Opera does not play nicely with the firefox browser .lnk (icon) on the desktop.

A week or so ago I installed Opera 36.0 on XP looking for a lighter footprint than Firefox.
(It was from the Opera site, and 36 was the last release to support XP - I used Opera's installation
exe)

It installed with no problems and it does what i want it to (play direct- link channels from the 181.FM
website-- it will not display the 181fm GUI try it as a direct entry of a browser URL --
http://listen.livestreamingservice.com/181-classicaljazz_128k.mp3

BUT,

On installation, it also changed the firefox link file to point to OPERA!
I would not have expected such behavior from the Opera website.

I remembered i had a backup of all links on the desktop on my non-windows installation system disk,
DISK D. I went to it and there it was -- BUT it had been changed to point to Opera, as well.

The only way i know of to start Firefox now, is to do a commandline start of the GUI, which i have done
several times now.

It is not like a standard programs icon/.lnk and not like the Firefox icon in win 7(which points to the
installation .exe. For XP, It starts out in Documents and settings but i forget what it executes under
Mozilla/Firefox/.

I also have the seamonkey browser on XP, but it was not changed.

If anyone knows how to recreate the desktop icon from an existing installation i would appreciate it.

In message <8fn93j12hn99qtdrrs39bfddq9jnb53lvq@4ax.com> at Fri, 3 May
2024 09:26:39, jackpatton@astraweb.com writes
[]
>On installation, it also changed the firefox link file to point to OPERA!
>I would not have expected such behavior from the Opera website.

Are you sure it was actually a .lnk to the Firefox executable, rather
than a link to a web page (these were .url files in the days of IE)?
>
>I remembered i had a backup of all links on the desktop on my
>non-windows installation system disk,
>DISK D. I went to it and there it was -- BUT it had been changed to
>point to Opera, as well.

That's why I'm wondering if Opera has just made itself the default
browser. (Not polite to do so without asking, but ...)
>
>The only way i know of to start Firefox now, is to do a commandline
>start of the GUI, which i have done
>several times now.

Next time you do that, see if you can find the option to make it
(Firefox) your default browser. (I forget where it is, but it's in the
settings somewhere, or was last time I looked.)
[]
>I also have the seamonkey browser on XP, but it was not changed.

That is perhaps a true .lnk to the executable, rather than a link to a
web page (or to an HTM[L] file, maybe a blank one).
>
>If anyone knows how to recreate the desktop icon from an existing
>installation i would appreciate it.
>
>
If the above fails, I suppose you could reinstall Firefox from the
latest install you have; _hopefully_ it will pick up existing bookmarks
and settings, but I have no knowledge. (It _should_ if it's a later
version than the one you were running, or perhaps if the same version.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than
to those attending too small a degree of it. -Thomas Jefferson, 3rd US
president, architect and author (1743-1826)

On Fri, 03 May 2024 09:26:39 -0400, jackpatton@astraweb.com wrote:

>If anyone knows how to recreate the desktop icon from an existing installation i would appreciate it.
>
>

I already recreated the icon using one of the commandline starts frrom the recently used list. That
one does go to the firefox exe in program files.........

On Fri, 3 May 2024 15:02:20 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>In message <8fn93j12hn99qtdrrs39bfddq9jnb53lvq@4ax.com> at Fri, 3 May
>2024 09:26:39, jackpatton@astraweb.com writes
>[]
>>On installation, it also changed the firefox link file to point to OPERA!
>>I would not have expected such behavior from the Opera website.
>
>Are you sure it was actually a .lnk to the Firefox executable, rather
>than a link to a web page (these were .url files in the days of IE)?
>>
>>I remembered i had a backup of all links on the desktop on my
>>non-windows installation system disk,
>>DISK D. I went to it and there it was -- BUT it had been changed to
>>point to Opera, as well.
>
>That's why I'm wondering if Opera has just made itself the default
>browser. (Not polite to do so without asking, but ...)
>>
>>The only way i know of to start Firefox now, is to do a commandline
>>start of the GUI, which i have done
>>several times now.
>
>Next time you do that, see if you can find the option to make it
>(Firefox) your default browser. (I forget where it is, but it's in the
>settings somewhere, or was last time I looked.)
>[]
>>I also have the seamonkey browser on XP, but it was not changed.
>
>That is perhaps a true .lnk to the executable, rather than a link to a
>web page (or to an HTM[L] file, maybe a blank one).
>>
>>If anyone knows how to recreate the desktop icon from an existing
>>installation i would appreciate it.
>>
>>
>If the above fails, I suppose you could reinstall Firefox from the
>latest install you have; _hopefully_ it will pick up existing bookmarks
>and settings, but I have no knowledge. (It _should_ if it's a later
>version than the one you were running, or perhaps if the same version.)

the bad thing about reinstallation is (may be) that, according to a note I saw on a mozilla website, for
XP you have to install ff 43 and work up from there. My current version is 56.

