Anarcho-Capitalist Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 I always read about how you guys think it's too difficult to use, which is weird considering we all know more than the average computer user. So, what exactly is so hard about using Foobar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Keyboard Cowboy Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 Some people have low self-esteem and a sense of self-loathing. They don't believe they're worthy of love, respect, and a good life. These are the individuals who walk around heavily tattooed, indulging in promiscuous sex, and don't use foobar2000. They'd rather just scrape by with some inadequate music player. Don't try to cajole them into using it, just pity them. :( :wacko:LoL! Wow... really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Anarcho-Capitalist Posted May 17, 2009 Author Share Posted May 17, 2009 LoL! Wow... really? He's joking, but I'm not with the post I just made before this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 HeartsOfWar Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 I tried it in the past, but did not like its spartan look. And although its not difficult to use, I still don't use it because of its appearance, and, IMO, Windows Media Player sounds better. It may be just me, but there is quite a difference in the output sound quality between Foobar and WMP, or even Winamp for that matter. Also, i personally hate the tiny interface and controls of Winamp.This is purely my opinion on the whole issue, not trying to start a flame war or anything... I'm sure someone has better hearing than me, but I just don't understand how people can say one audio player sounds better than another. Not all players are created equal, but the majority of sound differences people hear are strictly due to their differing hardware and whether they've properly configured the hardware. I've also never understood why people entertain the thought of buying expensive computer speakers when they're inferior in every way, and spend only 35 dollars on a sound card or using some cheap on-board card... Bottom line, you can't say one or the other (audio player) sounds better unless you have a true audio setup, and you've turned off all audio signal processing for a true comparison. Even then, what you hear is still only going to be as good as your hardware... Hopefully you're not in this category... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 DrCheese Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 ^I'd go so far as to say that people who use Foobar are much bigger, more appreciative fans of music than users of other players since Foobar's focus is strictly and pain-stakingly centered on the audio aspect of the player rather than any other BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Draconian Guppy Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 ^I'd go so far as to say that people who use Foobar are much bigger, more appreciative fans of music than users of other players since Foobar's focus is strictly and pain-stakingly centered on the audio aspect of the player rather than any other BS. True, but just because it focuses entirely on audio wouldn't kill it to include a couple of nice configs from the development team maybe :) I'm sure someone has better hearing than me, but I just don't understand how people can say one audio player sounds better than another. Not all players are created equal, but the majority of sound differences people hear are strictly due to their differing hardware and whether they've properly configured the hardware.I've also never understood why people entertain the thought of buying expensive computer speakers when they're inferior in every way, and spend only 35 dollars on a sound card or using some cheap on-board card... Bottom line, you can't say one or the other (audio player) sounds better unless you have a true audio setup, and you've turned off all audio signal processing for a true comparison. Even then, what you hear is still only going to be as good as your hardware... Hopefully you're not in this category... I guess comparing audio players is more for the audiophile than the common joe, errr well comparing the sound is anyway. Personally I can't tell a difference sound wise between Foobar and WMP... I can however tell a difference when I hook up altec lansing 5.1 and compare it to my old logitech 2.0 speakers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Anarcho-Capitalist Posted May 17, 2009 Author Share Posted May 17, 2009 Haha, are you for real? Yep. Give me 100 Foobar users and 100 Winamp users and I'm positive you'll find more and significantly bigger fans of music in the Foobar sample. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 +M2Ys4U Subscriber¹ Posted May 17, 2009 Subscriber¹ Share Posted May 17, 2009 If I didn't know not to take you seriously before, you've certainly made me think you shouldn't be taken seriously with this thread now :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Sam Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 Yep. Give me 100 Foobar users and 100 Winamp users and I'm positive you'll find more and significantly bigger fans of music in the Foobar sample. So "fans of music" only use Windows (As Foobar isn't available for OS X, Linux, etc)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 +Frank B. Subscriber² Posted May 17, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted May 17, 2009 ^I'd go so far as to say that people who use Foobar are much bigger, more appreciative fans of music than users of other players since Foobar's focus is strictly and pain-stakingly centered on the audio aspect of the player rather than any other BS. So users of operating systems like OS X or Linux on which Foobar2000 doesn't run are not 'appreciative fans of music' according to your logic. Oook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Anarcho-Capitalist Posted May 17, 2009 Author Share Posted May 17, 2009 So "fans of music" only use Windows (As Foobar isn't available for OS X, Linux, etc)? No, I'm saying that among Windows users, a Foobar user is likely to be a bigger fan of music than a Winamp user. