Yeah, read the thread: You're right, it sucks and your PC. But not for me and my Mac, I don't download illegally (not for my conscience or anything, just cause I get my stuff from cd's) And the way it sorts stuff out is perfect for the mac and what I use it for. Everything's central on my HD, easily imported to DVDs and shit, so yeah, sorry it sucks, I think it kicks ass.

Fuck winamp. Its bloaty and its buggy.

www.foobar2000.com

Foobar is the best. Fast, and reliable.

eh, Winamp5 is pretty good. It's way better than 3.

I know a number of people who swear by itunes; admittedly, almost all of them use Macs. I don't think Apple makes inferior software at all, and the Mac is a fine machine. But if they really want the PC crowd to pay attention, they really have to do a better job porting. Maybe they like having 3% of the market share, I don't know.

I'd heard of foobar before, along time ago. I forgot all about it until just now though. I'll am downloading it now though.

But winamp bloated and buggy???? I've never had a problem with winamp. Not even so much as an illegal operation error. And I use it everyday, throughout most of it.--that is unless of course you are talking about winamp3-5 those two I can agree wtih that on. But 5 is certianly a huge update from the shit of 3.


I will post my thoughts on foobar later when I get a chance to use it for abit.

Winamp rapes your sys resources. In XP, on a decent computer, it still takes a few seconds to load. The skins eat your resources, as I say, and both 3 (horrible) and 5 (pretty looking but still horrible) were a burden to use. Foobar is simple, FAST, and without extra fassi-man bullshit like Winamp. It also has killer playlist features. I dont really give a shit how my desktop looks as long as it runs speedily. F U K WINAMP. pace.

p.s tell me what you think of foobar. if i still ran PC i would be onnit like what on what.

OK i just had a huge prob with WA 5 and am going to give it 1 more try just case im not sure if it was due to winamp I say major probs killed all my sound drivers but it might have just been 1 of those windows bugs i will let you know if its winamp though

Man, I really don't see where you get that winamp eats system resources. Winamp and foobar both use the same amount. :tongue:

Anyway, Foobar seems like a pretty darn nice program. But its lack of an onboard volume control, slow loading of new large playlists, no ablitiy to shrink to the system tray no random option, those are some would-be nice features. However, I really do like the resync action foobar gives if it sees an error while reading the track. Very nice.

All in all, I think the programs are about equal.


(Note: this comparison was done against Winamp v2.91 vs. Foobar2000 v0.8)


---this will need some more time to come up with a full opinion.

I don't see it either. Winamp is quick to load; in fact, that's the MAIN reason I have used it over other programs all this time. Bloated? Not if you don't want it to be.

I don't bother with skins, seeing as I rarely actually SEE the interface. And I use the lite version of Winamp 5.0. I suppose if you felt obligated to have all the bells and whistles you'd have something that took more resources.

I got foobar in now, if it didn't go into the system tray it would have lasted a very short time; seeing as that feature is there, I'll keep it around for a while.

Fuck musicmatch. Too slow, and too crappy.



Though winamp is the only mp3 player I can tolerate anyway.