First of all, I can’t answer that question as to what is more accessible because I’ve not played around with Media Players for Windows for quite some time.
I do use VLC for Windows and I’m able to access all the functions I need in that player very easily such as the transport functions, file functions and so on. I have used Windows Media Player and I found it a more pleasurable experience to use than I thought it would be mainly because of the excellent amount of Shortcut keys and other goodies it has. So as I’ve already said, claiming that Winamp is the best and most accessible player in the world is a very general statement indeed and I wouldn’t have to look too far to find people who would disagree, I know there’s a whole heap of people out there using Windows Media Player because I’ve spoken to quite a few who have given me tips on that software. VLC users are a plenty and well as there being plenty of iTunes users and so on. > On 24 Dec 2015, at 12:56 PM, Kelly Pierce <kellyt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The news is that last week vivendi, which owns Universal Music, bought > a controlling interest in Radio Nomi. Many are hopeful that vivendi > will breathe new life into winamp. > > Dane, which programs are more accessible than Winamp? I am on Brian's > side in believing that winamp was the most accessible media player > ever. Yes, I am still using Winamp and loving the experieince. > > Kelly > > > > > > On 12/23/15, Brian <n8...@att.net> wrote: >> Winamp will always be the best player for screen reader users and >> keyboard users so you are a very big lier. if the new winamp is better >> and still accessable I would conciter using it but if not I will just >> keep using version 5.66 >> Brian Sackrider >> >> On 12/23/2015 4:45 PM, Dane Trethowan wrote: >>> Don’t care any more as there are so many good alternatives anyway, the >>> best thing that every happened in the media player world was the >>> announcement made that development would cease on Winamp and as yet I’ve >>> not heard any convincing reason as to why anyone should mourn the loss of >>> this software. >>> >>> If a new company has taken Winamp over and development has started again >>> then all well and good but I do think the player became far too bloated is >>> is very much over rated. >>> >>> >>>> On 24 Dec 2015, at 8:16 AM, Hank Smith, and Seeing-eye dog Iona >>>> <hank.smith...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> its about time they released it >>>> had no idea that they released a new version >>>> >>>> On 12/23/2015 2:12 PM, Larry Higgins wrote: >>>>> Hello listers, >>>>> >>>>> Just wanted to know if any of you have used the latest version of Winamp >>>>> from Radionomy? If so, how accessible is it with screen readers? I found >>>>> out that the there is apparently only two versions, pro and light, and >>>>> the pro is around $19.00. >>>>> >>>>> I might consider springing for the Pro version if I knew that it was >>>>> actually worth it, or maybe another way of putting it, if it wouldn't >>>>> break all of my presets and WE scripts/apps. I'd far rather use the old >>>>> version for as long as I can, rather than destroying a perfectly working >>>>> Winamp listening environment. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> ********** >>> Those of a positive and enquiring frame of mind will leave the rest of the >>> halfwits in this world behind. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > ********** Those of a positive and enquiring frame of mind will leave the rest of the halfwits in this world behind.