In message <ii1a3jtoc5q6kjijhmg6neje276lkmuc0i@4ax.com> at Fri, 3 May
2024 11:52:24, jackpatton@astraweb.com writes
[]
>the bad thing about reinstallation is (may be) that, according to a
>note I saw on a mozilla website, for
>XP you have to install ff 43 and work up from there. My current version is 56.
>
Presumably that's starting from no installation, though; presumably if
56 is already installed, it can be installed again.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"If just one child is saved, then we'll have created a police state for the
benefit of just one child."

On Fri, 3 May 2024 19:39:18 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>In message <ii1a3jtoc5q6kjijhmg6neje276lkmuc0i@4ax.com> at Fri, 3 May
>2024 11:52:24, jackpatton@astraweb.com writes
>[]
>>the bad thing about reinstallation is (may be) that, according to a
>>note I saw on a mozilla website, for
>>XP you have to install ff 43 and work up from there. My current version is 56.
>>
>Presumably that's starting from no installation, though; presumably if
>56 is already installed, it can be installed again.

I believe that they had started even back then doing incremental updates instead of full reinstalls.
I have not even checked if i still had the incremental (or maybe full) backup for 56 (of my XP) but
assume not because even back then it was cleaning up after itself and erasing the source for the
incremental backup.

Actually that makes sense when I think about it. -- They are saying that release 43 was the last "full
install" prior to the last update for XP (which was 56).

I really am going to a lot of trouble with this old XP machine when all i really want is a nice nightime
internet capable radio. lol.....

One of the numerous interesting things i have come across is that MPC 6.4 (Media Player Classic) really
has no idea what a URL is, but plays local non-internet media just fine.

The reason I am going for "light footprint" in all of these cases is that the XP machine wass not
underpowered for the time -- a 1.76Ggtz processor. But only has a single partition.
Where for win 7 I am running Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-4130 CPU @ 3.40GHz, 3400 Mhz, 2 Core(s), 4
Logical Processor(s), so MSINFO32.exe tells me

So comparatively, my Win 7 machine is a lightning strike when it comes to computational power.
The only thing I have seen that pushed all four logical processors to about 98% utilization, 180 degree
F heat, and quadruple my internal fan speeds (per AIDA64) was HANDBRAKE encoding MKVs with x265 codec.
I thought it must be dangerously close to a heat shutdown.

Jack,

> ... prior to the last update for XP (which was 56).

Could you tell me where you got that 'last update for XP' info from ?
AFAIK v52 was the last - as below mentioned :

"The 52esr family will be the last release to run on Windows XP and Vista."

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/52.9.0/system-requirements/

I just took a peek at the system requrements for v56 to be sure, and it
mentions Win7 as its minimum OS.

https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/56.0/system-requirements/

As for your question, I have installed FF v52 on a few new installations of
XPsp3, and all of them worked.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

In message <1ida3jli1dm9uq88cs5mdmtnp429km7f0c@4ax.com> at Fri, 3 May
2024 15:51:17, jackpatton@astraweb.com writes
>On Fri, 3 May 2024 19:39:18 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
[]
>>Presumably that's starting from no installation, though; presumably if
>>56 is already installed, it can be installed again.
>
>I believe that they had started even back then doing incremental
>updates instead of full reinstalls.
>I have not even checked if i still had the incremental (or maybe full)
>backup for 56 (of my XP) but
>assume not because even back then it was cleaning up after itself and
>erasing the source for the
>incremental backup.
>
>Actually that makes sense when I think about it. -- They are saying
>that release 43 was the last "full
>install" prior to the last update for XP (which was 56).

Ah, I see. So even if you go to their archive website, you can't _get_ a
full 56?

