but i can't frickin stand that load time. i obsessively close apps and reopen them so i stopped using it for winamp classic skin.
 
They both play music. I'm using bloaty iTunes right now, because I like the podcast management and other stuff. I also have Foobar and Winamp installed, and arbitrarily switch between them. :shrug:
 
Still beta, but they have been good at fixing stuff.

They still need to fix the 100% volume issue which really gets on my nerves. (Volume set to 100% is more like 125%, all distorted and such.)
 
Xcursion said:
Winamp is for people that like bloated software owned by AOL.
Click to expand...

Yes, Nullsoft was bought by AOL. However, it's noone else's fault that you don't know what you're doing but your own.

Winamp is a plugin based program in which all plugins are organized into individual dll's. If you don't want something, delete the corresponding dll (or don't install it on the initial install) and it wont be bloated.
 
songbird looks interesting, may have to check that out.

i use foobar, it runs a lot faster than winamp unless you're using a heavily modified custom setup. i just started running default columnsui setting and it's just fine for me :shrug:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top