Hello everyone,
I thought this question would have been asked countless times before, but after searching the forums I didn't find a single post about it. So far i managed my music from my laptop, which runs windows but my PC runs Arch Linux and recently i wanted to install Arch on my laptop as well and move my library to my PC. I looked at all the different alternatives to Foobar I could find, and while a lot of them a really nice none of them are quite as feature-rich or customizable as foobar is. This is a problem since I organize my music in a somewhat inconventional way any I want my library to be perfect. So I wondered, will there ever be a linux port? Since this software is relatively old I'm sure someone must have thought about this before and I guess if it was decided foobar would not be ported to linux there are good reasons.
Look into WINE (https://www.winehq.org/).
People on this forum seemed to have decent success using foobar with it.
I have done that and besides the issues with the GUI and window style being different I see no point in using Linux when I end up emulating windows programs anyway. Foobar seems to follow the Linux mindset rather than that of windows anyway.
I thought this question would have been asked countless times before, but after searching the forums I didn't find a single post about it.
Search in foobar2000 subforums (General, Support) - you'll find plenty of threads about Linux.
Ah, apparently i have been looking in the wrong section. Why will there be no port then? It seems to be one of the most requested things. And considering how many people would use it on linux since hardly any other music player/manager could compete with it, it seems quite illogical not to port it. I read that one reason is the huge amount of work required, especially since foobar's source will not be published. But it would definitely be a step in the right direction, a very big one. I'm sure there are developers willing to help porting it.
huge amount of work required
+ Market share: ( http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide )
Windows: 81.8 %
Linux: 1.61 %
I have already become a multi platform coding cyborg, dealing with Android, iOS, Mac and UWP - apart from Windows desktop which I sorely miss as it's the only thing I feel really competent at.
Mac port happened because I've become halfway competent at making Mac UI while working on unrelated commercial projects. With Linux I'd have to learn from scratch.
Anyway, I'm not outright declining Linux port, but it's not happening during forseeable future.
I have already become a multi platform coding cyborg, dealing with Android, iOS, Mac and UWP - apart from Windows desktop which I sorely miss as it's the only thing I feel really competent at.
Mac port happened because I've become halfway competent at making Mac UI while working on unrelated commercial projects. With Linux I'd have to learn from scratch.
Anyway, I'm not outright declining Linux port, but it's not happening during forseeable future.
I'm sure it will be excellently received in the linux community. There's a lot of music players but nothing as complete as foobar2000 and
although it works pretty well through wine a native application is always better and less problematic.
And you can take it like a personal challenge, exploring new fields :P
I'm sure it will be excellently received in the linux community.
A closed-source program? Not so sure.
I have already become a multi platform coding cyborg, dealing with Android, iOS, Mac and UWP
Anyway, I'm not outright declining Linux port, but it's not happening during forseeable future.
That is understandable, but I hope it will happen someday. Maybe you can find someone who can take on developing a linux version.
I'm sure it will be excellently received in the linux community.
A closed-source program? Not so sure.
Why not?
One can be a fan of open source and respect the good software although it be closed source.
Not everybody is a Zealot.
Even the FSF has celebrate the buy of github from Microsoft.
And microsoft itself has become one of the most actives actors in open soft world.
The times has changed a lot my friend.
And foobar2000 is a very loved piece of software and longed for a lot of people that miss it a lot when change to linux from his windows boxes.
Had you considered using Qt for the desktop version(s)? (Mac or otherwise)
And make fb2k 100mb or more thanks to Qt bloat?
That is understandable, but I hope it will happen someday. Maybe you can find someone who can take on developing a linux version.
I gave Linux Mint a test drive a few months ago in anticipation of XP becoming impractical and switching to Linux, and fb2k was one of the programs I tested.
I can't remember details as I didn't have it installed for long, but Mint has some sort of installer for Windows programs that run under Wine. I'm pretty sure fb2k was in the list of applications, so you'd run the Wine installer thingy, give it the fb2k installer exe and it does the rest. I copied the command line encoders I use over to where fb2k was installed and the ones I tested worked fine.