(Anyway, it's academic - as long as you are taking an image
occasionally! - as I think you said you'd got the necessary icon back.)
>
>I really am going to a lot of trouble with this old XP machine when all
>i really want is a nice nightime
>internet capable radio. lol.....

I'm very much in favour of keeping old things going!
>
>One of the numerous interesting things i have come across is that MPC
>6.4 (Media Player Classic) really
>has no idea what a URL is, but plays local non-internet media just fine.

Interesting; I have version 2.1.4 (on my W7-32), but it's "MPC-HC",
which is maybe a different thing; it seems to have come with the K-Lite
Codec Pack, as that's where its .exe is, and I don't seem to have a
separate installer for it in my installs directory. (I have
"K-Lite_Codec_Pack_1805_Mega [18.0.5, 2024-1-15].exe" [I will have added
the bit in square brackets to the name], downloaded 2024-1-19, so that's
probably where I got it. I'd offer to send it, but it's 63,742 KB; you
should be able to find it if you want it.)
>
>The reason I am going for "light footprint" in all of these cases is
>that the XP machine wass not
>underpowered for the time -- a 1.76Ggtz processor. But only has a
>single partition.

Core?

>Where for win 7 I am running Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-4130 CPU @
>3.40GHz, 3400 Mhz, 2 Core(s), 4
>Logical Processor(s), so MSINFO32.exe tells me

i3 here too - i3-2350M @ 2.30 GHz, 2300 Mhz (why do they tell us both,
and they've got the second h wrong!), 2 Core(s), 4 Logical Processor(s)
(that last bit is basically what an i3 is, I think).
>
>So comparatively, my Win 7 machine is a lightning strike when it comes
>to computational power.
>The only thing I have seen that pushed all four logical processors to
>about 98% utilization, 180 degree
>F heat, and quadruple my internal fan speeds (per AIDA64) was HANDBRAKE
>encoding MKVs with x265 codec.
>I thought it must be dangerously close to a heat shutdown.

Having had a previous (albeit much underpowered by comparison) machine
have problems with heat (laptops are more susceptible, I think), I get
very nervous if I ever hear the fan taking off, so try to stop
whatever's doing it. I don't do much video transcoding. The thing I
notice it most on these days is some web pages (for example nextdoor),
even when I'm not actually doing anything on them; ridiculous! If I have
Task Manager open, I can clearly see - in both the memory usage and
cores (it takes well over one of them) - when I open and close a tab to
nextdoor. Web pages - some of them, anyway - are basically software
these days, and AFAICS extremely inefficient software at that.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep decide what is for dinner.
(quoted by) Ipraylam, 2015-07-13

On Fri, 3 May 2024 22:17:13 +0200, "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> wrote:

>Jack,
>
>> ... prior to the last update for XP (which was 56).
>
>Could you tell me where you got that 'last update for XP' info from ?
>AFAIK v52 was the last - as below mentioned :
>
>"The 52esr family will be the last release to run on Windows XP and Vista."
>
>https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/52.9.0/system-requirements/
>
>I just took a peek at the system requrements for v56 to be sure, and it
>mentions Win7 as its minimum OS.
>
>https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/56.0/system-requirements/
>

Ok, i misremembered it then. The XP machine is upstairs from me and shutdown unless i have something
specific to do with it. Thanks.

>As for your question, I have installed FF v52 on a few new installations of
>XPsp3, and all of them worked.
>
>Regards,
>Rudy Wieser
>

On Sat, 4 May 2024 09:45:34 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>In message <1ida3jli1dm9uq88cs5mdmtnp429km7f0c@4ax.com> at Fri, 3 May
>2024 15:51:17, jackpatton@astraweb.com writes
>>On Fri, 3 May 2024 19:39:18 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>[]
>>>Presumably that's starting from no installation, though; presumably if
>>>56 is already installed, it can be installed again.
>>
>>I believe that they had started even back then doing incremental
>>updates instead of full reinstalls.
>>I have not even checked if i still had the incremental (or maybe full)
>>backup for 56 (of my XP) but
>>assume not because even back then it was cleaning up after itself and
>>erasing the source for the
>>incremental backup.
>>
>>Actually that makes sense when I think about it. -- They are saying
>>that release 43 was the last "full
>>install" prior to the last update for XP (which was 56).
>
>Ah, I see. So even if you go to their archive website, you can't _get_ a
>full 56?
>

Correct. And Opera is faster than Firefox, so i will be using that where in the past i would fire up
Firefox.

