• SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Here’s the story:
    Company buys the rights to Winamp, tries to get the community to do their dev work for free, fails. That’s it.

    The ‘Winamp source license’ was absurdly restrictive. There was nothing open about it. You were not allowed to fork the repo, or distribute the source code or any binaries generated from it. Any patches you wrote became the property of Llama Group without attribution, and you were prohibited from distributing them in either source or binary form.

    There were also a couple of surprises in the source code, like improperly included GPL code and some proprietary Dolby source code that never should have been released. The source code to Shoutcast server was also in there, which Llama group doesn’t actually own the rights to.

    This was a lame attempt to get the community to modernize Winamp for free, and it failed.

    Of course many copies of the source code have been made, they just can’t be legally used or distributed.

    • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 hours ago

      improperly included GPL code

      Shouldn’t that force a GPL release of the rest of the code, at least the bits they had the rights to?

    • IceFoxX@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      The former developers really want to publish it as OSS. This was ignored and the developers gradually dropped out. Then the management decided “anyway, a former developer had a good PR idea, let’s do it” and there was no one left to check the code etc. They just released it and started the shit show.

  • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    10 hours ago

    The FOSS story, yes. But the code is out there. Even the stuff they weren’t supposed to share.

    Can you name any userbase more ready to pirate the shit out of a third-party fork? Maybe the people still using Media Player Classic.

  • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    13 hours ago

    For one is was under a license what not only not Foss but completely violated Github TOS.

    Also the repo had a bunch of code they didn’t own the rights to like the Adobe stuff.

  • arxdat@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I understand the nostalgia surrounding Winamp—I loved it too. But with old versions still available, maybe it’s time to let it rest and look forward. Rather than holding onto the past, we have an opportunity to create new, modern tools that fit our needs today—and we can make sure they’re free and remain open-source from the start. This whole situation offers a valuable lesson: instead of relying on companies or commercial interests, we can build software as a community, ensuring it stays accessible for everyone. With over 8 billion people on the planet and so many resources available, including AI advancements, we’re more capable than ever of creating tools like Winamp—and beyond. I guess I am not understanding what the problem is here, also, someone in this thread has already pointed out that we still have VLC, which IMO works exceptionally well!

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      9 hours ago

      That’s the sad part. If there’s one thing that the open-source community produces an abundance of, it’s definitely text editors, but music players are a close second.

      Previously, we’ve had XMMS as an open-source project that supported WinAmp skins.
      And right now, perfectly actively maintained, there is QMMP.

      I’d bet money that the code quality of QMMP is a lot higher than that of WinAmp. So, if anyone wanted an open-source WinAmp, it was there all along.

      • arxdat@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 minutes ago

        See! I had not heard of QMMP, it looks great, thanks for sharing that :)

      • ProgrammingSocks
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        6 hours ago

        QMMP is great. Personally I don’t care much for Winamp-style music players (Strawberry Music and Tauon Music Box are my favourites right now) but QMMP opens anything I ask it to, has an alright default skin, and is obviously heavily customizable with afaik Winamp skin compatibility. It was time to leave Winamp over a decade ago.

        • daggermoon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          Strawberry is really great. It’s the only music player I use anymore. Only bummer is no DSD support. I get it though. There isn’t enough developers to maintain such a thing.

      • IceFoxX@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 hours ago

        Yep, but I think it’s good for the former dev’s to see what crap the management is making and instead of taking credit, they’re more likely to get a shitstorm.

        Just sad for the work of the dev’s.

  • starshipwinepineapple@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    And it makes no mention that they were modifying and using GPL code prior to making their code “open source”.

    Id argue that this story is not over until the GPL code can be confirmed removed by a third party

  • fin@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    92
    ·
    1 day ago

    If we can synthesize the idea of WinAmp owners, it would sound like, “Please contribute your free labor in an attempt to monetize the app in pursuit of our financial goals.”

    • penquin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’ve made a comment like that somewhere. They wanted free labor to make some money, that’s all. Lol. It was a failed attempt at exploiting people’s emotions.

  • 58008@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    AIMP [Windows/Android] has been my Winamp replacement for ~15 years. I’ve never found a player that comes close to rivalling it.

    P.S. I have no idea what the licence is for AIMP, I just know it’s free and is excellent. You don’t need Winamp.

    • Daddy Kuma@r.nf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      To me, one of the best players for windows along with foobar2000

    • Daemon Silverstein@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      I’ve been using it on Android because of its seamlessly crossfade feature (i.e. the next music/replay gets faded in as the current music is approaching the end). I made some loops with Audacity and it’s the only music player that manages to play them endlessly with no gaps.

    • 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      15 hours ago

      What about jet audio? Is it FOSS? I can’t find anything about that. I used it after Winamp started disappointing with it’s media support.

      • geoma@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        Website states: "It is however not being done as an open source project & there are other options out there if that’s something you need your software to be. It does rely on open source libraries & a number of modified plug-ins for which their changes are being provided to comply with their code licensing requirements.

        Ultimately I don’t want to spend the time to run a properly done open source project when there’s no guarantee of any assistance vs the overhead involved & my time management isn’t great so spending more time on project management isn’t imho a good use of my time."

        I also hold to the view that source code without at least 1 developer is pointless & implies a dead / abandoned project. I do appreciate that it does allow for taking things on if it’s then entered into such a state without any developer(s) attached as I’ve done with some of the plug-ins which has benefited WACUP. So whilst I’m in a position to keep making WACUP I don’t intend on open sourcing all of it & view doing that as the end of my time developing it.

        • Slotos@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          38 minutes ago

          Same weird non-sequiturs chain that foobar2000 author uses.

          They could’ve honestly said “I don’t wanna”, and that would be the end of it.

  • Corroded@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    For those that want some additional details Brodie Robertson created a video on what was happening 3 weeks ago on how things were going into the lead up to this. Here’s the link. It’s 16 minutes long and kind of funny. It shows how mismanaged things were from the beginning