WinAMP 5 Final release

By on December 16, 2003, 1:02 AM
Nullsoft has quietly released Winamp 5.0 final build which will finally make a good upgrade for all of us WA 2.x lovers.

We have been following 5.0 beta releases closely for the past few weeks so I won't outline what's new with this release, let's just say it feels as light as 2.0 but is more feature packed without getting bloated.

BTW, the download URL above does not point to Nullsoft official website, apparently the files were temporarily removed from their server so we are pointing to an available mirror.




User Comments: 42

Got something to say? Post a comment
Krugger said:
excellent. i've stayed away from the betas from the most part, and stayed far away from w3. this looks promising, i'll have to play around with it over break now that i have some time.
SNGX1275 said:
Please someone provide me with information on the ripping ability of the final. We had a discussion when it went beta about there being limited ripping features compared to the alpha. I'm still running the Winamp 5.0superearlyalphaness and its awesome. Convince me to change.
StormBringer said:
Well, for me, it ran as badly as the beta did, at least most things work in the alpha(same one sngx is running) IMO, they should have just fixed the problems with 3.0 instead of going backward with it. For now I'll keep the alpha as well.
chuonthis said:
I like the latest releases of Winamp 5. If you want to go back to Winamp 3, development is still ongoing and is now called wasabi.player. Some info at [URL=http://forums.winamp.com/showthread.php?threadid=158594
this thread[/URL].Edit: [URL=http://download.nullsoft.com/winamp/client/winamp50_ful
.exe]Direct link to file from nullsoft's site[/URL]
Rick said:
Winamp 5.0 has been working beautifully... Which I cannot say for Winamp 3.0. Even the final release of 3 is guaranteed to crash once or twice while I'm using it.5 feels lighter than 3 and looks nicer out-of-the-box in my opinion.I guess it depends on how we use Winamp that makes the difference. Some people load playlists.. Some people queue from explorer.. Some people just play their music directly. I imagine things like these probably affect operation enough that it works fine for some people, while others it does not (ie. crashing).
StormBringer said:
Yes, I'll agree 3 was very bad, the problem I have is that 5 seems to not like mIRC at all, it takes a long time to open and will periodically crash if I have mIRC open while using it. 3.0 did the same thing. 5 also seems to have some issues with being told what to do, it sometimes decides to not play when I load a song(I have to manually play each track as it loads, even using a playlist) I also have a very different opinion of their video support in this release "not sucky"? I beg to differ, the alpha support was pretty good, but this final is horrible, it seems to have some problems with codecs, it might play the file, then next time it just gives audio with missing video.I'll likely keep tinkering with it in case there is some little conflict with another app that is causing all this. It may be the fact that I keep a copy of 2.8x around for use with mIRC, which I am certain is the problem with it not wanting to run while mIRC is open.To answer your question sngx, ripping/encoding and burning is not available in the free version of 5.0, you need the paid version for that.
will_is_awesome said:
Anyone using this yet that has taken a look at the video streaming? I was watching it stream on another computer using 3.x and it was quite choppy and cut off all the time. Just hoping they upgraded the one feature I'd like to use, so anybody test this yet?
StormBringer said:
Yes Video streaming isn't too good, but I think the main problem is with the servers feeding the streams. Some of them were pretty good, as far as being smooth, quality is tolerable, but there is a lack of good content. There also isn't much to choose from currently and many of the servers are constantly full. I also can't get a Radio server list, I don't know if this is a problem with the server or if it is with Winamp 5, but it doesn't even appear to be trying to connect to the server to get the list. On a lighter note, it seems that uninstalling and completely removing all traces of all previous versions of Winamp and reinstalling Winamp5 seems to work better. I'm still having a few issues, but it hasn't crashed again yet. I'd also like to note that the 3.0 style skins don't seem to be as much of a resource hog as they were in 3.0. While it is currently running good, with a few annoyances, I'm still not sure about it, for one thing, removing 2.x has left me unable to use Winamp through mIRC
chuonthis said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by StormBringer [/i]To answer your question sngx, ripping/encoding and burning is not available in the free version of 5.0, you need the paid version for that. [/quote]Actually, the free version of Winamp does have ripping support. It's just that the rip speed is limited to 2x and you can't encode in MP3 (only to WAV or AAC). The reason for the MP3 restriction is because Nullsoft has to pay for the MP3 encoder license.