>(Anyway, it's academic - as long as you are taking an image
>occasionally! - as I think you said you'd got the necessary icon back.)
>>
>>I really am going to a lot of trouble with this old XP machine when all
>>i really want is a nice nightime
>>internet capable radio. lol.....
>
>I'm very much in favour of keeping old things going!
:-)
>>
>>One of the numerous interesting things i have come across is that MPC
>>6.4 (Media Player Classic) really
>>has no idea what a URL is, but plays local non-internet media just fine.
>
>Interesting; I have version 2.1.4 (on my W7-32), but it's "MPC-HC",
>which is maybe a different thing; it seems to have come with the K-Lite
>Codec Pack, as that's where its .exe is, and I don't seem to have a
>separate installer for it in my installs directory. (I have
>"K-Lite_Codec_Pack_1805_Mega [18.0.5, 2024-1-15].exe" [I will have added
>the bit in square brackets to the name], downloaded 2024-1-19, so that's
>probably where I got it. I'd offer to send it, but it's 63,742 KB; you
>should be able to find it if you want it.)

I have several video/audio player. I even used WinAmp as my main player -- movies and audio for a
while. By the end (and i have next to the last WinAmp player that goes semi-transparent on loss of
focus, there were all kinds of add-on bells and whistles for WinAmp and at the time i was last using it
on a regular basis -- about a decade ago -- it gave the best sound reproduction (enhanced by some of
those bells and whistles).

I imported my final WinAmp player form XP to Win 7 where it will still play as a standalone player.

Anyway, i specified the release/version of the MPC i was talking about because i figured that if they
stayed in business, they would update certain aspects of it.
>>
>>The reason I am going for "light footprint" in all of these cases is
>>that the XP machine wass not
>>underpowered for the time -- a 1.76Ggtz processor. But only has a
>>single partition.
>
>Core?

Yes.

>
>>Where for win 7 I am running Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-4130 CPU @
>>3.40GHz, 3400 Mhz, 2 Core(s), 4
>>Logical Processor(s), so MSINFO32.exe tells me
>
>i3 here too - i3-2350M @ 2.30 GHz, 2300 Mhz (why do they tell us both,
>and they've got the second h wrong!), 2 Core(s), 4 Logical Processor(s)
>(that last bit is basically what an i3 is, I think).
>>
>>So comparatively, my Win 7 machine is a lightning strike when it comes
>>to computational power.
>>The only thing I have seen that pushed all four logical processors to
>>about 98% utilization, 180 degree
>>F heat, and quadruple my internal fan speeds (per AIDA64) was HANDBRAKE
>>encoding MKVs with x265 codec.
>>I thought it must be dangerously close to a heat shutdown.
>
>Having had a previous (albeit much underpowered by comparison) machine
>have problems with heat (laptops are more susceptible, I think), I get
>very nervous if I ever hear the fan taking off, so try to stop
>whatever's doing it. I don't do much video transcoding. The thing I
>notice it most on these days is some web pages (for example nextdoor),
>even when I'm not actually doing anything on them; ridiculous! If I have
>Task Manager open, I can clearly see - in both the memory usage and
>cores (it takes well over one of them) - when I open and close a tab to
>nextdoor. Web pages - some of them, anyway - are basically software
>these days, and AFAICS extremely inefficient software at that.

Yep, i try to keep up with any heat issues. My win 7 desktop has not really had any except the
HANDBRAKE. I have had heat shutdowns (aka crashes :-)) in XP and if you ever have, you quickly begin
to keep monitoring equipment on hand and watching it...... AIDA actually gives the fans rpms, all kinds
of sensor readings for temps and hundreds of other things.
It used to be called "Engineer's" something......
For the Win 7 machine, where the cpu fan normally runs at 1300+- rpm, Handbrake pushed the CPU fan to
over 5000 rpm and it was making quite the racket -- to those listening for it. I put two external fans
on the box -- one directly on the vents and one blowing away the exhaust that came out the back and that
did quiet down and cool down things a little.

I also had "Speedfan" (don't know if it is still in existence) running back in the XP prime days, but
not now.

Of course you are correct that code is inefficient -- as well as extremely complex-- these days. We
have such computational power and download speed that modern computers -- and phones -- can crunch and
spit out in a couple of seconds what would take a 386 processor a couple hours to untangle -- if it ever
did.

