Talk:Winamp/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Winamp under Vista

I've added some info about how does the aero preview handles winamp, please fix me if i am wrong, but i've uploaded a screenshot to prove it Drk Guy (talk) 22:21, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Version 5.57 release notes says Aero preview compatibility. So I think this can be changed.

Winamp browser

I cant anywhere to find what is the winamp browser what. Do you can to add some information about Winamp browser? I need to know, what is its layout engine (gecko, ie, opera?). Thank you very much and sorry for my bad english. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.176.197.249 (talk) 21:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Probably Internet Explorer running in the background. AOL services don't support other better browsers like Opera —IncidentFlux _{[ TalkBack | Contributions ]} 03:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

"minor change"

Request for vote: include pre 1.0 release info? Some time back, an anonymous deleted 2 paragraphs under the rubric "minor change", without discussing it here. I'm reverting it. Unfortunately, it orphaned an image which 3 people worked on, which was subsequently automatically deleted. --Lexein (talk) 11:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Winamp can read RSS/XML feeds too

Winamp can be used as a fully functional RSS reader/Aggregator, for articles and media. Surprised not to find any mention of that here.—IncidentFlux ^{[ TalkBack | Contributions ]} 14:28, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Winamp no longer whips the llama's ass

The current version of Winamp (5.541) does not contain the demo phrase "Winamp. It really whips the llama's ass." Instead, it says "Winamp. It really whips the llama's animal baa sounds." Have sensitive souls complained, or has Winamp decided to censor itself? Is this notable enough for the article?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:32, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't know what happened, but the old phrase is back. (I've checked in v. 5.621, demo is located at %appdata%\winamp\demo.mp3). Jaho (talk) 01:54, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Overall Updates

I wanted to make some updates to the Winamp page based on the latest version (5.551). Three areas that I'd like to update: explain what new features are in place the latest version, add some external links to official Winamp pages (e.g. link to the developer network), and discuss Online Services. Previously Winamp users/developers could customize/create Skins & Plugins. Now there's a thrid area... Online services. --Mikethellama (talk) 14:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Just to answer this in general: when it comes to software features, relying on company pages alone can lead to tags WP:ADV and WP:NPOV. Best to either wait for, or search for, published reviews and articles. Betanews News _might_ be suitable, but not the blog or forum section. See WP:SOURCES --Lexein (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Article header

"Winamp was first released by Justin Frankel in 1997.[1] Current Winamp development is credited to Ben Allison (Benski) and Maksim Tyrtyshny.[2] Winamp grew from 33 million users in February 2005 to over 57 million users in September 2006.[3][4][5]"

How can it have 33 million users before it first released? by Random user 76.100.137.240 (talk) 21:39, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Read your quote again, then see if you still have a question. If you still do, I think you're having trouble reading numerals. There isn't a single statement in your quote that suggests that there were 33 million users before it was released. 98.211.124.111 (talk) 14:39, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Deletionist

This article has been decimated by someone who couldn't be bothered with citation needed. This person has removed wheat (including images) along with the chaff. I'll be reverting most, if not all, of the destruction. This means that many intermediate edits will be lost. Discuss here, please before I do this. --Lexein (talk) 17:42, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Provide a source for the material and I'll be happy to work with you on it. TNXMan 21:26, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

look. --Lexein (talk) 19:25, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Easter Eggs

• Potential source: Easter Eggs: Software Surprises, David Nagy-Farkas, Abacus Software (April 1997), ISBN-13: 978-1557553263. --Lexein (talk) 13:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Can the specific easter eggs be cited to this book? TNXMan 13:20, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

It says "potential." You want to help? Don't talk to me. Get every image lost as a result of your actions undeleted. I _know_ of one, there are probably more. --Lexein (talk) 19:24, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Derivative works

Only Unagi had a solid citation. Sad to say, the other assertions definitely need a secondary source. And the XMMS claim is just irrelevant to Winamp, because it's simply compatible with Winamp skins. No derivation performed. --Lexein (talk) 21:45, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Deletions

Deletions without discussion or contribution will be reverted. Deletions are lazy and are considered "drive-by". Contributions, such as discussion, "citation needed", rewriting for accuracy, or finding & citing sources, are valid improvements. Discuss. --Lexein (talk) 12:50, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, let's discuss. To quote WP:V,

"The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. The source should be cited clearly and precisely, with page numbers where appropriate, and must clearly support the material as presented in the article."

If I challenge the material, then you are the one who must provide a source in order for it to remain. TNXMan 12:56, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll be removing the material again, pending a response from you with some reliable sources. TNXMan 14:03, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Don't quote a heavily disputed policy in defense of laziness. Contribute. --Lexein (talk) 15:27, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:V is heavily disputed? The edit history of the page says differently. TNXMan 15:37, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Since you invoked it, WP:V#Burden of Evidence, was clearly disputed, because it includes language designed to deter abuse and laziness. And since you brought it up, I'll quote some back at you: "It has always been good practice [for deleters] to make reasonable efforts to find sources oneself that support such [apparently unsourced] material, and cite them." Lest I be accused of wikilawyering, let that speak for me. --Lexein (talk) 17:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Lexein, deleting content is easy, and a lot of content would be lost if Wikipedia was pro deletion, rather than taking the time to look for references and adding them. No point in with arguing with deletionists, since they contribute nothing. IncidentFlux ^{[ TalkBack | Contributions ]} 15:41, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

"Winamp Playlist"

We need to state that the Winamp does not truly list either the title or the filename in the Winamp playlist. The software insists on displaying the artist name at least once before it displays the song. This does not allow one to sort so that the same song by more than one artist is displayed one after the other. Seems that one has to make a no win choice: Winamp which will display the time that a playlist will require to play; and the current version of Windows Media Player which truly displays the song name and will truly sort by song name but refuses to display the time that the playlist will require to play.1archie99 (talk) 01:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

(I edited your 3rd sentence, "one"->"more"). This is interesting. If sorting is the main issue, Winamp has these sort controls:

• in (alt-L) Media Library/Playlists/(particular playlist), use (at bottom of Modern skin) Misc/sort by Title
• in (alt-E) Playlist Editor window, use (menu) Sort/Sort list by Title

Title formatting (for Playlist Editor and current song) can be adjusted in Preferences/Titles/Advanced Title Formatting

Does this address your issue? I hadn't explored that before. Note that WP:NOTMANUAL, so these instructions can't really go in the article... --Lexein (talk) 04:07, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I fixed my comment to what it was before; your attempt to help is appreciated but please note it is not good practice to edit others comments; WP:TPO; WP:TPOC. I tried the tack you seem to be on in the past and recently. I did not seem to be able to get the formulas to work. Unfortunate that the documentation is not as straightforward at that for WMP. It is late in my day; I will attempt once more in the near future; studying your comments first. Otherwise, I will be jumping between the two players.1archie99 (talk) 06:21, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

No prob. Good luck. --Lexein (talk) 11:14, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

BTW this works: %title% - %artist% then the alt-L sugg above works --Lexein (talk) 00:57, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Prior unintended blanking

I now know how that blank occurred in my prior save: Firefox restarted in the middle of my section edit due to a toolbar install. I subsequently saved my (browser-retained) section edit, which became a full page save. Gotta watch that. --Lexein (talk) 04:43, 17 July 2010 (UTC)