I was reasonably impressed with Linux Mint. Not that I've played with any other distros in a while but I was happy enough to not bother and Mint will be the OS for my new PC, whenever I get around to building it. It's reasonably Windows-like. Well, it's reasonably XP-like, at least.
Oh.... and if something won't run in WINE it's easy enough to install some flavour of Windows as a virtual OS. I vaguely remember that working fairly seamlessly. You start a Windows program from the start menu the same way you'd start any other program and all the Virtual stuff fires up behind the scenes. At least that's how I remember it.
@lvqcl
Yes. http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide
But be precise.
At least mention that that is rough numbers.
If we really get facts straight:
That is a Desktop userbase market share metric gathered by the network of StatCounter.
If you include all the platforms and remember that Android is technically Linux: http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share
Then Linux userbase already is more than Windows.
====
Also Linux users, Open Source, Free Software users and IT professionals - use a lot of ad-blocking/removing of trackers.
So that Statcounter cannot see.
I used to use BluHel firewall, Ublock Origin, Ghostly, Disconnect, partly NoScript, Carma Blocker, Lightbeam - most of this all at the same time. And with https://someonewhocares.org/ and later with
https://github.com/StevenBlack/hosts on top.
As so I had all sites working normally, while trackers/bad quality/slow ad-counter scripts removed.
Bandwith saved, load time saved, RAM saved, and I am calm.
====
Also let's not forget that from 98% of Windows users - the majority is simple OS users. Office workers, families.
While the majority of Linux users are IT professionals/enthusiasts. That have English as primary, or as I - learned English, just to be a professional.
It is a huge difference in a userbase.
And in most cases gaining that Linux user base - results in a quiite a bit boost in IT professionals, good bug-reporting and descriptive/thoughtful feature ideas, for a closed source project.
In case if project is open - of course, it is a completely different game, the project gets drive-by commits&ideas, and maintainers&developers community around it.
====
Also let's not forget that because Linux users are mostly IT professionals, or tech-savvy people - they are looking the stuff on the internet (blogs, RSS feeds, GitHub, GitLab, distro resources, Phoronix, Hacker News, Medium, Habr, Open News, Linux.org.ru) - those in most cases do not have StatCounter trackers, also because both sides (hoster and reader) respect(/or forced to respect) the privacy of readers.
Linux users are known to be concerned to be in control of their information.
So StatCounter does not see that Linux IT crowd browsing their daily life and interests.
====
And let's not forget.
1. Also, let's say (a fact) that most of the servers (even Microsoft Azure has 40% in 2016, 50% from 2017 MS presentations info, and approaching 70% of instances - are Linux servers).
Especially big services and services with high-load are almost exclusively Linux.
2. And so, let's say that 90% of sites you browse and services you use are using - operate on infrastructures of Linux servers.
Google, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, SnapChat, Reddit, and all others.
3. "Microsoft loves Linux":
Just yesterday:
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/powershell/2018/07/20/powershell-core-now-available-as-a-snap-package/
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/linux/sql-server-linux-setup?view=sql-server-linux-2017
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server/sql-server-2017
Microsoft themselves integrate their stack to Linux and Open Source. And eventually, at last, - use ideas from.
And don't forget the Free Software (Linux and main tools are GPL) - that can not be conquered/submerged by Microsoft or any other company in any shape or form.
They also make Linux distributions themselves:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Linux_distributions
I would reference my older post of arguments here: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/41448#issuecomment-394398724
Microsoft merged Windows department and already expects Windows OS - to be a supplementary product.
At current Microsoft action - it is perceived and expected that Microsoft would rebase Windows on Linux kernel in next several years, making Windows - a distribution of Linux. So they would not need to write their own kernel, and would make supporting of OS easier.
Windows had:
* Microsoft POSIX subsystem
* Windows Services for UNIX
* now - Windows subsystem for Linux (https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/about)
, so Windows really has architectural predisposition to make migration much easier then most people expect.