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 brentaal Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 I'd go so far as to say that people who use mpd + ncmpccpp are much bigger, more appreciative fans of music than users of other players since mpd's focus is strictly and pain-stakingly centered on the audio aspect of the player rather than any other BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 »X« Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 ^I'd go so far as to say that people who use Foobar are much bigger, more appreciative fans of music than users of other players since Foobar's focus is strictly and pain-stakingly centered on the audio aspect of the player rather than any other BS. I've never read such drivel. And not just that post, but every one of yours before it. You can't understand why people are intimidated by it you say. Yet when people explain their reasons, you refuse to listen. If we can't customise it we are lazy, if we don't use it we don't appreciate music as much as you and if we prefer WMP or iTunes there is something wrong with us. I don't use foobar because OOB it looks like ass. And I can't be arsed to customise it to get it to "work" right for me. Not to mention installing plugins. As someone said already, foobar is one of those apps that you see in someones screenshot and really want it. If you love it, good for you, but the fact you seem to enjoy bashing anyone who doesnt share your view sums you up quite nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Draconian Guppy Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 Yep. Give me 100 Foobar users and 100 Winamp users and I'm positive you'll find more and significantly bigger fans of music in the Foobar sample. In a weird way, I kinda agree with this :| Edit: _X_ I agree with you as well, it's what I said in my previous posts, they could add a half decent config within the download. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 justlooking Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 These guys are foobar all the way. That's good enough for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Minimoose Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 Some people just want an easy way to listen to their music, not something that takes 2 hours of reading instructions, downloading about 20 different plugins (the right versions) just to get the program in a fuctional state. At least in wmp you just click on your music folder and it does everything for you. I would much rather have that 2 hours of my life to listen to music thanks very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Fagutish Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 Foobar takes practice like everything in life, so if you're too simple minded, weak or ignorant to even try a few times, hey.... your loss smile.gif I like how you guys act as if you actually have very limited free time... rolleyes.gif How come most people can do it and you couldn't? I'd go so far as to say that people who use Foobar are much bigger, more appreciative fans of music than users of other players since Foobar's focus is strictly and pain-stakingly centered on the audio aspect of the player rather than any other BS. I hate this. Why do you have to prove to the world your delusional superiority-complex/need-to-be-part-of-something-exclusive? State the benefits of your preferred software and kindly explain your case. Your aggressive tone will only push people harder against you. This doesn't just apply to just foobar-lovers either, you'll notice this kind of behavior with fanboys of Linux, OS X, XP. Stop and think. Everyone has preferences, comfort zones, different needs/wants. Their unimportant software decisions aren't an acceptable excuse to look down on them. Anybody who posts on a forum isn't spending most of their time productively. Amen. I'm going back to SimCity 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Calum Veteran Posted May 17, 2009 Veteran Share Posted May 17, 2009 ^I'd go so far as to say that people who use Foobar are much bigger, more appreciative fans of music than users of other players since Foobar's focus is strictly and pain-stakingly centered on the audio aspect of the player rather than any other BS. I also completely disagree with this. I am one of the biggest music fans I know of - I adore music, it is my favourite thing in life - even before programming. You could even click on the link to my Last.FM profile (the image in my signature) to see just how often I listen to music, how many artists are in my library and how many times I've listened to them. I've had music on for most, if not all of today. Yet, I still use iTunes. I use iTunes because of how it organises my music and all of the different ways I can edit the information of my music library. Does foobar2000 have support for multiple album artwork images in each track? Does it allow you to edit the time the track starts and stops (to cut out parts of songs you do not wish to hear - like when there is a gap before a hidden track - or parts of songs which shouldn't be there - like the end of Behind Blue Eyes by Limp Bizkit)? Does it let you rate each album as well as the tracks contained within that album? Does it let you organise tracks into different groups as well as stating their genre? Does it allow you to select whether the track is part of a compilation? Does it allow you to select the disc number in the format - X of X (same for the track number)? Does it allow you to select the media kind (Music, Music Video, Video, TV Show, Audiobook) etc explicitly in the tag editor? Does it allow you to select an option which remembers the playback position? Does it allow you to select an option which skips that track when you are shuffling your library? Does it allow you adjust the volume of each track specifically? Also, does it allow you to normalise the volume of all tracks? iTunes does all of these. If foobar2000 does all of these, I may consider using it and not using iTunes, even if it means I have to customise foobar2000 a little bit, but it has to be able to do all of these. Also, how is the iPod touch support and integration in foobar2000? Does it have a homescreen which displays how much charge you have left, how much storage space you have left (and how much is used and what type of media it was used for) and a nice high resolution image of your iPod touch? iTunes does ;) As I say, I am one of the biggest music lovers you would ever meet, yet those are my priorities in a media player and I have never had a problem with the sound quality I hear when using iTunes :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 ViperAFK Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 All my favorite media players are on linux (banshee, amarok, rhythmbox) but I can't even use them because this is my gaming pc and dual booting is fail. Anyway this thread has gotten a bit ridiculous, people listen to music, and organize their music in different ways, one program might be great for one but not for another, stop trying to force your favorite programs on people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 +M2Ys4U Subscriber¹ Posted May 17, 2009 Subscriber¹ Share Posted May 17, 2009 I also completely disagree with this. I am one of the biggest music fans I know of - I adore music, it is my favourite thing in life - even before programming. You could even click on the link to my Last.FM profile (the image in my signature) to see just how often I listen to music, how many artists are in my library and how many times I've listened to them. I've had music on for most, if not all of today. Yet, I still use iTunes.I use iTunes because of how it organises my music and all of the different ways I can edit the information of my music library. Does foobar2000 have support for multiple album artwork images in each track? Does it allow you to edit the time the track starts and stops (to