Extended network functionality

[Dr.Flay]

I am wondering if including AjaxAmp as a standard option could be a way to encourage more app development aimed at connecting to Winamp, or even more networking or parallel-plugins (like pro remote controlled/linked mixing desks).
Perhaps the group could scratch their chins and think of some funky ways to use Winamp via remote control, or controlling something else, or working as a hive ? (or "herd" if we use the Llama reference).
http://ajaxamp.com

[MarkRH]

Yeah, AjaxAmp is something I have used a lot to play my music library from my parent's house using it's streaming options.  Since I only do this a couple times a year, I don't mind using the other Winamp for that.

[dro]

I'm not going to use AjaxAmp but have plans and some very initial code to try out a few things with allowing remote control / access to a Winamp install.

There's a lot that still needs to be done as AjaxAmp is often the main option used but its lacking a number of features (data access from Winamp and a few other things) which is part of the reason for wanting to making a new implementation. The other is that I want something practical to hopefully get better at web tech for a few other things (non-WACUP related) that I've got to look into.

Plus any solution now really needs to be at least working over a HTTPS connection along with proper iPv6 support (subject to specific usage) and if possible adopting things like HTTP/2 (not sure it'll help too much with such a setup) and WebSockets (which allows for a flow of data between Winamp and the browser / app / whatever) so that things like song changes can be pushed without having to poll for such information i.e. a cleaner and better solution).

-dro

[Dr.Flay]

You have sort of wandered in the direction I was intending for discussion, as you obviously tried to do, or are aware of things AjaxAmp cannot do.

AjaxAmp is sort of arbitrary for the topic, only relevant as-in it is a working addon (if limited).

I am more interested in brainstorming ideas that make Winamp indispensable to anyone that also uses a mobile device.

I am not talking replacing Kodi, but thinking more;

"Wouldn't it be cool if you could easily...."

...translate multi-touch events into a convenient way to control 2 Winamps running together with a DJ-mixer DSP ? (DJ-Hero plugin+app)

...Control Milkdrop and AVS from your device via sliders and knobs GUI, mapped to the various key-presses ? (VJ-Hero plugin+app)

There must be other ideas that have never been "a thing" due to a previous world of separate devices and software.
I think device integration and fluidity is the way forward to keep Winamp relevent down the road, so an API that has the scope to encompass more than just play music will be a major boon in these wilderness years (After-all that is what WACUP is).

[dro]

The potential ideas could be limitless but it really comes down to what makes sense and what can feasibly be done.

With what I think you're aiming at (primarily a standardised 'web' api interface allowing for 'remote' access - be that local or remote as part of another app as such), there's a fair bit that can be done (i.e. playlist, library, playback queue, playback options, etc) but some things might just be a step too far (it really depends on whether things can be modified or not in the first place).


The obvious especially for remote access comes down to the bits i've mentioned above along with some sort of file / streaming implementation (I'd pushed for a while to see a cut down version of the SC DNAS integrated as part of the pre-sale suggestions between the two products). As it's not the greatest of things due to the re-encoding that goes on when using the DSP / output plug-in as the broadcasting part (the ideal is if the input files are in the desired format and bitrate that you don't have to re-convert anything) but it'd be enough imho to allow for most reasonable streaming playback options to work.

The other would be to look at a UPNP/DLNA solution which achieves the same end result but is probably a bit more complicated to get implemented but might work better with other solutions out there though the simpler 'here it is' approach of a mini-DNAS appeals (due to having more experience in that area).


The bigger thing then is even after this is implemented (whatever it ends up being), is anyone going to want to make use of it. For some I think it might be helpful but there's not a lot of vocal voices out there. One thing that a web interface might help with is it makes certain inter-app aspects work (e.g. Windows UWP apps with 'classic' win32 programs) as that method does work when using the more traditional SendMessage(..) setup doesn't (at least I don't believe UWP apps are able to make use of such things).

-dro