Reviews of Winamp 5 Standard

1. 
   Pkshadow

   Reviewing 5.572 (Nov 30, 2010)

   Well why are we reviewing a Jan 2010 file?
   Why when I click D/load do I get a warning from Norton as can see here http://safeweb.norton.co..._emusic-7plus_en-us.exe ?
   Why is it I am running a higher version number than this one ?
   I think some one should explain this problem !
2. 
   Virtual_ManPL

   Reviewing 5.572 (Jul 3, 2010)

   Too bloatware...
   They simply choose wrong direction... video player ?
   
   but still 3/5 for many plugins and of course for many awesome skins...
   
   better use AIMP or foobar2000
3. 
   nugro

   Reviewing 5.572 (Mar 24, 2010)

   Bloated, phone home, adware ridden, slow, NO TABBED PLAYLIST, ugly and confusing UI (sorry kid, I'm not into flashy neon these days). Sure there are some good points, let's see uh... it play music, and lotsa gimmicky plugin, and um it play video too! eh wait, what software are we talking about again?
   
   No. Thanks.
4. 
   RADicalSatDude

   Reviewing 5.53 Build 1924 (Mar 31, 2008)

   All these whiners are spamming the review section, I've been using Winamp since 1997 and have no issues with it till now, FLAC works, everything works fine if your OS is stable.
   
   Only thing I'd like to see is an option to resample to 48,000 KHz or 96,000 KHz and any codec playback support like VLC, right now I use Winamp with FFDShow to attain obscure format playback.
   
   It does what it says on the box!
5. 
   Sephiroth...

   Reviewing 5.34 Build 1239 Beta (Mar 14, 2008)

   Totally bloated crap. Aimp and XMplay are much better that this useless, Rotten! piece of garbage.
6. 
   vcorvinus

   Reviewing 5.34 Build 1195 Beta (Mar 21, 2007)

   Good but Unicode support is buggy. Using the Winamp Classic, skin will enable it but using the Winamp Modern, will result in "boxes".
7. 
   And|

   Reviewing 5.34 Build 1178 Beta (Mar 18, 2007)

   Im happy that standard edition is beeing released again now. I still think its too bloated. These days im toying with the idea to switch either to QMP or Foobar.
   
   Almost 7mb for a player is too much. Version 5.2 was 4.2mb...
8. 
   marrie

   Reviewing 5.34 Build 1155 Beta (Mar 15, 2007)

   states flac works. I still cannot get a flac file to play at all. I got one to play once but cannot get it to happen again. the library needs to be mor eaccessible and eaier to use. that has got to be one of the most confusing parts of the software.
   Thanks.
9. 
   high1

   Reviewing 5.34 Build 1155 Beta (Mar 14, 2007)

   http://download.nullsoft...p534_1155_beta_full.exe
   http://download.nullsoft...mp534_1155_beta_pro.exe
   http://download.nullsoft...mp534_1155_beta_std.exe
   http://download.nullsoft...p534_1155_beta_lite.exe
10. 
    Desides

    Reviewing 5.25 Build 857 Beta (Aug 29, 2006)

    24-bit playback support, built-in Replay Gain, unicode playlists (Media Library support in a future version), and the same level of customizability and features.
    
    Winamp is brilliant, and its maintainers are to be commended.
11. 
    Xssshell

    Reviewing 5.25 Build 787 Beta (Jul 31, 2006)

    My Favorite MP3 Player, love!
    If you criticize something, you already like it.
    
    advantages
    - fast
    - totally customizable
    - portable
    - nice gui, skinnable
    
    disadvantages
    - playlist maxcount limit
    - playlist maxentries limit above 100.000
    - random track feature is not good
    - audio quality is ok, but not excellent
    - shareware, Pro version enables more features
12. 
    Paul Skinner

    Reviewing 5.25 Build 787 Beta (Jul 27, 2006)

    "Improved: [in_mp3] 24bit MP3 playback, 64bit internal precision"
    
    W00T!!11eleventy.
    
    That's what I like to hear.
    
    There is no greater audio programme available IMO.
    
    VLC is great for diversity, but Winamp is best for quality.
13. 
    Shadowtech

    Reviewing 5.2 (Feb 25, 2006)

    All hail the mighty Winamp!

Discuss Winamp 5 Standard

No comments yet