That is also probably why they migrating their tools to Linux one-by-one.
VS Code, .Net
"Bloated and heavy Qt" - how many years would I see that people say that old myth.
Qt.
I used to write some simple GUIes for different needs, in GTK and Qt.
I would just refer to this post: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/issues/41797
I got triggered, because guy called KDE - a legacy system. People should pick words and make research before trying to midlessly convert last of the Linux dirstribuions from KDE to GNOME.
====
Yes, in Windows, because of it's distribution design - in the most cases application needs to bundle and drag with itself most of the stack and libraries it uses, and so also Qt. It is Windows design and distribution flaw, they outsourced to users to search and check and download and install software, and to programmers to distribute it. And then tried to solve it with forcing people to use Metro all the time everywhere from the Microsoft Store.
In Linux you have a distributions official, maintained systems that have all software in one place. And it automatically downloads software from official sites, and check-sums that files are right, and goes through official toolchain, and installs software and dependencies for you.
In Linux - if you install KDE, and see that 300 dependencies and 400 Mbytes would be installed.
That is the same Mb size as for GNOME, but much more dependencies.
But in Linux - it is one time 400 Mbytes - that reused forever by all applications.
In Windows - resulting Desktop with all application&updates gets easily to 120-200 Gbytes.
While I have an old system that lives on 120 system partition - it is Arch Linux that has software-rich AUR system. It had/has 5-6 years worth of tools and applications installed for (DevOps) usage and experiments. That system holds probably roughly 3 times more libraries/tools/applications than Windows person uses. And Arch Linux system is 70 Gbytes, so it always fitted, and I never got concerned with space on the system partition. Because software in Linux reuses bits that are already installed.
Ok - KDE installs all that 300 packages. But you need to understand that KDE is not just by words is "feature-rich" - it is in fact "feature-rich", so it uses many modules and their features.
And more modular and future-rich then most but not all GNOME applications.
In eyes of one people 300 KDE dependencies (from which 20-40 are Qt) - is a very flexible modular design.
In eyes of other that is "fat bloat", and so logically that people also think that those developers were stupid to use all that.
====
Qt even took more actions to be even more granular and made architecture possibility - Qt-Lite.
https://blog.qt.io/blog/2017/05/31/qt-lite-qt-5-9-lts/
That allows compile-in/bundle only functions that were used from modules. That is lightweight as it can be.
Already modular Qt - can be made 5 times leaner if leveraging Qt-Lite.
====
Abought is Qt lightweight.
Lightweight LXDE somehow got fully rewritten to Lightweight LXQt.
And Budgie GTK somehow wanted to be fully rewritten to Qt for Budgie v11.
Do you imagine what should happen, so developers decide desktop environment to be rewritten to other toolkit. How much work that is.
I did closed-source Docker image that serves LXQt Linux environment through noVNC (to be used from a browser). Why LXQt - because it is modern, good looking and lightweight on RAM and hard-drive, and great to run at many instances scale in container clusters.
====
A year ago I made reinstall to my godmother.
Pentium 4, Nvidia NV20 (the year 2001 of manufacturing).
Mainline Qt and KDE was the fastest modern GUIs on that 15 years old PC.
Qt and KDE folks worked hard to make the total system of fallbacks, so DE falls back and fully adjusts to possibilities of hardware it runs on. So that is why it works so great on that PC.
====
Do you imagine how lightweight toolkit must be to run on microcontrollers. It is not even Raspebby Pi Zero - it is microcontrollers. https://blog.qt.io/blog/2018/05/03/qt-microncontrollers-mcu/
====
Qt used in hardware, serious science, and automotive industry.
Look serious GUI and complex UI applications as QGIS and Krita.
Look at what KDAB is doing to understand the crazy possibilities of the toolkit:
https://www.kdab.com/development-resources/videos-webinars/
I talk about Qt, because people that does not know, and just repeat old tropes and write stuff without arguments, in fact those people make a big damage to the reputation and community of KDE.
