• 0

Better than Foobar or Winamp?


Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Foobar is probably the most useful audio player out there. It also has amazing skinning support that allows people like me to get right into making skins. I made my first within minutes and it actually looked good and worked well.

I use iTunes for some reason. ;) Used to use Fb2k 24/7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Nahhh... It sucks 41 MB out of my memory when I add my whole music library in it.. Opening it takes forever.. I'll stick to my iTunes for now...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Nahhh... It sucks 41 MB out of my memory when I add my whole music library in it.. Opening it takes forever.. I'll stick to my iTunes for now...

during my testing of apollo, i hit over 150MB used... i had just over 12000 songs in the playlist..... also used over 30% cpu...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Wow, foobarlooks sucks compared to skins with Winamp or Windows Media Player. Foobar2000 is nice and minimal, and packed with more features than Winamp, but the lack of volume control without going into the option menu is odd. Is there a way you can put volume control in the toolbar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Um well, when you have near 10,000 songs in the playlist, i could imagine how it'd take up a ****load of memory. Not to mention i just tried adding only 2,000 at once and it took forever to load them, and eventually crashed twice before working.

Winamp opens all 5,500 of mine in less than 2 seconds and still uses only 10-12 megs of memory :D :yes:

edit: just tried it actually, Winamp 5.02 with 5,457 songs in the playlist, using modern skin, 6.8 megs of memory :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Wow, foobarlooks sucks compared to skins with Winamp or Windows Media Player. Foobar2000 is nice and minimal, and packed with more features than Winamp, but the lack of volume control without going into the option menu is odd. Is there a way you can put volume control in the toolbar?

sometimes one really gets annoyed by ppl not knowing what they should before making a statement thats not true.

foobar was never made to have a "skin". this is something the foocommunity has brought to the users, not the coder himself. and since its still in development, you wont find that many skins around yet, im sure there will be plenty to satisfy any kind of user.

you will find a nice little taskbar plugin at http://mujweb.cz/www/steelspace/foobar.htm

tbar_foo.gif

which will take care of the most common issues of playback with foobar. there are other than this one a numerous other plugins you can use to enhance foobar looks and functions.

and why dont you do it simple for volume control, do as me, i use a global key (shift+ num+ and num-) to raise and lower the volume. very practical and very neat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

why you people say that apollo is old and abandoned? its latest update was in this year, this month

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Apollo sound quality does seem to be nice, but I'll stick to fb2k. I myself came from Winamp after using it for like 4 years. Just a month ago I went to fb2k and gave it a try once again and stayed with it since.

For those who don't know, you can get foo_tunes which is a iTunes-like GUI for fb2k. It has some neat stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Apollo sound quality does seem to be nice, but I'll stick to fb2k. I myself came from Winamp after using it for like 4 years. Just a month ago I went to fb2k and gave it a try once again and stayed with it since.

For those who don't know, you can get foo_tunes which is a iTunes-like GUI for fb2k. It has some neat stuff.

any screenshots about this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.