> haven't used those 2 earlier versions of Winamp for ages. So why would
> Nullsoft (or whoever it is) abandon Fraunhofer for Nitrane?
Nitrane is based heavily on AMP. Or more accurately, it started as AMP.
It was supposedly rewritten and nitrane was "better".
In any case, Playmedia sued Nullsoft for having AMP code, which they
settled out of court just before the AOL buyout.
During the time that the lawsuit was filed, and then time they they
settled, they stopped using Nitrane and distributed Fhg's decoder in its
place. Since Nitrane was "better", they switched back once they suit had
been settled. Or maybe that was one of the conditions, was that they MUST
use nitrane. Who knows. I don't think details were made public.
In any case, that's why they used fraunhofer. Winamp usually claims two
things
1) nitrane sounds better
2) nitrane is faster
1 is obviously false, but who knows for 2. i dont' think the fraunhofer
decoder was SIGNIFICANTLY slower, although since you guys are comparing
versions now, you might find that it is.
jack.
--
MP3 ENCODER mailing list ( http://geek.rcc.se/mp3encoder/ )