It result is echo-chamber and closed-loop systems, and the results are that Linux community underappreciates KDE and Qt devs work.
People use GTK, because they are using GTK. Writing in GTK, because we already started writing in GTK. Financing GNOME, because we use GNOME.
While KDE is really competitive and not funded work. Imagine would it was if was somewhat more encouraged and funded.
People fall into GTK, KDE camps. I want them to become co-represented and co-workers.
In Linux, for users, it is just the question to install 300 Mb of dependencies, and not any other resources - to use applications both GTK and Qt applications freely, and use from them those that have possibilities needed for you.
I used Foobar2000 for many years.
And also migrated with it to the Linux systems.
So I was using it for ~10 years on Linux systems under Wine.
It is late at my UTC+3, I would write the main part - report on running Foobar2000 in Wine under Linux - in later days.
And would be a really happy report with useful info.
report with useful info.
Does it imply that you wrote 4 posts filled with
useless info?
While the majority of Linux users are IT professionals/enthusiasts.
And in most cases gaining that Linux user base - results in a quiite a bit boost in IT professionals, good bug-reporting and descriptive/thoughtful feature ideas, for a closed source project.
If they are such IT professionals, then why should they wait while someone create player for them?
While the majority of Linux users are IT professionals/enthusiasts.
And in most cases gaining that Linux user base - results in a quiite a bit boost in IT professionals, good bug-reporting and descriptive/thoughtful feature ideas, for a closed source project.
If they are such IT professionals, then why should they wait while someone create player for them?
There's a lot of beautiful players, tagging programs and music converters program in linux.
I don't have any "need" of foobar in linux per se.
I just love the program from the time I used windows xp.
I don't have any problem running foobar in linux with the help of wine.
I just love to have a native version that have full use of the system resources without any translation layer.
And most important thing, I don't want to start the typical flame war between linux-windows.
So the tone is not absolutely necessary,
report with useful info.
Does it imply that you wrote 4 posts filled with useless info?
Maybe was useless for you but I have enjoy his explanation.
huge amount of work required
+ Market share: ( http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide )
Windows: 81.8 %
Linux: 1.61 %
I'm sure it will be excellently received in the linux community.
A closed-source program? Not so sure.
Do you consider that useful.....
If you aren't interested in the subjet is not necessary tring to start the typical flame war.
A little bit of respect
So the tone is not absolutely necessary,
If you aren't interested in the subjet is not necessary tring to start the typical flame war.
You are not a moderator, so it's
your tone that is not acceptable. People here can and will question validity of arguments.
So the tone is not absolutely necessary,
If you aren't interested in the subjet is not necessary tring to start the typical flame war.
You are not a moderator, so it's your tone that is not acceptable. People here can and will question validity of arguments.
So I can and will question your lack of arguments.
I also have the right too I hope.
Until a moderator will say the opposite.
If you have something on topic you're welcome, otherwise this unpleasant exchanget is, by my side, over
huge amount of work required
+ Market share: ( http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/desktop/worldwide )
Windows: 81.8 %
Linux: 1.61 %
1.61% is a LOT of people. If there's 1 billion people using personal computers, 1.61% is over 16 million people.
That is not a small amount :)
But there's another question. How many of those 16 million would get notice f2k existence on their platform? Then how many of those who notice would really switch to f2k and stay with it?
And more general question - how complete can be foobar on system that uses different APIs, thus may offer different capabilities - for example limited in certain areas. What makes foobar great is also its 3rd party plug-in base. They won't just work in native Linux version and not many devs will make ports. Because some are not active anymore, some are not interested in supporting/learning Linux platform specifics. So here Wine emulated version even exceeds possible native foobar for Linux, as most Windows APIs based plugs work in f2k under Wine...
But there's another question. How many of those 16 million would get notice f2k existence on their platform? Then how many of those who notice would really switch to f2k and stay with it?
