Is The Better Winamp Or Windows Media Player? What is better?

[Odyssey 0]

I recomend Winamp. It is not so bad on using resources. It works great, and loads extremely fast. The equalizer on Winamp is a nice feature. I have always used Winamp, and will continue using it.

[desdenova 0]

What?!? WMP is like IE: It sucks... Winamp is faster, it's cusomizable, and really good if you listen at songs online... I used to listen at online radio, and WMP used alot of time to connect etc, but winamp connected immediately...

 

WMP = IE

Winamp = Firefox

58852[/snapback]

I think same.

 

Windows Media Player makes problem with my OS Windows XP SP2. Why? I don't know. Often i must kill Windows Media Player.

 

I use Winamp 2.95. I don't like Winamp 3.0 or 5. 2.95 is faster...

[rambo406 0]

media player easy to use and most of all !! it's free!

[badinfluence 0]

my ranking is as follow,audio >> 1) iTune 2) Winamp 3)Window media player 9(*i dun like v.10) 4) Real playervedio >> 1) Quicktime 2) Window media player 9(*i dun like v.10) 3) Divx playerwindown media player version 10 isnt stable yet and they released..vedio codec are not function well. so i prefer still stick with version 9 which is working perfectly.iTune is the best tool for audio right now which you can convert/import mp3<>wav<>m4p<>aiff but the winamp music library management is the best which i ever seen....for the Real player, beware about its MIME setting under preference section..the real player program all audio/vedio to open with real player without prompting.. that's the worst thing in Real player..but one good thing is that real format is best for streamline to publish on web because of using low bandwidth usage, very small compression but low quaity..

[Saint_Michael 3]

hmmm i dunno winamp is... oh hell it blows i prefer windows media player need i say more well. not really everyone explained it above so HA!!!

[MidnightDevil 0]

Im not against Windows Media Player, in fact, I like it. But I use Winamp, it's lighter, versatible, configurable, lot's of skins, lot's of dsp, lot's of stuff WMP doesn't even dream about!!About the sound quality, WPM has a very good quality, no doubt about it. but playing around with winamp EQ the quality can be much more improved.

[nonon 0]

Well i just use winamp 2!!It has all features i need, it's quite lighter and faster than windows media player and reads out the informations tags in the files so i easily know what i'm listening to...I can also see movies in it...

[Someone 0]

WinAMP, no doubt WMP is good but, wmp uses more memory that is suposed and it's not so good, not so many options but I use it more thatn winamp because i don't listen to music so i don't need programs for that

[adzik 0]

I used winamp for quite some time, then WMP.... now, I just can't bloody decide. Maybe someone has another good alternative?

[Shackman 0]

Windows media players from microsoft looks more nicer...I prefer it. But I use winamp too. Winamp uses less system resources and it is quite effecient......but for the eye candy...and those who like a nice interfact, like me...I would prefer windows media player. I don't mind paying the system resoruces.-Shackman

[MidnightDevil 0]

Winamp, has neat sound quality, lots of botifull skins and its lighter.WMP, has a very good sound quality, some neat skins and its a little heavier

[ywlke 0]

WinAmp has a cleaner interface, and it chews less resources, but WMP plays more formats and it has a WMP taskbar, which means I can Play/Stop, etc. without having to bring up the full window.