BrownPaper said:
i wonder why a lot of users are saying that winamp is crummy with video. all winamp is supposed to do is use the same video codecs to play the file. it is just wierd how performance suffers a bit when common sense says it should not suffer.
Curl said:
It's about time
Nodsu said:
[quote]i wonder why a lot of users are saying that winamp is crummy with video. all winamp is supposed to do is use the same video codecs to play the file. it is just wierd how performance suffers a bit when common sense says it should not suffer.[/quote] A codec only decodes/encodes chunks of data fed to it. Reading data, feeding it to the decoder, receiving the raw data, interpreting it and making the OS display it is all up to the player app. Making all that go fast is not an easy task. Especially if it is just an extra feature to a sound player.
chuonthis said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by Nodsu [/i]Especially if it is just an extra feature to a sound player. [/quote]Exactly, video playing is just an extra feature in Winamp. It is still primarily a music player. If you wanted to play videos, you'd use [URL=http://sourceforge.net/projects/guliverkli/]Media Player Classic[/URL] :D
tripleione said:
I haven't yet tested Winamp 5 myself, but I am in the process of downloading it right now (56k :( ). However, I can assure you that if it is anything like Winamp 3 it will not be staying on my hard drive for long. Just too slow, clunky and bloated feeling for my taste.I have been eagerly awaiting an update to Winamp 2.91, which has been sitting happily on my HDD since I downloaded a few months ago. Perhaps this will be it?
chuonthis said:
If your computer isn't the latest and greatest and you feel that Winamp 5 is a little sluggish still, don't uninstall it just yet! Try switching to a classic Winamp 2.x skin instead of the default Modern skin. That'll help lighten the load on your CPU and return Winamp to 2.x speeds.
StormBringer said:
Personally, after tinkering with it a bit(see my previous replies) Its much faster than 3.0, much more responsive, the skins don't hog resources, and it doesn't feel as bloated. I still have a few issues with it, such as the video, which I strongly disagree with chuonthis about, I feel if they added the feature, it should be done right or not at all, I've been using Winamp since its early development and with the exception of 3.0, have always been happy with it, if they can improve the video support soon, then ok. If not, they should remove it.
Vehementi said:
I've been using Winamp 5 since it came out, and all I've noticed is how much better it is than v3. I LOVE Milkdrop, as I first saw in the superprealphaleetness version. It's also better at handling large amount of songs - it reads the ID3 tags and duration much faster than any of the earlier versions. And it definitely beats both Windows Media Player and iTunes at resource management.Anyone know what happened to the playlist manager? I really like that feature of v3, and it's gone. It was very useful, mainly because when you open a new media file it clears your whole playlist and replaces it with that. Very irritating, but I can live with it, as it's still awesome.
SNGX1275 said:
Actually veh, you can change the preferences in Winamp5 (or at least in the superprealphaleetness version) so that it doesn't clear your playlist, it only adds it to the playlist when you double click a file. (Preferences -> Configuration -> Shell Integration -> far right hand side -> Enqueue files doubleclicked in Windows (default is to play))AFAIK they have killed the Playlist Manager, which I have mixed feelings about, but it definately helps Winamp5 feel lighter.And yes, milkdrop is the sweetness - and I believe I was the one that told you about how awesome it was in the IRC channel :PEdit: Veh has told me this "it's in General Preferences - File Types actually" for you guys that have the final version.
