Scaling of old Winamp skins

Added by Bert vL over 10 years ago

I compiled the newest stable release for Debian. only one problem: The ubuntu package version from the repos has the option to upscale old winamp skins (make it look twice as big) which I can't find in my complied version. How do I get it? Or is it gone for good? I need it because my screen resolution is so big I can hardly read anything.

Do I need to add anything when compiling?

Replies (21)

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by John Lindgren over 10 years ago

That option is gone. It was badly implemented and buggy from the beginning and was dropped in the transition to GTK+ 3.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by Bert vL over 10 years ago

Well, it always worked for me... Isn't it possible to bring this back as a plugin? Or is it completely incompatible to gtk3?

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by John Lindgren over 10 years ago

There's no reason that it couldn't be implemented except that it would probably be more work than anyone has time for.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by super jamie over 10 years ago

I too would like to see this feature back.

I think it was more popular than you realise. You'll find quite a few forum posts from years ago indicating it was the reason people started using Audacious in the first place.

I know that's certainly the case with me. I'd rather not go back to xmms1 as gtk1 is ugly and will probably be removed from all distros eventually, it already has with Ubuntu.

I understand it was buggy when using some of the old "extended" themes like TinyPlayer but when using genuine WinAmp skin files it always worked fine for me too.

Please consider adding this feature back in, even if it's just a disabled-by-default plugin so it doesn't "taint" your main code.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by John Lindgren over 10 years ago

I think you misunderstand the issue. Whether the feature is implemented has nothing to do with how popular it is; it depends on whether someone cares about it enough to implement it. (I don't.)

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by Evan Daniel about 10 years ago

Seriously? That sucks. I used audacious because I liked the interface. It's the only distinguishing feature it has, and it's a really good one. Except now the text is so small I can't read anything, and the visualizer is so small it's not interesting. The double size option always struck me as a crude hack, and I wouldn't mind seeing it replaced with something better / more flexible / whatever. But, as things stand now, I can't read the panel, and that's not acceptable. Time to downgrade, I suppose.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by Michael Schwendt about 10 years ago

It is my continuing impression that more and more Audacious users abandon the old Winamp skinned UI in favour of the GTK UI (not only because if its features like dockable plugin windows) plus a matching desktop theme.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by Axel Lira over 9 years ago

The Winamp skin and the double size option are the very reasons me and many friends of mine use audacious. I could care less about the GTK UI, and I'm still using version 2.5.4.
We were majorly disappointed when we found the option was "upgraded" out of 3.x.
In another note, I also missed the black GTK file chooser that paired with the default winamp skin. I wonder if they got it back by now.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by Alex R about 8 years ago

I would like to support those users who liked old Winamp-like interface. I think it was a time when users of audacious suddenly realized, that Linux now have not just Winamp-like interface (xmms), but also everyday normal musical player features, like plugins, skins, small memory footprint (though not applicable anymore to my broken 3.3.4, which can leak up to almost all free ram at random time) and low cpu usage. When they realized they finally found a program, that can encourage their friends to use Linux. Or just for those users who used Winamp 2.x on Windows and miss these good old days.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by John Lindgren about 8 years ago

You can support or create a fork of Audacious 2.5 if you want to, but keep in mind that you are abandoning three years of new features and bug fixes that have been implemented since then. As of tonight there are 223 issues with a status of "Closed" in our tracker, and that tracker only goes back to Audacious 3.1. So ... good luck?

GTK+ is a dead end, though (2.x and 3.x both). So instead of going back and maintaining an old version, you might consider helping out with the C++/Qt port once it gets off the ground. Since the Winamp interface will have to be mostly rewritten anyway, we can design it to work well with double size from the beginning.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by Meneer Jansen about 8 years ago

Joined this forum for only one thing: please implement the option to scale the ol' Winamp skin. It's the only reason I still use Audacious.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by John Fordham almost 8 years ago

I, also, joined this forum for exactly one reason: To urge reinstatement of the scaling capability.

When I started using Linux, I found that most of the audio players sucked. Most were far too involved with heavy database activities which I found to be useless. They were only in the way, and they continually nagged to update or exchange data with online repositories of data. Worse than annoying - it was repelling. Then I found Audacious. It had the nicely functional WinAmp-style skin as it interface, managed a large playlist without problems, etc. But the graphic mapping of functions & lettering on my high-res display was WAY too small to use - until I discovered the "scale" function. Then, it was perfect.

Once the Linux v3 kernel was released, suddenly every programmer on the net, and all their cousins made a leap to immediately press it into use. Debian released Wheezy, Ubuntu released v12.04 LTS,... Color management controls became primitive & unwieldy in every desktop I tried. One evening w/ Unity, and I came to the conclusion it was the very worst DUI I'd ever seen in 30 years of personal computing. (Interesting note: I read an interview w/ Linus Torvaldis, where he said that he intended to switch to xfce/Xubuntu, just to get away from Unity/Gnome3.)

