4 ms·
Form over function. So, yep not what Winamp is about.
by CountDrewku 5y ago
Form over function. So, yep not what Winamp is about.
- blowski 5y agoI wonder how much of this is nostalgia. Winamp was awesome, but given that skinning was part of its popularity, form was definitely a big deal.
- Minor49er 5y agoIf the form impeded function, it was easy to change. Some skins even made sure to cover all of Winamp's sections properly. The Invader Zim skin appealed to my 15-year-old tastes and still offered visible, functional controls with a readable playlist. Some skins looked cool, but if they removed options, they weren't used other than to show off to friends on occasion
- derefr 5y agoWinamp skins were surprisingly restrictive, though; you couldn't really skin Winamp in a way that impeded its functionality / created mystery-meat navigation. Every Winamp skin was fundamentally just a set of textures applied to the same standard controls layout: https://skins.webamp.org/ https://skins.webamp.org/ Windows Media Player, meanwhile... https://www.theskinsfactory.com/wmpdesign https://www.theskinsfactory.com/wmpdesign
- captbaritone 5y agoThat was true for "classic" skins, but starting with Winamp 3, Winamp supported free form "modern" skins that were defined in XML and had a custom scripting language so that the author could define their own behavior.
- derefr 5y agoTrue; though I'm pretty sure the WinAmp anyone here actually has any level of nostalgia for, is WinAmp 2. WinAmp 3 was so lacklustre that they brought back a lot of WinAmp 2 stuff and called the result WinAmp 5. (And then everyone continued to use the Classic skins, which WinAmp 5 supported.)
- ConceptJunkie 5y agoThe form could be changed, but the substance remained the same: an incredibly well-design app that just worked.