Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Winamp Finally Comes to Mac, Bringing Easy Android Music Syncing

I used Winamp until 2010, when I got a mac and had no choice. I still prefer how it works over iTunes, in terms fo day to day listening, and I was always able to add songs to my iPod with it.
 
Needless to say as I'm sure it's been expressed throughout this thread but I used to use WinAmp on a daily basis!!! Thanks for taking me down a memory lane stroll MacRumors..
 
milo said:
So how is it for syncing to Android? I assume you don't really have to use it for much other than the sync itself and still use iTunes for creating playlists and otherwise managing music files?

Does it support syncing play count/date and ratings back from the android device (assuming android music player supports the same sort of ratings)?

And are there other Android music sync apps that really nail it as opposed to checking this one out? Any recommendations would be appreciated.
Click to expand...

AcesHigh87 said:
Wow I remember having this thing on my PC for awhile but then just using the media player because we upgraded computers and I couldn't remember everything I had. While I doubt I will ever use it over iTunes (on a mac iTunes really is the only choice) it might be nice to get once some new features are introduced so that I can sync with my HTC phone.
Click to expand...


Songbird (for Mac) is there for syncing music with android devices
 
Last edited:
wikus said:
Even bigger bloatware than iTunes. I remember watching RAM usage somewhere between 2-300mb. Its not buggy, it works, but its definitely laggy.
Click to expand...

My post is not about if it's bloatware or not. It's a response to folks who don't know that there is a music-manager/player out there which syncs Android phones on a Mac.
 
Corax said:
My post is not about if it's bloatware or not. It's a response to folks who don't know that there is a music-manager/player out there which syncs Android phones on a Mac.
Click to expand...

If people in this thread don't know of a music-manager/player that syncs with Android, we have quite the issue now do we. ;)
 
I'm clearly bloody weird.

Back in my Windows days, when Napster was all the rage, everyone kept telling me that Winamp was the greatest thing ever. I'd try it periodically and always hated it. Then, when iTunes came around, I started using that, and loved it. Didn't get a Mac for years either.

Anyway, this does look good. I'm guessing the more Android inclined Mac users might be more likely to want to use Winamp anyway, so its nice that they have a presumably solid option to sync wirelessly with the phones. And more choice is always good! How will this handle purchases made in iTunes? With difficulty, I imagine...?
 
Better late than never, my dad still uses it on his old Windows machine and prefers to use Winamp rather than any of the newer versions iTunes when it comes to playing and managing music.
 
FroMann said:
Better late than never, my dad still uses it on his old Windows machine and prefers to use Winamp rather than any of the newer versions iTunes when it comes to playing and managing music.
Click to expand...

well on older machines iTunes has become so bloated that it crawls and causes a of problems. iTunes is a very bloated program and it scales like crap for weaker computers.
 
Great news. Love Winamp

Great news - Dont have to convert my music collection from FLAC to ALAC.

Hoping Dbpoweramp ripping is next to Mac.

Only 2 products I use on windows and miss on Mac were Winamp (avid user for many years) and Dbpoweramp for accurate CD ripping to Flac.

Well done Nullsoft. !!!
 
Hard to believe that some people are actually defending the bloatedness, high memory use, and iffy performance of iTunes.

That must be some tasty kool-aid.
 
Fondest memories was using WinAmp and browsing others music folders that everyone would share on the University intranet. It was like iTunes, tens of thousands of mp3 of any genre, except opera and classical music of course! ;)

I remember the day I moved from WinAmp to iTunes on Windows (when I bought my first iPod in 2004) and after all this time, it would be a hard sell to get me to move back. iTunes has grown up and has become nearly indispensable, and WinAmp is still mounting LLamas. Baaaaah! :eek: :D

Hey Winamp, my 486DX2/66 misses you. Write sometime ok?
 
Corax said:
My post is not about if it's bloatware or not. It's a response to folks who don't know that there is a music-manager/player out there which syncs Android phones on a Mac.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. Anyone used both Songbird and Winamp for Android syncing, how do the two compare?
 
milo said:
Hard to believe that some people are actually defending the bloatedness, high memory use, and iffy performance of iTunes.

That must be some tasty kool-aid.
Click to expand...

As pointed out before, anyone comparing the sad joke WinAmp or even WMP to the polish of iTunes must lay off the crack pipe - unless you're fond of 1999, that is.

But since you don't seem to know iTunes at all (or even use Macs), I won't bother explaining.

I will simply add that its very reasonable memory usage is absolutely in line with its goals and features; that it starts up in less than 0.5 second on my computer, even with extensive metadata, genius and syncing needs; that it has NEVER crashed or lost any content regardless of the size of my library; and that it is BY FAR the most comprehensive solution for my 200GB media collection, with everything neatly organized in a single place.

As for the other comment in favor of "runtime" routines, gimme a break. I want my iTunes to be ready for everything from the second I start it up - if you want Java-like crap, call Oracle or go back to a Windows PC.
 
Last edited:
BRLawyer said:
As pointed out before, anyone comparing the sad joke WinAmp or even WMP to the polish of iTunes...
Click to expand...

