- What is Your Favorite Windows Jukbox/Media Player?
- Posted by JW on October 25th, 2003
I just read the post about the player in Holland and realized that I haven't
really decided on ONE media player yet so I thought I'd see what you guys
liked. Maybe I missed one and that's the one I'm looking for. What do you
like the best?
Thanks, Joe
- Posted by BeeBop on October 25th, 2003
windows media player 9 series is by far the best option at the
moment. plays wma and mp3 and has a fully featured easy to use
and fast media library.
- Posted by Joel on October 26th, 2003
"JW" <jweb@swbell.net> wrote:
For music, Winamp2 is hands down my choice. For video files, WMP 6.4
is generally what I use (Windows XP includes it in the same folder as
the newer version, with the name mplayer2.exe; presumably Windows Me
does also).
--
Joel Crump
- Posted by Joel on October 26th, 2003
"BeeBop" <BeeBop@nospam.edu.com.org> wrote:
And it uses way more CPU than it should to play music.
--
Joel Crump
- Posted by BeeBop on October 26th, 2003
longing for the command prompt, joel? ;-)
wma does take some more cpu-power to decode, but that's because
it's more modern and a more advanced codec with better quality.
for the rest it depends on which features of wmp9 you use. if you
switch on things like srs, equalizer, etc the cpu has more work
to do. that's obvious.
wmp9 is meant for a fast pentium 4 running windows xp. don't use
it on older slower machines/windows versions.
- Posted by Joel on October 26th, 2003
"BeeBop" <BeeBop@nospam.edu.com.org> wrote:
That does not make sense and is not funny. Please graduate from
kindergarten before posting on Usenet.
You're an idiot. WMP9 uses way more CPU than it should to play *any*
music, even simple MP3s, and it doesn't have to be running any
gimmicks at the time.
So I can't even use it to play MP3s without having a P4? You must be
the most idiotic of trolls to recommend something *that* bloated.
What's so special about XP's ability to run it, also? Do you even
know how close Windows 2000 SP2+ is to XP?
--
Joel Crump
- Posted by BeeBop on October 26th, 2003
oh yes, it does make sense. you told this the world yourself a
few threads lower in this newsgroup. i know exactly what kind of
person you are. ;-)
the rest of your comment i shall ignore. it's the usual flavor.
- Posted by Slow Joe on October 26th, 2003
On Sat, 25 Oct 2003 13:49:48 GMT, "JW" <jweb@swbell.net> wrote:
Winamp 2.6 with AudioStocker installed.
Joe
----------------
It matters not how experienced you are, nor how dedicated to the task. If you're not having fun, you are doing it wrong.
- Posted by Markeau on October 26th, 2003
"JW" <jweb@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:0cvmb.1033$dh7.222@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com
J. River's Media Center 9.1 ... it has excellent mp3 tag managment
(including MMJB custom tag support), DSP and burning options and many,
many more features (including image management, but for now I just use
the robust set of music management features):
http://www.musicex.com/mediacenter/
Plus, they have excellent support:
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?board=3
- Posted by Joel on October 26th, 2003
"BeeBop" <BeeBop@nospam.edu.com.org> wrote:
You are wrong, and I *dare* you to try to demonstrate how that comment
about running a GUI on 'nix has jack shit to do with playing MP3s in
Windows. You will look most *stupid*, since Winamp2 plays MP3s in a
Win32 GUI app with much less CPU usage than WMP9.
Yes, it was the usual flavor. You were grotesquely wrong, and I
explained how you were wrong with one hand tied behind my back. It
was wise of you not to respond to my reply.
--
Joel Crump
- Posted by BeeBop on October 26th, 2003
as most here you have not tried and used wmp9 and thereby you are
talking silly as usual and calling people, who think otherwise
stupid. the program has a lot of features that need a fast
machine and windows xp. wmp9 is a fully functional player. winamp
is no more than a utility to decode music-files. it's library
function is a joke. and winamp uses even more resources than wmp9
as i showed last week.
- Posted by BeeBop on October 26th, 2003
isn't there a command line mp3 decoder utility available for you?
then you don't even need the resources for the winamp gui.
something like:
c:\joel's_very_low_resource_command_line_utility_t o_decode_his_mu
sic_while_all_other_people_are_very_happy_with_the ir_resource_gob
bling_gui's_and_don't_care_about_how_many_resource s_it_uses_as_lo
ng_s_the_music_sounds_very_good_with_srs_trubass_a nd_is_a)joy_for
_the_eye_with_it's_nice_visualizations_and_the_lik e >
joel's_soundcard -alt_extreme_extreme
- Posted by GimmeFuel on October 26th, 2003
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
BeeBop wrote:
So for those of us with less recent machines, what would you suggest?
My P3-800 hangs on wmp8; I don't even want to think about wmp9. Should
plunk I down a couple grand for a new computer just so I can listen to
music?
Or should I stick with Winamp 2.x, which even on my 400mhz laptop
rarely rises above 3% CPU usage?
- --
while(sizeof(government) > necessary) {vote(libertarian);}
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQA/AwUBP5xMWVCXj+OnPkFuEQIZngCfTDnbprdG6ash8wKeBzZgvZ 2QlIcAn3ae
Oe9EutobWHAkyPZww0mz6nxv
=l1NY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Posted by Bill in Co. on October 26th, 2003
GimmeFuel wrote:
Nope.
Yup. Slam dunk deal.
- Posted by Daniel Thompson on October 27th, 2003
The people discussing the merits of WinAmp over WMP are missing the vital
point.
WinAmp is a high fidelity player, WMP may have all the singin' an' dancin'
bells and whistles but it is *not* a high fidelity player.
WinAmp like another freeware utility by the name of L.A.M.E. is concerned
mainly with how the music *sounds*. D'you think Microsoft and it's dumb fuck
market base give a shit about bitrate and quality?
No, they just want to "stream" the latest chart shite.
Kind Regards.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.528 / Virus Database: 324 - Release Date: 17/10/2003
- Posted by dadiOH on October 27th, 2003
BeeBop wrote:
Ummm, BeeBoob, you *said* that but you most assuredly did not prove it.
Several people posted showing the exact oppsite (correct). And you still
don't understand the special meaning of the word "resources" in Windows.
--
dadiOH
_____________________________
dadiOH's dandies v3.0...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://www.gbronline.com/xico/
_________________________________
- Posted by Bill in Co. on October 27th, 2003
dadiOH wrote:
No, you just forgot, dadiOH! He was including Windows Explorer! (but even
with that running, which it always is, there is no comparison. WMP is more
of an albatross, hands down.
(and yes, I have BOTH on my computer, and use them for different reasons and at
different times; ditto with MMJB).
- Posted by CQ on October 27th, 2003
Daniel Thompson asked BeeBop...
No. He doesn't.
He takes in whatever line MS gives him and spews it back here. A classic
example of GIGO.
--
CQ
+----------+
| PLEASE |
| DO NOT |
| FEED THE |
| TROLLS |
+----------+
| |
| |
.\|.||/..
- Posted by dadiOH on October 27th, 2003
Bill in Co. wrote:
Mea culpa. But even the combined *total* of RAM used for Win Explorer and
Winamp is less than what he listed for WMP.
--
dadiOH
_____________________________
dadiOH's dandies v3.0...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://www.gbronline.com/xico/
_________________________________
- Posted by Daniel Thompson on October 27th, 2003
What's GIGO?
"CQ" <me@privacy.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1a06639c7f46b30b989a17@news.cis.dfn.de...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.528 / Virus Database: 324 - Release Date: 17/10/2003