StormBringer said:
The playlist manager being gone is a bit saddening, but as you said sngx, it does make it lighter. I haven't noticed a change in ID3 reading speed, but its always been fast for me anyway. As for Milkdrop, its been around for years as an available plugin, and yes its quite nice and it has gotten better.
khosw said:
as StormBringer mentioned is does take a long time to open, itlooks nicer with the modern skin, but the music still sounds thesame. The built-in movie (mpg-mpeg/avi/asf/wmv) player is almostuseless, since there's bsplayer out there which is much better.The really cool feature is the built-in media library snap-in.You can configure it to update as frequently as you like and upon startup of winamp, to scan your selected dir for new files.
StormBringer said:
I don't remember saying that, matter of fact, it seems a bit faster than 3.0 was, though 2.x was quite a bit faster at opening.
SNGX1275 said:
I'm surpised you guys don't like the video playback of Winamp5. It plays video clips just fine for me and it doesn't toss up all that other crap around the video like Windows Media Player 7-9. Infact it is my player of choice now, just above PowerDVD for movie rips.Maybe they really did mess it up after the alpha.
StormBringer said:
sngx, IMO, the video support in the alpha was much better than in the final release. With the alpha I was pretty much playing all my vid clips in it, but the final seems to have trouble with some.
SNGX1275 said:
I may download this final release and install it to a different directory. But it could screw up something in the registry still and rape my alpha.Oh well, worst case I'll uninstall it and clean up my registry, and then re-install my alpha.
chuonthis said:
Sorry if I sound repetitive (and off topic) but anyone looking for a video player should be using [URL=http://sourceforge.net/projects/guliverkli/]Media Player Classic[/URL]. It's not the mplayer2 that you think it is. It looks a lot like it and runs just as smoothly and lightly, but it has tons of advanced features and customizations. You can play any file that you have a codec installed for (including RM and MOV).
poertner_1274 said:
I think the thing that most people like about Winamp is its ability to do both. It would be nice to only have to use 1 application for music and videos. That is why this is such a hot topic, because most people want it to work well so they can use it for both. Instead of having one app for music, one for videos, and another for movies, etc.
khosw said:
SNGX1275 and chuonthis, have you tried using bsplayer?[url]http://www.bsplayer.org/[/url]these work well for me; bsplayer, (avi,mpeg,mpg,....)video lan (for m2v files), avi preview (corrupt, broken, unfinished avi's)virtual dub(asf) and virtualdubmod, (anything else)powerDvd only for vcd's.
poertner_1274 said:
But that is just the problem, they are looking for a player that is good, not very intensive and plays everything. So there is no need for all those players on your system.
tripleione said:
I'd have to agree with StormBringer. This is definately an upgrade worthy of the name "Winamp." It's not so bloated and slow like WA3, but has a more modern feel and look than WA2.The new interface is quite nice too, as well as the ability to use the EQ with CDs (something that WA2 was not able to do). Definately keeping this version.
SNGX1275 said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by khosw [/i]SNGX1275 and chuonthis, have you tried using bsplayer?[url]http://www.bsplayer.org/[/url]these work well for me; bsplayer, (avi,mpeg,mpg,....)video lan (for m2v files), avi preview (corrupt, broken, unfinished avi's)virtual dub(asf) and virtualdubmod, (anything else)powerDvd only for vcd's. [/quote] Nope haven't tried that - Winamp5 alpha does just fine for everything you listed.
chuonthis said:
Winamp can play unfinished AVIs? Hmm...never knew that/tried that. I haven't used BSPlayer but I just checked it out and it seems like its features are similar to Media Player Classic's. However, I like the look and feel of MPC so it's still my choice in video players.[b]Edit:[/b] FYI, Winamp 5.01 is out with some fixes and junk...[URL=http://www.winamp.com/player/free.php]download[/
RL]
poertner_1274 said:
Thanks for the link, maybe that will help clear up some problems that people have been having.
StormBringer said:
It seems to have addressed most of my issues, though they weren't listed in the things it is supposed to fix. I'm not gonna complain though, it seems to be a little more like what I expect from Winamp now.
