i hope you will hate it, WINAMP forever!!
As I once read:
"foobar2000 is not for people who don't want to spend time setting up or configuring their player. It's customizable and incredibly powerful, but we can only get those benefits by spending some time learning the software and becoming accustomed to the environment. If that's not what you want in a player, there are plenty of alternatives, such as WinAmp and iTunes."
So quit bitching about it. Doesnt make a difference either way.
Billy player is almost like the absolute bare minimum audio player around.
Foobar is one of the lightest and powerful audio software players around.
I for one find foobar, for me, is the best for my needs. Im still using v0.8.3 because I found that v0.9 lacked options that I liked. I like how it supports cd burning when Nero is installed. Plus, features like decoding files and encoding them to what ever format, is handy. Record feature is priceless. Plays archived files that have audio files. For me, it just works out the box without having to modify any annoyances which seem to be present in every other audio player. Its completely free too.
On a side note, a friend of mine tried foobar too. He has been using WinAmp for years and was curious. First thing he noticed was the output quality was higher.
I have noticed that myself when Ive played audio files in various other players, that none of them seem to have that good an output. Some people may not notice the difference, but I for one notice minor details.
At the end of the day, its up to the person. There is a choice and its a matter of preference. foobar fits my needs because its minimalistic and does only what I want it to do and is specialised in its field.
http://eolindel.free.fr/foobar0.9/accueil.shtml