It's a very popular software, could be a big number of user. There's a lot of post in linux forums about how to run it in wine and even a snap (a package with wine and foobar ready to install).
If the port is good and there's a API to make plugins could be very popular.
And more general question - how complete can be foobar on system that uses different APIs, thus may offer different capabilities - for example limited in certain areas. What makes foobar great is also its 3rd party plug-in base. They won't just work in native Linux version and not many devs will make ports. Because some are not active anymore, some are not interested in supporting/learning Linux platform specifics.
This is a valid point.
The more interesting part of foobar are the plugins and maybe some of them not want/not can be ported but on the other hand there's a lot of new developers with experience in linux that can do new plugins.
So here Wine emulated version even exceeds possible native foobar for Linux, as most Windows APIs based plugs work in f2k under Wine...
I agree. Foobar runs quite acceptably in wine but there's a quite aspects that are a inferior through wine like networking, disk access, etc because wine limitations.
There are pros and cons but I think that could be an improvement a native version.
There's a lot of beautiful players, tagging programs and music converters program in linux.
I know that there are players and tagging programs for linux.
I don't have any "need" of foobar in linux per se. I just love the program from the time I used windows xp.
So, should i rephrase my question that you probably tried to answer?
If they are such IT professionals, then why should they wait while someone create player,
which they will love more than existing linux players, for them?
And most important thing, I don't want to start the typical flame war between linux-windows.
Problem is not "linux-windows". Problem is people. Some people can't just do what they do. They want everybody to do the same.
I don't have any "need" of foobar in linux per se. I just love the program from the time I used windows xp.
So, should i rephrase my question that you probably tried to answer?
If they are such IT professionals, then why should they wait while someone create player, which they will love more than existing linux players, for them?
There's a lot of players and is a question of taste which one the people choose,
Whe are here because loves foobar but that do not mean that it will be technically worse or better than others. Each one make the things the way see thinks is better.
I simply will love a native version for a software that I use. Of course I ask to it to the program developer
That said nothing about windows-linux developers. We are talking about a program,
If I can't use foobar simply I use another, different but not inferior.
In fact I change to linux many years ago and only recently start to use foobar again.
And all this time I don't have any problem at all to play, organize or tagging music.
Many of them are for some people "better" and more "beautiful" than foobar.
In fact the mayority of windows people do not even know, use or like foobar and even you can say that is a strange example of software for the typical windows-ecosystem.
And most important thing, I don't want to start the typical flame war between linux-windows.
Problem is not "linux-windows". Problem is people. Some people can't just do what they do. They want everybody to do the same.
I don't really understand this part. The OP only answer for a port. Anybody is trying to force anyone to do anything.
Is a petition not an order
But there's another question. How many of those 16 million would get notice f2k existence on their platform? Then how many of those who notice would really switch to f2k and stay with it?
No idea. I wouldn't use it if it existed, since I'm already perfectly happy with the software I currently use. But I can't say what others would do. I just suspect that if you have the option between an open source solution vs a proprietary one, most Linux users would stick to open source. IMO, fb2k on Linux would probably get very little interest and wither away after a while.
I'm just saying that the market share argument should always be taken with a grain of salt, since the amount of people who use computers these days is huge. Even a small percentage now translates to a hell of a lot of people. There's real reasons not to go through the big effort of porting it to Linux. It's just that market share just doesn't seem like a real reason for something that is freeware.
The existence of fb2k on GNU/Linux could also raise the amount of total GNU/Linux users as well because for some people the absence of native fb2k port is a real stopping factor.
Can any Linux users comment on whether the more popular Foobar plugins also work under WINE emulation?
In particular, I'm thinking of Facets and the various wave seekbars available. I can imagine due to indexing and graphics requirements, respectively, these might be a challenge to emulate without performance problems.
Can any Linux users comment on whether the more popular Foobar plugins also work under WINE emulation?
In particular, I'm thinking of Facets and the various wave seekbars available. I can imagine due to indexing and graphics requirements, respectively, these might be a challenge to emulate without performance problems.
