217
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) by petsoi@discuss.tchncs.de to c/linux@lemmy.ml
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] terusgormand8465@lemmings.world 6 points 3 hours ago

What a shitty company

[-] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 41 points 6 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 2 points 1 hour 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 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 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 10 points 9 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.

[-] arefx@lemmy.ml 4 points 7 hours ago

Inwish i could control spotify from winamp man

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 22 points 12 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.

[-] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 10 points 8 hours ago

I like how they were like “you can’t fork this repo” and it’s like — actually yes I can.

[-] arxdat@lemmy.ml 12 points 11 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 15 points 8 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.

[-] ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social 5 points 5 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 1 points 4 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.

[-] halm@leminal.space 39 points 15 hours ago

Yeah well, VLC has been open source for 23 years.

[-] kratoz29@lemm.ee 6 points 4 hours ago

Do people really use VLC to listen to music?

[-] msage@programming.dev 1 points 1 hour ago

I used to, 15 years ago.

Good times.

[-] bikooo2@r.nf 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I used, but today I use Clementine (is still alive) and sometimes QMMP with somo winamp skins

VLC It's a good Music player if you only need to play music

[-] IceFoxX@lemm.ee 36 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)
[-] IsoSpandy@lemm.ee 8 points 8 hours ago
[-] IceFoxX@lemm.ee 3 points 2 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 26 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 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 93 points 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.”

[-] Boxscape@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 hours ago

WinAmp owners

I'm a visual person so I need to put a face to these windowlickers to laugh at in my head.

Is it this guy?

[-] penquin@lemm.ee 38 points 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.

[-] GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml 29 points 1 day ago

It's astonishing that they were so open about it. They didn't even hide to try to hide it

[-] ramble81@lemm.ee 16 points 23 hours ago

That license was laughable and blatant

[-] greedytacothief@lemmy.world 34 points 1 day ago

I watched a video a little while ago , I think the only value winamp has is nostalgic and historical. If it was really open source maybe we could get a really good fork and that's about it, I think. Maybe I'm missing the point, let me know I'm not very smart at this stuff.

[-] wesker@lemmy.sdf.org 42 points 1 day ago

Maybe WinAmp was the llama all along.

[-] Dirk@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 day ago

WinAmp hurt itself while slapping

[-] 58008@lemmy.world 10 points 21 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.

[-] bikooo2@r.nf 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

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

[-] dsilverz@thelemmy.club 1 points 1 hour 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.

[-] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 2 points 14 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.

[-] bikooo2@r.nf 1 points 1 hour ago

It's propietary

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 15 points 23 hours ago

Would anyone care if they did? I didn't see anyone reviving xmms and that is open source.

[-] Ephera@lemmy.ml 5 points 9 hours ago
[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 hours ago

That is pretty cool actually - I didn't know about that!

[-] mangaskahn@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago

Legal issues aside, are there any publicly available forks of the repo?

[-] CaptainBasculin@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 day ago

Repository ownership appearently got transferred to "alexfreud"; my fork on GitHub of the original repo redirects to it.

https://github.com/alexfreud/winamp

For reference, the fork I made

https://github.com/CaptainBasculin/winamp

[-] Commander_Keen@reddthat.com 6 points 23 hours ago
[-] Mugmoor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 day ago

Not Open-Source, but there's a fork called WACUP, which is Winamp with modern features.

[-] geoma@lemmy.ml 9 points 23 hours 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.

[-] CorrodedCranium@leminal.space 20 points 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

[-] malockin@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

well that was... something

[-] flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 6 points 22 hours ago

TIL Winamp was still active as a project

[-] non_burglar@lemmy.world 15 points 20 hours ago

It wasn't, really. It was passed around as IP for a long time like a used car everyone wanted to fix & sell, but no one wanted to do anything with.

[-] TheDoctor@hexbear.net 7 points 1 day ago

What did they realize that they open sourced their product a decade too late for anyone to actually revive it?

[-] Ephera@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 hours ago

People are saying that the repo contained third-party code, some of which was proprietary, some was GPL. That's two angles from which they could be sued very easily...

[-] FuckyWucky@hexbear.net 4 points 1 day ago
this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2024
217 points (99.5% liked)

Linux

47764 readers
838 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS