Winamp 5 vs. iTunes 4.5

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2004-04-28 09:20pm

Alrighty, with the release of iTunes 4.5, I can finally have lossless audio goodness with iTunes on Windows. But I've used Winamp for a long time ... so, I'll put up a poll. Which do you find to be a better music player? I don't care about video -- I have other plays for that.

Please only answer if you've used both.

EmperorMing · Post by **EmperorMing** » 2004-04-29 01:03am

If iTunes can access the same type of internet media as Winamp (internet TV and radio), then it could be an interesting comparison.

Otherwise, no contest - Winamp wins.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-04-29 02:07am

EmperorMing wrote:If iTunes can access the same type of internet media as Winamp (internet TV and radio), then it could be an interesting comparison.

He's interested in the music jukebox capabilities of each application. Anyway, iTunes does have streaming radio channels (and they're pretty good, actually). I can't for the life of me comprehend what's with Windows developers and integrating every possible function into a given application. I wouldn't be surprised if Windows Media Player 10/Whatever-They're-Going-To-Call-It came with a built-in HTML editor, for example.

iTunes is a music jukebox, first and foremost. I'm not sure why 4.5 plays QuickTime trailers, but it's pretty much a few lines of code since iTunes already uses the QuickTime API anyway. So there's really no bloat there. The music capabilities and store integration are nice.

But internet TV in WinAmp? Why? It's got some really nice music features, but iTunes has a much simpler approach, in my honest opinion. One thing I'd like to see in iTunes though is a scratch playlist like WinAmp has. You might be able to simulate something like that with smart playlists, but even the iPod has an On-The-Go playlist; why doesn't iTunes?

As for which is better, I'd vote iTunes, but not by much. WinAmp 5 is a solid application, no question about it. If the migration cost in time is too great, then you should probably stick with WinAmp. But if you really like the idea of AAC lossless (which probably has a better chance of being supported in a wider variety of players), then go iTunes.

Vendetta · Post by **Vendetta** » 2004-04-29 01:41pm

Winamp in its early days was too clunky and counterintuitive a program for me to be arsed with. Hell I used to use Windows Media Player ahead of Winamp because I could see what the fuck I had on my system and access it by album and playlist, whereas winamp3's media library plugin was utter shite (I don't know whether it's improved or not)

iTunes does all the shit I want, in one interface, doesn't do a host of shit I don't want it to do.

Graeme Dice · Post by **Graeme Dice** » 2004-04-29 03:36pm

I have to ask if Winamp has gone back to remembering which song you were playing when you quit it, or if I still have to keep using version 2.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2004-04-29 10:08pm

Graeme Dice wrote:I have to ask if Winamp has gone back to remembering which song you were playing when you quit it, or if I still have to keep using version 2.

(Checks. Closes Winamp, reopens it. Winamp just loaded song I was playing when I killed it.) Yes, yes it does.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2004-04-30 09:47pm

Winamps Media Library still isn't as good as Musicmatch's... you can't 'fold' albums or artists your stuck with a hugely long aphabetised list. Which is better than Winamp 2.8, which I've been using for years.

YT300000 · Post by **YT300000** » 2004-05-01 07:13pm

I dislike iTunes. It takes (at school, the only place I have used it) fucking forever to arrange the music in it's playlist. Winamp at school is fast, convenient, and kick-ass.

Winamp.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Winamp 5 vs. iTunes 4.5

Well?

Winamp 5 vs. iTunes 4.5