My component list
Core (2018-07-24 10:54:48 UTC)
foobar2000 core 1.4
foo_albumlist.dll (2018-07-24 10:54:02 UTC)
Album List 4.6
foo_audioscrobbler.dll (2014-08-27 05:56:30 UTC)
Audioscrobbler 1.4.7
foo_bpm.dll (2018-03-12 12:40:13 UTC)
BPM Analyser 0.2.4.6
foo_converter.dll (2018-07-24 10:54:04 UTC)
Converter 1.5.3
foo_discogs.dll (2018-05-05 21:10:17 UTC)
Discogs Tagger 2.14
foo_dsp_dolbyhp.dll (2014-08-31 14:34:22 UTC)
Dolby Headphone Wrapper 1.4.1
foo_dsp_dynamics.dll (2018-03-10 11:11:18 UTC)
Dynamics Compressor 0.2.1
foo_dsp_effect.dll (2018-08-23 01:32:00 UTC)
Effect DSP 0.32
foo_dsp_eq.dll (2018-07-24 10:53:56 UTC)
Equalizer 1.2.1
foo_dsp_fakegapless.dll (2018-02-16 18:00:58 UTC)
Fake Gapless DSP 0.4
foo_dsp_std.dll (2018-07-24 10:53:58 UTC)
Standard DSP Array 1.3.1
foo_dsp_subwoofer.dll (2018-08-18 02:52:13 UTC)
Subwoofer 2.0.0
foo_dsp_vlevel20080302.0.dll (2018-05-10 07:57:53 UTC)
VLevel 20080302.0
foo_dsp_vocal_exciter.dll (2018-03-15 14:55:48 UTC)
Vocal Exciter 1.0.1
foo_dynfil.dll (2018-04-03 19:20:27 UTC)
Dynamic Fields 1 beta 4
foo_enhanced_playcount.dll (2018-08-18 02:52:13 UTC)
Enhanced Playback Statistics 3.0.2
foo_enhanced_spectrum_analyzer.dll (2018-05-23 18:02:32 UTC)
Enhanced Spectrum analyzer 0.9.4.0
foo_facets.dll (2011-08-18 18:06:16 UTC)
Facets 1.0
foo_fileops.dll (2018-07-24 10:54:00 UTC)
File Operations 2.3
foo_freedb2.dll (2018-07-24 10:54:14 UTC)
Online Tagger 0.7
foo_infospect.dll (2014-08-27 05:56:42 UTC)
Infospect 1.0.3
foo_input_monkey.dll (2017-11-29 15:31:29 UTC)
Monkey's Audio Decoder 2.1.9
foo_input_std.dll (2018-07-24 10:54:34 UTC)
FFmpeg Decoders 3.2.4
Standard Input Array 1.0
foo_jesus.dll (2017-04-20 09:50:11 UTC)
Autosave & Autobackup 10
foo_jscript_panel.dll (2018-07-04 12:48:09 UTC)
JScript Panel 2.1.5.2
foo_lrc_metalarchives.dll (2018-08-18 02:52:32 UTC)
Lyrics from metal-archives.com 0.3
foo_lyrics3exsrc.dll (2018-03-18 10:09:57 UTC)
БД к Lyrics 3 0.2.0 beta 2
foo_masstag.dll (2015-06-11 18:49:07 UTC)
Masstagger 1.8.4
foo_musical_spectrum.dll (2018-04-11 11:34:32 UTC)
Musical Spectrum 0.9
foo_musicbrainz.dll (2018-04-25 22:52:28 UTC)
MusicBrainz Tagger 0.3.7
foo_osd.dll (2018-04-12 10:55:19 UTC)
On-Screen Display 1.74
foo_playcount.dll (2018-02-16 18:11:12 UTC)
Playback Statistics 3.0.2
foo_queuecontents.dll (2016-04-30 17:00:17 UTC)
Queue Contents Editor 0.5.1
foo_quicktag.dll (2015-06-11 18:49:29 UTC)
Quick Tagger 1.0.3
foo_random_pools.dll (2015-04-09 13:44:37 UTC)
Random Pools 0.1.5
foo_rgscan.dll (2018-07-24 10:54:10 UTC)
ReplayGain Scanner 2.3
foo_run.dll (2018-03-26 00:05:39 UTC)
Run services 0.3.8
foo_runcmd.dll (2014-09-07 23:08:39 UTC)
Run Command 1.1
