I prefer winamp2 to all of them. But winamp 5 is lighter than winamp 3
Winamp 2 is the one that demands the less memory
Sooo... Winamp 2 > Winamp 5 > Winamp 3 > mushrooms (i hate mushrooms)
Huh
Winamp 5 idling in classic mode is about 2megs memory give or take, which is the same as or comparable to Winamp 2. On the other hand you've got all the pretty skins from Winamp 3, and the new media library option which rocks (especially since winamp 2 chokes on the new Enhanced Audio CDs).
In my mind there's little reason not to upgrade (stability and feature wise), unless you have a craptacular hunk of computer running minimal memory and win98 or winME.
Huh
Winamp 5 idling in classic mode is about 2megs memory give or take, which is the same as or comparable to Winamp 2. On the other hand you've got all the pretty skins from Winamp 3, and the new media library option which rocks (especially since winamp 2 chokes on the new Enhanced Audio CDs).
In my mind there's little reason not to upgrade (stability and feature wise), unless you have a craptacular hunk of computer running minimal memory and win98 or winME.
When I use winamp 2, my computer runs normally. It takes about no time to open it. Unfortunately, when I tryed winamp 5, it was slower and it took arround 4-5 seconds for it to open. So I judged that Winamp 5 was a bit more demanding than Winamp 2. I guess that doesn't matter if you have a good computer; I have an old piece of crap :/
Winamp5 defaults to Modern skins when you start it, and that will hit you up for 10-15 more megs of ram easy. You'll get better mileage if you switch to classic skins, but yes it should still be a bit more resource heavy than winamp2, mostly because of the new media lib options. It's a choice you'll have to weigh I suppose.
I don't know why anyone would use anything besides the old, classic skin anyways. It's not like you're going to be staring at Winamp while the song is playing.
With Winamp 5 on classic mode, I can't even tell the difference between it and Winamp 2.xx, so I may as well use it. I don't use any of the visual effects shit or anything, and it is just as fast as Winamp 2 was.
From what i've heard, winamp 5 is winamp 2 plus the skinning engine of winamp 3. I think they junked the rest of winamp 3 (which was a rewrite) as it sucked so badly. But yeah, winamp 5 is fine.
I just upgraded from Winamp 2 to Winamp 5 about a week or two ago.
I have to say, I'm quite happy with it. It does take a bit longer to start
up, but I'm not entirely sure that it's being more demanding as much as
just .. being that way. Anyway there is an entire wealth of graphics and
usage options that you can enable/disable to have it use a lower system
profile, but it still wants a PIII 500mhz min. If you got that, I would hafta
say absolutely get it. The modern skin minimized to an always on top
toolbar with big friendly control buttons is nice.
I use both 2 and 5
2 when I play in full screen. Less cpu usage and good with one playlist full with all songs I have with shuffle turned on
5 when I want to listen to a full album. The bigger you library of songs is the better this one is. Good search function and well organized according to artist -> album -> song. I wouldn't recommend this one for badly organised or tagged files cus it might get messy (ie if one ID tag says Roller Girl and the other Rollergirl it will interpret it as two different artists). It's really good for well organized full albums.
5: Da1andonly> !ban epinephrine
5: RoboHelp> Are you nuts? You can't ban a staff member!
5: Da1andonly> =((
5: Epinephrine> !ban da1andonly
5: RoboHelp> Staffer "da1andonly" has been banned for abuse.
5: Epinephrine> oh shit
Comment