I was willing to put up w/ many things from the heavily disfunctional v3 kernel dumping use of metacity - but, when I discovered that the Audacious program had lost its ability to make the graphics large enough to interact with, I abandoned thoughts of upgrading to any of the v3 kernel environments. I'm a musician, and I use Audacious during my practice sessions. I maintain playlists of practice materials in my archive, switch between playlists, edit playlists, etc. on a daily basis. A fully functional & CONVENIENT audio player is essential. And, no nagware conducting data-mining, thank you. I'll maintain my own access to files, thank you. Automated databases only get in the way. Choosing between the purported (?) advantages of v3 kernel environments, and having a fully functional audio player, I'll choose the player.

I did make an attempt at working with the new, different Audacious interface - and, it was awful. Not only is it clumsy, but it's a bland eyesore. I simply couldn't work with it. But, when I open the Audacious v2.x player using the WinAmp-stype interface, the entire player is literally 3 inches wide on my screen. The playlist is slightly smaller, at approx. 2 inches. I kid you not - 3 inches & 2 inches, at most. It makes me wonder whether the programmers have access to modern, high-res display devices when they test what they've done... (They do test it, don't they? I mean, they must have looked at the result at least once, right?)

So, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, either reinstate the "scaling" function, or correct the mapping of pixels to functions to fit high-res display devices. Make the graphics MUCH larger. I'm sure the GIMP program could scale them up with ease, and GIMP isn't that hard to learn to use.

Thank you in advance, for your assistance in this matter.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by John Lindgren almost 8 years ago

As I said before, I'm not personally interested in reimplementing the scaling feature. There appears to be enough interest in the feature that you should be able to find another developer who is interested and can write a patch, or even pool together a few dollars and hire someone to do so (I'm not volunteering as I already have a full-time job). It will take more effort than just reverting the commit that removed the feature, as the originally implementation was badly done, but the feature is certainly not impossible to implement.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by John Lindgren almost 8 years ago

John Fordham wrote:

Once the Linux v3 kernel was released,

I'm not sure how much you actually know about the internals of Linux, but the removal of this feature had absolutely nothing to do with the Linux kernel. It was removed because it was badly implemented [1] and we needed to make the code more maintainable in the long term (and especially during the migration to the GTK3 toolkit).

[1] There was one bug in it in particular (related to some interaction with rolling up the main window) that I eventually gave up trying to fix, since it was just too difficult to understand how the code was intended to work.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by Bodo Eggert about 7 years ago

The problem description sounds like you had a complicated way of upscaling.

I'd rescale the theme to double/triple size on changing the scale (or on loading) and adjust the position of the buttons accordingly. Then the code should just work.

Off cause if you've inherited old code that has hardcoded constants, it won't be that easy.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by Thomas Lange about 7 years ago

Have you read the post before? ;)
This feature is again available with version 3.6.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by Jim Turner over 6 years ago

Mr. Lindgren, my old eyes thank you! :D

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by John Fordham almost 4 years ago

John Lindgren wrote:

Oh well, what's one less night of sleep anyway?

It's been 3(?) years since I first posted here. Since then, some changes have occurred - for which, I'm grateful. Three days ago, I was forced to install a new OS to replace Ubuntu v16 which crashed & burned during in-place upgrade to v18 - unrecoverable. After some study, I chose to dl' & install Debian ("Stretch") v9.5.0 w/ the "Mate" desktop. I'm as pleased as punch with it, except for the absence of SagCAD in the repo. The version of Audacious in the repo is v.3.7.2. The WinAmp interface which I love so dearly seems to work like a charm (as far as I've investigated) with the "Double Size" option - with one BIG GLITCH:

The playlist seems incapable of reading & using the MP3 ID v2 tags. Instead, it's just showing the filenames of the songs, as found in the directories. I mentioned previously that I'm a musician, and use Audacious as an accessory for my practices. The glitch I mentioned is important, because I developed a format for including practice data into the MP3 song title field. (As a programmer, you might like this.) For example, " a5 01 Ab SongName ArtistName" indicates that a song w/ name of SongName by the artist ArtistName is in the key of Ab, has been melody-practiced 15 times (Base 61 = {0,1,2,3,...9,a,b,c...z,A,B,C...Z} in each digit, w/ 3 digit places for each numeric value), and percussion-practiced 1 time. I leave the leading digit blank until needed, to reduce visual clutter. I tuck in as many spaces as necessary after SongName, to align the end of ArtistName at the right edge of the playlist display window. This format makes it possible to easily track my practice, to maintain variety of artist/group, and notice pieces which have been lagging in practice, or over-practiced.

Is it possible to fix that glitch?

Thanks in advance!

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by John Fordham almost 4 years ago

Whoops! Base 62, not base 61.

RE: Scaling of old Winamp skins - Added by John Lindgren almost 4 years ago

This thread is over 6 years old and completely unrelated to ID3 tags. Please start a new one.