Masque said:
I don't know......I've been happy with M$'s offerings in Media Player and haven't found a need to change over. Can any of you convince me?
Josiiah said:
Sounds good, Im gonna go grab it right now. I love winamp and what they are doing.
Vehementi said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by Masque [/i]I don't know......I've been happy with M$'s offerings in Media Player and haven't found a need to change over. Can any of you convince me? [/quote] Launch both Winamp 5 and WMP at the same time, and look at how much memory each uses in the task manager. Winamp is less of a burden on your system. That means it's faster too, WMP is pretty sluggish even on my system. For audio Winamp is the best choice, IMHO, just use WMP and Winamp side by side and you'll see what I'm talking about. I love the interface much more, especially the playlist manager. I have 400+ songs on my Winamp playlist, and it's a cinch to surf through them and find exactly what I need, and you can sort them however you want.I would like you to name one thing WMP is better at than Winamp.Plus if you're paranoid, Winamp doesn't have all the "Microsoft spyware" in it that WMP supposedly does.
poertner_1274 said:
I agree Veh, I think that WMP is a little heavy and bogged down. Once again they add in all their M$ BS that a lot of people probably don't need. But on the other hand it is quite a bit easier IMO to operate if you aren't very computer competant, which most of the populatoin isn't.But for the power user Winamp is by far a better choice.
UncleGemboel said:
I think foobar its much better than winamp and MS WMP, thats for sure, this player very light in memory and off couse for that you can't see a eye candy interface.But i can can bear that, i dont need good interface or some strange visualisation, i only need player which can play my music in good sound and doesnt consumed much of my memory, and stable.
Vehementi said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by UncleGemboel [/i]I think foobar its much better than winamp and MS WMP, thats for sure, this player very light in memory and off couse for that you can't see a eye candy interface.But i can can bear that, i dont need good interface or some strange visualisation, i only need player which can play my music in good sound and doesnt consumed much of my memory, and stable. [/quote] Your media player may take up less memory than Winamp, but how much? 500k? Big deal. I think the eye candy is worth the extra MB even if it's that much, and of course you can just revert back to the original skin, not the "Modern" one, and it'll take up less memory and still be the program it is.And that "strange visualization" you speak of, Milkdrop, doesn't run on default, and it doesn't take up any memory when not activated, you can turn it on at your leisure. It's just a cool little feature built in. I'm fairly sure your media player hasn't had as much development put into it as Winamp has anyway.
Masque said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by poertner_1274 [/i]I agree Veh, I think that WMP is a little heavy and bogged down. Once again they add in all their M$ BS that a lot of people probably don't need. But on the other hand it is quite a bit easier IMO to operate if you aren't very computer competant, which most of the populatoin isn't.But for the power user Winamp is by far a better choice. [/quote] Okay you two....you talked me into it. I'll grab it soon and let you know what I think. I asked....you delivered. Fair enough. ;)
SNGX1275 said:
Appears I'm a bit late to this part of the discussion, but I'm on dial-up now at parents house (for the holidays) and we have relatives visiting - the computer is in the room they are using too so my internet usage is severly limited.Anyways my only reason to use Winamp over WMP that hasn't been listed yet is the amount of screen real estate used. If I just want to listen to mp3s WMP takes up half the screen at 1024x768, Winamp takes up much less. Also even for videos, Winamp can show you the play controls and then just the video window, just a few pixles for the border more than the actual video itself, WMP gives you a bunch of unnecessary 'border'.
Krugger said:
i haven't used WMP post 6.4 except when the files require it (DRM files). i still use 6.4 to watch most videos as it's my default. if i'm watchin a vcd or divx or dvd i'll use a more advanced player, but wmp classic is way better that 7/8. those are bloated to no end. winamp3 was too, and that's part of the reason i'm still at 2.9 with the plugins and skins, it's great. no need for the minibrowser though. the DFX audio DSP plugin has been in use for 3 years now, it makes a huge difference to my audio. i think winamp2 is one of the best programs out there.
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.