August 2, 2007

Winamp 5.33 vs iTunes 7.3

Filed under: blog, culture, internet, mac, music, musings, program, reviews, software, tech — bardicknowledge @ 4:33 pm

Well I have talked about this before, iTunes vs Winamp but I have recently jumped ship from musikCube and moved back to winamp. So I figured I would give both the newest versions a spin and did what I could to make both use a little memory with actually hacking any files.

All I want my music player to do is to play music. That it’s. i don’t give a shit about visuals or stores, or podcasts, or internet radio, or ipod support, or whatever. All it has to do is play music, cd’s and rip them if I for ever some reason have a cd.

So how did things turn out?

Well I installed the latest version of winamp and itunes.  Winamp 5.33 and iTunes 7.3

In Winamp I literally removed every plugin that isn’t needed to play my library or rip/burn cds.  In iTunes I turned off every feature but the library. I didn’t delete anything because the preferences didn’t give me the option like Winamp does.

I stat again I did not hack or did anything to change the configs other than use the options available to me through the preferences.

Anyways, Winamp’s memory usage sits between 6000k-20000k which is pretty good for a media player.

iTunes, after installing and turning of all the features used 44000k.  And when you add all the other crap processes it runs, updater, devices and I dunno what else, it was over 55000k mem usage.

Obviously I choose to keep my Winamp installation.

If you purely want to listen to music through a library, Winamp is your best bet. If you want only to listen to playlists, you may want to consider foobar, but!!! it just as much (and more if skinned) than Winamp.

You could also consider Evilplayer but I wouldn’t. No id3 tag support, no way in hell I’m using it.

So there ya go. Winamp wins hands down if you ONLY want to listen to music. If you want to buy songs (pff) then iTunes may be useful. Don’t even mention ipods. I have an ipod and I run the software from the ipod. I can run it on anyones Win installation. If ya have a mac you have iTunes so no worries there.

Oh, btw, I am obliviously talking about all Windows software here.

I am going to try to hack iTunes a little and see what I can do. I have nothing against mac. I use a mac at work and I rather enjoy it. But I am looking at things in a purely functionality/memory usage point of view. Take my word or not, makes no difference to me. Sorry if I sound kinda rude but I got slammed for my last review because Winamp won then too and that was without configuring and I just want to make sure people don’t bitch that I’m a fanboy or anything. I will switch music players if you can show me a better one.



  1. I’m pretty old school, and I like to organise my music by the directory structure, which Winamp allows for easily. I still can’t get used to all this playlist stuff that all the new players are flexing.

    I think though, that Winamp will be moving to this trend to. Have you seen Winamp Beta 5.5? It’s got this new Bento skin that makes it look very similar to the rest of the library “playlist” infused players. Oh well…

    Comment by Soulistic — September 21, 2007 @ 10:39 am

  2. I’ve been using Winamp probably since version 1.0. It’s been a good player at all times. I loved when they introduced the library, which made search easier and faster. As you said iTunes seems too big, too loaded with extra features as for the music player. Winamp is indeed relatively fast and does not eat up your memory. Hands up for Winamp!

    Comment by freeborn182 — October 2, 2007 @ 1:19 pm

  3. Winamp! all the way
    but not if you compare to wmp

    by the way,
    if you ever get bored enough, make one of these reviews
    except compare zune software to itunes
    i wonder which will win, because theyre both shit

    Comment by Lev — January 29, 2008 @ 9:59 pm

  4. Haha, you are a fanboy!! (of sorts) BUT not the kind who eats the souls of haters, thankfully.

    Winamp is something I’m trying for the first time right now, and it looks really nice and seems like a really good media player. I also REALLY like that nice new Bento skin. (sorry, but I’m too cautious and too lazy to actually download and install a skin other than the default on ANY media player) However, although the organization of music libraries looks solid, I still love the simplicity and ease of use of iTunes, however not-so-pretty the default skin will be. Also, for some reason, iTunes doesn’t use as many resources (memory-wise) as Winamp on my HP Pavillion / Windows Vista Home Premium computer, but that is strangely true with many programs – I seem to never have the same results as anyone else in this category.

    Comment by SK — February 17, 2008 @ 11:32 am

  5. guys, maybe you can try this “really small mem-usage” mp3 player. it called aimp2.

    you can also use some of winamp plugins.

    Comment by ferry — July 16, 2009 @ 10:31 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: