Talk:MacAmp

Sources needed

This article makes some grand claims about MacAmp and Dmitry Boldyrev, but cites no sources. I'd like to see these claims backed up and rewritten from a neutral point of view.

I've marked the article "disputed" because I find many of its unsourced claims dubious. For example:

• How do we know it is the "world's first"?
• Did SoundJam "copy" MacAmp specifically, and not just emulate the general interface of pre-iTunes MP3 players?
• How can we claim that the DJ version ever existed if it was never released?

rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 07:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

---

Rspeer read: MacAmp is the world's first MP3 audio player "with a user interface." If you can find one before that with a GUI then it can be disputed.

That's not how Wikipedia works. Please read Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you make a strong claim like that, you have to be able to back it up with a source.

So, in asking those questions above, I'm not asking for you to just answer them, because that doesn't help. I'm asking for you to link to reliable sources such as magazine articles.

By the way, who are you? Leaving anonymous messages isn't a very good way to be heard. It's extremely easy to get a username and requires giving no personal information. Along those lines, if you're Dmitry Boldyrev, you also need to read the autobiography policy -- you have to be very careful when writing about yourself or your accomplishments on Wikipedia.

I know that Wikipedia policies can be daunting when you first encounter them, but working within them is the only way to make your edits stick.

rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 07:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Rspeer:

There is no such thing as "General interface". While it was copied and both Winamp and Macamp Justin Frankel, Dmitry Boldryev and others designed the GUI concept of a media didn't care about it doesn't make it a "general interface" suited for public developer consumption. Winamp and Macamp came up with a unique GUI featuring unique elements. Anything released after that which resembles the concept of that GUI is a copy. It could be politely called "Winamp/Macamp like interface" if project is open source/free software or could be called "rip off" if the offending application sells for money. As far as I could find, SoundJam is commercial software. The fact developers didn't care enough or didn't bother with taking it to court doesn't change the fact that it is a rip off. For example release "RspeerTunes" as a commercial application which is bit to bit copy of iTunes interface, count the hours not days you get cease and desist letter (at least) from Apple Inc. Release "GNU-RspeerTunes" for a non competing OS as opensource, free software, nothing happens. That doesn't mean iTunes interface is public domain. It is a GUI which is designed, patented and owned by Apple Inc.

Now for the "never released for public consumption" part. A historical closed source commercial software may have several side branches which later decided never to release to general consumption for technical, commercial or legal and even social reasons. The only source for such information except technical espionage could be: Developer himself. I don't know if it is Dmitry Boldryev added that information but if he did, you should thank him for all software users who are a bit more into historical applications and history of them.

Please find a X, Windows, Macintosh, Amiga GUI mp3 player which was released to general public before BOTH Winamp and Macamp. Both projects started around same time, Mac version could have been released before Windows version because couple of reasons. Do we agree at least Winamp is World's first general public released mp3 GUI player? GUI player means user can select a file from X,Windows,Mac gui and play it without any text terminal command. By claiming Macamp is not World's first GUI mp3 player, you also claim Winamp isn't too. "Win"+"Amp", "Mac"+"Amp" , you understand the naming scheme now?

Before I waste my time on users who loves "citation needed" tag, I really want to learn whether do you agree with the fact that Winamp is the first ever publically usable GUI player/shell which plays mp3 files. If you agree, I will try my best as an end user who respects legendary developer profiles more than random wiki users. It may cost money since I will have to buy historical magazines. I am hoping that another rule of Wiki not to scan documents without permissions won't be (ab)used because you simply don't agree to the fact.

As we are speaking about now historical computer software, may I ask your credentials for disputing it? For example, were you using computers back in 1997 and following software scene? I personally do. Do I remember first incarnations of Emacs? No. Do I go to Emacs entry and "dispute" any claims? No.

This is a problem on Wiki which resulted in side projects, faceless, anonymous end users disputing articles because of their own agenda and calling other faceless, anonymous people with powers for help. As result, real info which can benefit to end users is legally vandalised,erased.

As a end user I am always interested in software application history and recently figured a trend to censor anything related to Dmitry Boldryev or Macamp, could I ask the reasoning behind this?.Ilgaz 12:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Let me see if I can address at least one of these issues that you bring up. You seem to take issues with the citation tags and the need for them. The problem is that this article makes a rather bold claim that this piece of software was world's first MP3 audio player with a user interface. As Wikipedia policy states (see WP:RS), exceptional claims require exceptional sources. This is not to say that we believe a "faceless", random Wikipedia editor any more than a "legendary developer profile" - but that also means that we can't take the legendary developer's word any more seriously than a random Wikipedia editor who feels the information is inaccurate. If someone feels a piece of information presented on any article is dubious then they are doing the community a favor by requesting a reliable source to back up the claim. In this case we cannot use the developer's profile as it was written by himself or people close to him, and is thus a primary source. We can't use primary sources to verify such claims. It's not to say we don't believe primary sources - it's just that, without a secondary source to back the claim up, we cannot be certain that it is accurate. Perhaps they could be intentionally fabricating the information, or perhaps they may be simply mistaken. In trying to build a reputable encyclopedia, we have to take steps to ensure that material is accurate.

For the record, yes I was using computers back in 1997, and yes I remember hearing about WinAmp "back in the day". I do not remember hearing about MacAmp. Does that mean I have to assume Winamp came first? No. There are a number of reasons I can think up that I may not have heard of Macamp, and even if I had, I cannot use my 10 year old memories as a reliable source.

Please do not accuse editors of having "their own agenda" and using the rules to their own benefit by "vandalising" information. A key principle of Wikipedia is to assume good faith and give all editors the benefit of the doubt. When concerns about information are brought up then a source to back up those claims must be found. This is the only way we can ensure the veracity of the information we are providing. Arkyan • ^(talk) 14:04, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Ilgaz, calm down. I'm not attacking you, and my only "agenda" is to defend Wikipedia against information that appears bogus.

