and just because Winamp is dead to you (and using a Winamp clone with limited Winamp plug-in support) is what you want to do, that doesn't mean those of us who still prefer Winamp cannot use that.Īnd that screenshot is a poor representation of things as it shows that AIMP hasn't bothered to do a simple thing of adding the Winamp skinned window api support (which i find disturbing for a player which is so heavily skin based) which is something that goes back to Winamp 2.9x over a decade ago.
talk about double-standards.Īnd i would love to see data to prove your audio-quality statement since if the foobar2000 author says there's no tangible difference between it and Winamp when using the same output method, i find it hard to believe your statement (and i noticed no difference the last time i tried AIMP).Įither way, you should use what you want to use (which seems to be AIMP) and those who want to use something else (be that Winamp, VLC, foobar2000, MPC, etc etc) should be able to do just so without being bashed / forced into using something they a) don't like, b) don't want and / or c) don't care for (as the tone of your last few posts has been). does that sound fair enough? as the last i checked, AIMP keeps adding things and doing what you're saying Winamp shouldn't do. Then you should use AIMP and let those of us who want to keep using Winamp to use it as we want to do so.
0 kommentar(er)
