#Winamp 5.666 build 3516 crashes cracked#
#Winamp 5.666 build 3516 crashes update#
#Winamp 5.666 build 3516 crashes skin#
#Winamp 5.666 build 3516 crashes software#

The reason I never further updated it was the way Winamp devolved over the years (loss of plugin functionality and eventually loss of proper NT 5.x support) and the fact I made an installation that shares libraries with XMPlay and allows them both to easily play variety of VGM and demoscene audio formats.

Re WACUP: Windows Explorer / OS shell integration is one of the main aspects along with a decent replacement local library plug-in that doesn't have the issues the plug-in from 5.666 has (which isn't something you'd be using from your other comments). Though having worked on it I'd still take a 5.66x over a 5.64/5.65/5.7 beta as it was a better iteration imho but that might be more from me thinking as a plug-in developer & that there were fewer odd crash reports against it compared to the earlier builds.Īs just because it works fine for one doesn't meant it won't for others & complaints about Winamp stability / random crashes has plagued it over the years & was one benefit of the 5.64/5.65/5.7 betas in that the crash reporter was generically enabled (something that I did with WACUP from the start as most don't want to provide the information so a form of automatic crash submission is needed to help detect & try to resolve key issues that don't appear elsewhere).

If you've stripped things back then it probably doesn't make that much of a difference on the version. Tbh it sounds like you want to use something different anyway & just need a reason to do it which is entirely your choice & works the same for those who doggedly hold onto old 2.9x builds which do have issues. That's one aspect of WACUP that beats Winamp though you could counter reply & say that code not being worked on is less likely to bring new bugs, etc.

#Winamp 5.666 build 3516 crashes software#

Sure I'd love everyone to come over to WACUP (which is still using bits of Winamp for the moment) but trying to replace & improve something that was developed over 14 years takes time & there's aspects of WACUP that still prevent it from being used as a generic daily driver).Īny software potentially can have vulnerabilities & having developer(s) is a better place to be than not if something does arise. I still hold that the patched 5.666 build is better to use compared to a 5.64/5.65/5.7 beta build as it resolved a lot of small issues from the crash reports that were enabled over those builds.

#Winamp 5.666 build 3516 crashes cracked#

That specific 5.7 beta is the equivalent of 5.65 & sure it probably works fine / can be cracked or you could just use the non-beta 5.65 build as it was only the beta builds with the Winamp Cloud features that was time locked. Yet although I loved those I almost never use them now, so I could probably be okay with switching to Audacious in Windows. The only real disadvantage of Audacious for me is inability to run Winamp visualization plugins.

#Winamp 5.666 build 3516 crashes skin#

Nowadays I spend more time in Linux than in Windows, and there I use Audacious with the same skin as Winamp. I'm not sure that either 5.8 or WACUP address this concern. The only thing I don't like is the idea that when something hasn't been in active development for so long, there are probably known vulnerabilities in it.

#Winamp 5.666 build 3516 crashes update#

I know there's 5.8 from and WACUP, but I don't see any compelling reasons to update based on features.

It still works in Windows 10, and I still like the Winamp user interface. The beta expires but that's trivial to crack. Though I now see that the beta actually has a lower build number, because 5.666 is build 3516. When the last version of Winamp came out, I didn't like the 666 in the version number and 5.7 seemed newer than 5.666, I used the v5.7 build 3444 beta.