No, I don't think WinAmp was the "first MP3 player with a user interface" either. I think it was the Fraunhofer Institute's Winplay3, from reading the history section of the MP3 article. So your claim here contradicts another statement made elsewhere on Wikipedia.

Of course, if that statement is wrong -- if you (or maybe Dmitry, if he's a separate person) really did beat the Fraunhofer Institute itself to releasing a GUI MP3 player -- then you have an easy way to set the record straight. Just provide the reliable sources I asked you for in the first place.

rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 18:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Made into a stub

I've turned the article into a stub. I see that Mewse made some changes to acknowledge Winplay3's existence, but even the new text had no references. Since the "world's first" part turned out to be untrue, I'm not inclined to believe any of the rest.

I also believe that Ilgaz, Mewse, and Dmitry Boldyrev are the same person unless you give me a reason to believe otherwise. Most of what I've removed from the article was a glowing narrative about what was going through Dmitry's mind when he did various things -- that's got a clear point of view, and it's almost certainly Dmitry's. I ask you again to read and follow the autobiography policy.

I encourage you to expand the current stub based on verifiable information. That means providing a reliable source for every non-trivial statement you make. If you don't think you'll be able to write with enough detachment, you could also post your sources here to the talk page so that other editors can build an article out of them.

rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 07:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I would take offense if you claim me, a 34 year old from Istanbul using his real name on whole Internet is in fact Dmitry Boldryev. I know Wiki's proactive "no lawsuit threats" policy but if you claim if I am a shameless, non ethical lamer who is low enough to use multiple identities to abuse ANY knowledge, I sadly say that this Wiki project is completely out of hand. What next? Should I share my IP and provide a SSH shell to prove you, a no name alias some facts?

I urge you to give information about a) Who are you? b) What is your problem with Macamp? c) What is your problem with Dmitry Boldryev? d) What kind of a credible source except actual developer would give information about non released closed source commercial software which is protected by various patents and legal agreements? If that information, which is trivial IMHO is given by actual developer, what is your problem with it?

Sad that this excellent project which could be compared to 1768'es Britannica based on the impact to culture is vandalised by people who has their little, tiny kingdoms and use their powers to mentally masturbate.

Fraunhaufer MP3 GUI player was NOT GENERAL PUBLIC USABLE, if you weren't a teenager those times, you would easily know that fact. There are dozens of articles on web which brands Winamp and Macamp as first generally usable, end user usable GUI players.

What you do is vandalise an article based on your personal agenda and ego. If you can't use your powers accordingly, you should give up. This is not DAL IRC network which you can randomly K-Line users just because you feel like.

If there is one, single thing which would cause me to "Burn ship" is that claim of cloning. Careful next time.

Also both Justin Frankel and Dmitry Boldryev caused a revoulution on music and the entire concept of music industry. Wiki or anything won't change anything. Next time you vandalise articles about actual software developers who changed the IT scene, please spare time to read some books. E.g. "MP3 Power" by Frankel, Greely and Sawyer (ISBN-10: 0966288939 ISBN-13: 978-0966288933) could be a good start. You would see Boldryev's name and Macamp in that book and the reason why macamp.com redirects to subband.com and could live some shame for claiming a legendary developer doing lame games as clones.

As I have already wasted my time and got an actual job to do, I am cutting short this time. Types like you, never created anything but has sort of power because of internet addiction is exactly why I don't share my extensive knowledge about AVID 2K/4K editing on Wikipedia. I don't want a teenager, amateur to vandalise my work which is $2K/hour normally

In addition, if Dmitry Boldryev helped this article I openly protest him as a person gives great respect to such developers for sparing time arguing with a person hiding behind nick and has no professional software experience. Justin Frankel, Dmitry Boldryev, JWZ type of developers who already have their own bits in IT history'es respected publications shouldn't spare time trying to fix a broken, abused project like Wiki.

As an end user I am openly saying this article should be left as "Stub" as protest to Wiki. If anyone wants to learn about history of gui Mp3 players, they can check respected publications or sites like Wired.

Ilgaz 14:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

The flaming is not helpful. I don't have anything against the people you mention, I only have something against unreferenced Wikipedia articles that make grand claims, some of which turn out to be false. In your rant, you've finally done what I asked you to do in the first place, which is provide a reference. More would be nice, of course. Maybe eventually you'll understand that claims of who you are and what your expertise is don't matter, while references do. But the burden isn't on me to "go read a book" -- that book is for you to reference and cite your claims.

I really don't care if you're 34 years old and live in Istanbul, who your IRC friends are, or how much you get paid -- it doesn't make you exempt from basic policies of Wikipedia. Which you're trying to be, when you make personal attacks to defend edits by someone called Mewse (who's he?) that make extraordinary claims without references.

rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 17:02, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Mewse is Dmitry

Mewse has signed messages as "Dmitry". That makes one connection obvious. This article is as much of a conflict of interest as it looked like.

I also see from Googling that there is some dispute about the early history of MP3 players, particularly between WinAMP developers. This article was presumably Dmitry trying to make his version of things heard.

rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 17:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Rspeer: We have tried to point Wiki admins to the facts, but have been completely disregarded. I think that until Administrators actually open their eyes to facts and start looking at truth unbiased. We'll be celebrating Columbus day for eternity.

Dmitry, inventor of WinAmp

You're being disregarded because you either don't understand Wikipedia policies or you just don't want to follow them. "Bias" has nothing to do with it. The policies apply the same to everyone. rspeer / ɹəədsɹ 06:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Macamp.png

Image:Macamp.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:01, 16 September 2007 (UTC)