cut out parts of songs you do not wish to hear - like when there is a gap before a hidden track - or parts of songs which shouldn't be there - like the end of Behind Blue Eyes by Limp Bizkit)? Does it let you rate each album as well as the tracks contained within that album? Does it let you organise tracks into different groups as well as stating their genre? Does it allow you to select whether the track is part of a compilation? Does it allow you to select the disc number in the format - X of X (same for the track number)? Does it allow you to select the media kind (Music, Music Video, Video, TV Show, Audiobook) etc explicitly in the tag editor? Does it allow you to select an option which remembers the playback position? Does it allow you to select an option which skips that track when you are shuffling your library? Does it allow you adjust the volume of each track specifically? Also, does it allow you to normalise the volume of all tracks? iTunes does all of these. If foobar2000 does all of these, I may consider using it and not using iTunes, even if it means I have to customise foobar2000 a little bit, but it has to be able to do all of these. Also, how is the iPod touch support and integration in foobar2000? Does it have a homescreen which displays how much charge you have left, how much storage space you have left (and how much is used and what type of media it was used for) and a nice high resolution image of your iPod touch? iTunes does ;) As I say, I am one of the biggest music lovers you would ever meet, yet those are my priorities in a media player and I have never had a problem with the sound quality I hear when using iTunes :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 ceminess Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 I love foobar2000! The only addon I install is minimize to taskbar. Put it on random and just let it go. Its perfect, low on resources, and non-intrusive. I don't need or want any other features. I don't even want a list of my music. I just keep it in my taskbar on random for my whole library and hit the next button on my keyboard if I don't like the song. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 +jamesyfx Subscriber² Posted May 17, 2009 Subscriber² Share Posted May 17, 2009 I think people who fully appreciate music would be at gigs all the time rather than being bothered about some software. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 C++ Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 I personally use Winamp because it runs circles around everything else in terms of sound quality. But let me explain what people mean when they call foobar2000 hard. They don't mean that they cannot figure it out. They mean that it simply isn't worth it. People don't use it for the same reason they don't use Linux. Yes, everything about it is customizable and yes, if you really wanted to, you could set it up to greet you by name and do your taxes every time you open it. But who wants to? There are very few people who care about their media player beyond the sound quality and very few people who don't have real life jobs and commitments much too pressing to afford or justify spending time fiddling with a frickin' media player skin. And even fewer people who possess both of those qualities. Most people prefer things that just work. Many even look to pay extra for just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 ceminess Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 I also completely disagree with this. I am one of the biggest music fans I know of - I adore music, it is my favourite thing in life - even before programming. You could even click on the link to my Last.FM profile (the image in my signature) to see just how often I listen to music, how many artists are in my library and how many times I've listened to them. I've had music on for most, if not all of today. Yet, I still use iTunes.I use iTunes because of how it organises my music and all of the different ways I can edit the information of my music library. Does foobar2000 have support for multiple album artwork images in each track? Does it allow you to edit the time the track starts and stops (to cut out parts of songs you do not wish to hear - like when there is a gap before a hidden track - or parts of songs which shouldn't be there - like the end of Behind Blue Eyes by Limp Bizkit)? Does it let you rate each album as well as the tracks contained within that album? Does it let you organise tracks into different groups as well as stating their genre? Does it allow you to select whether the track is part of a compilation? Does it allow you to select the disc number in the format - X of X (same for the track number)? Does it allow you to select the media kind (Music, Music Video, Video, TV Show, Audiobook) etc explicitly in the tag editor? Does it allow you to select an option which remembers the playback position? Does it allow you to select an option which skips that track when you are shuffling your library? Does it allow you adjust the volume of each track specifically? Also, does it allow you to normalise the volume of all tracks? iTunes does all of these. If foobar2000 does all of these, I may consider using it and not using iTunes, even if it means I have to customise foobar2000 a little bit, but it has to be able to do all of these. Also, how is the iPod touch support and integration in foobar2000? Does it have a homescreen which displays how much charge you have left, how much storage space you have left (and how much is used and what type of media it was used for) and a nice high resolution image of your iPod touch? iTunes does ;) As I say, I am one of the biggest music lovers you would ever meet, yet those are my priorities in a media player and I have never had a problem with the sound quality I hear when using iTunes :) I never understood why someone would want to rate their own music collection? For what? In case you forget if you like a song or not? I can understand why you would want other features you listed, but not everyone wants or needs those features, and some of them bog down a player and add cpu and memory usage. I personally hate itunes! and if foobar2000 had all of those features, I would start looking for a new default music player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Draconian Guppy Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 I never understood why someone would want to rate their own music collection? For what? In case you forget if you like a song or not? :rofl: What get's me is, I rate it too :cry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 ootput Posted May 17, 2009 Share Posted May 17, 2009 I don't like the Black Cat mascot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question
Anarcho-Capitalist
I always read about how you guys think it's too difficult to use, which is weird considering we all know more than the average computer user.
So, what exactly is so hard about using Foobar?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
340 answers to this question
Recommended Posts