Funny, I didn't make that comparison, not sure why you'd say that in response to my post.

I'll give an example of something iTunes does very very poorly (and note that I am just making a statement about iTunes, not comparing it to any other app). It seems to not use multiple cores at all. And particularly video conversions are something that are very well suited to multicore, just compare to apps like Handbrake.

Besides slow file conversions, I see tons of spinning beach balls in iTunes, the app just doesn't seem to be multithreaded, at least not much at all. Shouldn't the app be able to be responsive and usable while it's doing things in the background?

Drag in a bunch of files - spinning beach ball for a while. Change tags on a bunch of files, beach ball. Sometimes when doing things with iOS devices, syncing or ejecting. Lots of basic things totally lock up the app to user input. Particularly on a multi core machine, shouldn't it be able to do those things in the background while still allowing the user to do other things in the app?

Now I have to give credit, with the iTunes 64 bit release it was finally a bit less of a dog but there's still a ton of room for improvement.
 
MacRumors said:
was a major media player back in the MP3 sharing heyday -- and is still the preferred media player for a large number of Windows users.
Click to expand...

Dang this takes me way back.

"was a major media player back in the ... " yup no argument there.

"and is still the preferred media player for a large number of ... " hmmm not so sure about that one.

The idea of moving over into the mac platform even if just to support android synching ... that's a little funky imho.
 
milo said:
Funny, I didn't make that comparison, not sure why you'd say that in response to my post.

I'll give an example of something iTunes does very very poorly (and note that I am just making a statement about iTunes, not comparing it to any other app). It seems to not use multiple cores at all. And particularly video conversions are something that are very well suited to multicore, just compare to apps like Handbrake.

Besides slow file conversions, I see tons of spinning beach balls in iTunes, the app just doesn't seem to be multithreaded, at least not much at all. Shouldn't the app be able to be responsive and usable while it's doing things in the background?

Drag in a bunch of files - spinning beach ball for a while. Change tags on a bunch of files, beach ball. Sometimes when doing things with iOS devices, syncing or ejecting. Lots of basic things totally lock up the app to user input. Particularly on a multi core machine, shouldn't it be able to do those things in the background while still allowing the user to do other things in the app?

Now I have to give credit, with the iTunes 64 bit release it was finally a bit less of a dog but there's still a ton of room for improvement.
Click to expand...

So I will take your complaints one by one:

- iTunes does not need to use multicore at all considering its goals and features; besides, I do not know anyone who uses it for video encoding - that's why I have Handbrake and DVDRemaster;

- I see ZERO beachballs, regardless of using the app in the foreground or background - again: iTunes is for me one of the most polished apps ever, especially in the light of big, fully indexed libraries such as mine;

- and as you said, even more CPU-intensive tasks have been almost completely sped up by the 64-bit version; I use it on a daily basis for artwork insertion, Lossless importing and indexing, and no app comes close to its feature-performance balance.
 
I'd switch if they implement support for plugins like ChipAmp.... Audio Overload on the Mac is a poor alternative for chiptunes.


BRLawyer said:
I see ZERO beachballs, regardless of using the app in the foreground or background - again: iTunes is for me one of the most polished apps ever, especially in the light of big, fully indexed libraries such as mine;
Click to expand...

I'd still be using iTunes 7 if I didn't have an iPhone... runs much smoother than the current version. For the first time since I started using iTunes seven years ago, I can no longer scroll through my library smoothly.
 
BRLawyer said:
As pointed out before, anyone comparing the sad joke WinAmp or even WMP to the polish of iTunes must lay off the crack pipe - unless you're fond of 1999, that is.
Click to expand...

You clearly never have used the program known as iTunes on Windows. It can fairly be nailed and compared to WMP vs iTunes there. In that case both programs do the exact same thing. WMP has a store, plays movies, and media library with more file types than iTunes.


iTunes on OSX is by far better but on Windows it is a pile of crap and has become overly bloated.

I choose to compare it and show how it was bloated and heavy by comparing it system resources directly with WMP since as a program they do the exact same thing.

iTunes idle use less resources than WMP which is actively playing a movie and top it off connected to an even larger library (movies are added to the list in WMP)

It just goes to show you how much worse iTunes is. It is bloated and only getting worse with time. Not better.
 
What rumors? The rest of you who are not converts to the Mac might remember that quicktime could not buffer / prioritize it's process properly to decode a mp3 without skipping before Mac OS X. If you had MacPhex, Macster, or Scour on Mac (Scrouge?), you were familiar with every option to play this music back without skipping. Torrents were still years off and saying Metallica wasn't followed immediately by sucks yet.

SoundAmp, SoundJam (*cough* iTunes), MacAmp, Cabrio (RB/QT based and skipped but came to mind), Unsanity Echo, Audion, more… last but not least, the WinAmp Mac Alpha release…

http://web.archive.org/web/20010605220948/http://www.winamp.com/download/mac/
http://download.cnet.com/Winamp-for-Mac/3000-2141_4-5874677.html
http://www.macnn.com/news/4555

Really, someone on this website must have owned a Mac back then! Am I the only one who played with this alpha?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back