foo_sanitizer.dll (2017-12-01 13:32:51 UTC)
Tag Sanitizer 1.1
foo_scrobble.dll (2018-04-08 02:20:55 UTC)
Scrobble 1.1.0
foo_simplaylist.dll (2014-08-31 13:34:44 UTC)
SimPlaylist 1.0
foo_simplaylist_manager.dll (2014-08-31 13:34:34 UTC)
SimPlaylist Manager 1.0
foo_stnaa.dll (2017-01-12 16:29:56 UTC)
Search tracks with no album art 1.00_beta3
foo_stop_after_queue.dll (2018-02-16 18:00:58 UTC)
Stop After Queue 1.1.1
foo_tagbox.dll (2015-06-11 18:49:43 UTC)
TagBox 0.212
foo_textdisplay.dll (2014-08-27 05:57:06 UTC)
Text Display UI Element 1.1 beta 1
foo_texttools.dll (2015-06-11 18:50:18 UTC)
Text Tools 1.0.5
foo_ui_columns.dll (2016-12-29 09:18:47 UTC)
Columns UI 0.5.1
foo_ui_std.dll (2018-07-24 10:54:14 UTC)
Default User Interface 0.9.5
foo_uie_albumlist.dll (2016-12-29 09:19:41 UTC)
Album list panel 0.3.7
foo_uie_console.dll (2016-12-29 09:19:15 UTC)
Console panel 0.5
foo_uie_esplaylist.dll (2015-07-08 14:12:01 UTC)
EsPlaylist 0.1.3.9
foo_uie_lyrics3.dll (2018-03-16 13:46:10 UTC)
Lyric Show Panel 3 0.5
foo_uie_lyrics3_minilyrics.dll (2018-03-18 10:10:33 UTC)
БД онлайн: MiniLyrics 0.9
foo_uie_panel_splitter.dll (2015-07-10 13:42:08 UTC)
Panel Stack Splitter 0.3.8.3(alpha)
foo_uie_tagger_mod.dll (2015-06-11 18:50:41 UTC)
Tagger Panel 1.2.10
foo_uie_typefind.dll (2016-12-29 09:19:55 UTC)
Typefind 0.3.1
foo_unpack.dll (2018-07-24 10:54:08 UTC)
ZIP/GZIP/RAR Reader 1.8
foo_wave_minibar_mod.dll (2018-09-02 18:50:50 UTC)
Waveform Minibar (mod) 1.0.19
All working.
The only thing that not work is full screen in Spectogram an similars and download images in JScripts Panels.
Do anyone know underlying Foobar2000 using what library to build on? Like MFC/WinForms etc. I am curious why only Foobar2000 develop such efficient software, better than QT, 10 times better than chromium apps. Furthermore on its columns ui, it is extremely good for customization. Why not more apps build like Foobar2000?
It builds on WTL for UI parts, which is vaguely like MFC, but really minimal, and links statically. Components can use more than that, depending on what the developer uses.
> Can any Linux users comment on whether the more popular Foobar plugins also work under WINE emulation?
Most of them work, even the VST bridge works somehow (but AFAIK only 32-bit VST)
There was one that didn't work (when tested on macOS though) because it needed some C++ library from MS and I haven't found any way to "correctly" install it: https://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_dsp_dither
Maybe it will work now, a lot of time passed with updates both to fb2k and the plugin but I am lazy to test as I don't really need it now (didn't need it back then as well but I didn't know that)