When i left the mainframe world, a 386, originally with no math co-processor or external RAM was my
first machine. It cost 3 times as much as the Win 7 machine i am using now.

In message <rvic3j9suo4r3gb96od4hdtkk87v7765rl@4ax.com> at Sat, 4 May
2024 11:36:26, jackpatton@astraweb.com writes
[]
>I have several video/audio player. I even used WinAmp as my main
>player -- movies and audio for a
>while. By the end (and i have next to the last WinAmp player that goes
>semi-transparent on loss of
>focus, there were all kinds of add-on bells and whistles for WinAmp and
>at the time i was last using it
>on a regular basis -- about a decade ago -- it gave the best sound
>reproduction (enhanced by some of
>those bells and whistles).

I default to WinAmp for sound, and VLC for video. My WinAmp is 5.9.2,
but I use a "Skin" called Winamp Classic (comes with, not a third party
one) that makes it look like a WinAmp of years earlier (a bit line a
1980s music centre, with components). I'm happy with the sound quality I
have. I _edit_ sounds in GoldWave - I bought that not long before
Audacity came out, and I gather the latter works much the same; I use
GoldWave because I'd got used to it. I very rarely edit video - when I
do my _preferred_ is VirtualDub, though I think I have to use other
things (or a format converter) for things VirtualDub won't handle.
>
>I imported my final WinAmp player form XP to Win 7 where it will still
>play as a standalone player.
>
>Anyway, i specified the release/version of the MPC i was talking about
>because i figured that if they
>stayed in business, they would update certain aspects of it.

Have a look at the K-Lite Codec Pack - that comes with a fairly recent
version of MPC.
[]
>for it. I put two external fans
>on the box -- one directly on the vents and one blowing away the
>exhaust that came out the back and that
>did quiet down and cool down things a little.

Difficult to do for laptops. You can get fan trays to put under them,
but they make the whole thing less wieldy.
>
>I also had "Speedfan" (don't know if it is still in existence) running
>back in the XP prime days, but
>not now.

I have it - 4.52. Tells me my temperatures are around 50C at the moment,
which is OK. (Says the one fan is 37377 RPM, which I strongly doubt! Oh,
now apparently 55041!)
>
>Of course you are correct that code is inefficient -- as well as
>extremely complex-- these days. We
>have such computational power and download speed that modern computers
>-- and phones -- can crunch and
>spit out in a couple of seconds what would take a 386 processor a
>couple hours to untangle -- if it ever
>did.

Well, they would, if coders weren't so lazy - initially, and now
actually _unable_ to write compact code. With increasing computing
power, it becomes uneconomical to train/pay coders to code efficiently
(initially) or even know how to [e. g. use assembler] (now), so the
actual speed computers achieve the same tasks remains roughly the same,
or even actually slows down a bit. That certainly applies to web page
scripting.
>
>When i left the mainframe world, a 386, originally with no math
>co-processor or external RAM was my
>first machine. It cost 3 times as much as the Win 7 machine i am using now.
>
My first PC compatible (remember that phrase? sometimes IBM compatible),
as opposed to 8 bit machine (my last was a BBC Master) was a 386SX -
somewhere around 25 or 40 MHz, I think. (Actually a second processor -
an 80186 - made the BBC into a _sort of_ PC. That was a very odd
machine.) I felt a bit guilty "abandoning" Acorn machines for "the
opposition", but pricing made it inevitable (you could get a "PC" with a
lot better hardware specs than the Archimedes route, for a lot less).
That was in DOS (5 or 6, IIRR) days, with Windows 3.1 (which I rarely
used as it was so slow - mainly only if I wanted to look at a web page,
which I didn't much then). I think may have been about 400 pounds - in
the 1980s.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

what - recession? Up north? What we gonna have - more nowt?
(News Quiz 2013-7-26)

On Sat, 04 May 2024 10:53:00 -0400
jackpatton@astraweb.com wrote:

> On Fri, 3 May 2024 22:17:13 +0200, "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> wrote:
>
> >Jack,
> >
> >> ... prior to the last update for XP (which was 56).
> >
> >Could you tell me where you got that 'last update for XP' info from ?
> >AFAIK v52 was the last - as below mentioned :
> >
> >"The 52esr family will be the last release to run on Windows XP and Vista."
> >
> >https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/52.9.0/system-requirements/
> >
> >I just took a peek at the system requrements for v56 to be sure, and it
> >mentions Win7 as its minimum OS.
> >
> >https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/56.0/system-requirements/
> >
>
> Ok, i misremembered it then. The XP machine is upstairs from me and shutdown unless i have something
> specific to do with it. Thanks.
>
> >As for your question, I have installed FF v52 on a few new installations of
> >XPsp3, and all of them worked.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Rudy Wieser
> >
>

Try MyPal browser. It claims to be a (more up-to-date) version of Firefox
for XP

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

John,

> Try MyPal browser. It claims to be a (more up-to-date) version of
> Firefox for XP.

Thanks, but I don't care too much about "up to date". As long as it (still)
does its job its good enough for me. Same reason why I'm still running XP.
:-)

The only reason I asked is that FF v52 has a bug in regard to background
processes for new-style plugins when JS is disabled in the browser. I was
wondering if I could update to a version where that was fixed.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

On 5/5/2024 12:09 PM, R.Wieser wrote:
> John,
>
>> Try MyPal browser. It claims to be a (more up-to-date) version of
>> Firefox for XP.
>
> Thanks, but I don't care too much about "up to date". As long as it (still)
> does its job its good enough for me. Same reason why I'm still running XP.
> :-)
>
> The only reason I asked is that FF v52 has a bug in regard to background
> processes for new-style plugins when JS is disabled in the browser. I was
> wondering if I could update to a version where that was fixed.
>
> Regards,
> Rudy Wieser
>
>

For some of the browsers, nothing prevents you from getting
source and making changes.

And in case you think this is far fetched, remember that
soon, AI capable of refactoring code will be more widely
available, and you won't have to lift a finger. Merely
pay a huge electrical bill.

Since the source for Windows XP is available, you'll be
able to change the threading model, add back your modified
browser, and... away you go.

Paul

On Sat, 4 May 2024 20:01:30 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>I default to WinAmp for sound, and VLC for video. My WinAmp is 5.9.2,
>but I use a "Skin" called Winamp Classic (comes with, not a third party
>one) that makes it look like a WinAmp of years earlier (a bit line a
>1980s music centre, with components). I'm happy with the sound quality I
>have.

John, do you have a working lyrics plugin for Winamp? I was using an older
version of Winamp, along with the gen_lyrics.dll plugin, but that plugin is no
longer supported as of 5.601, so 5.92 doesn't stand a chance, I guess. I may
have to revert to about 5.61. the last version known (by me) to support the
gen_lyrics.dll plugin.

On Tue, 14 May 2024 18:03:30 -0500, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:

>On Sat, 4 May 2024 20:01:30 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>>I default to WinAmp for sound, and VLC for video. My WinAmp is 5.9.2,
>>but I use a "Skin" called Winamp Classic (comes with, not a third party
>>one) that makes it look like a WinAmp of years earlier (a bit line a
>>1980s music centre, with components). I'm happy with the sound quality I
>>have.
>
>John, do you have a working lyrics plugin for Winamp? I was using an older
>version of Winamp, along with the gen_lyrics.dll plugin, but that plugin is no
>longer supported as of 5.601, so 5.92 doesn't stand a chance, I guess. I may
>have to revert to about 5.61. the last version known (by me) to support the
>gen_lyrics.dll plugin.

Hmm, never mind! I reinstalled the lyrics plugin and it's now working with 5.92.
The release notes for 5.601 say that they've disabled support for that plugin,
but it's still working.

In message <ihr74j5m06su88qd1jek9028jae23sdhcl@4ax.com> at Tue, 14 May
2024 18:06:56, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
>On Tue, 14 May 2024 18:03:30 -0500, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 4 May 2024 20:01:30 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>I default to WinAmp for sound, and VLC for video. My WinAmp is 5.9.2,
>>>but I use a "Skin" called Winamp Classic (comes with, not a third party
>>>one) that makes it look like a WinAmp of years earlier (a bit line a
>>>1980s music centre, with components). I'm happy with the sound quality I
>>>have.
>>
>>John, do you have a working lyrics plugin for Winamp? I was using an older
>>version of Winamp, along with the gen_lyrics.dll plugin, but that plugin is no
>>longer supported as of 5.601, so 5.92 doesn't stand a chance, I guess. I may
>>have to revert to about 5.61. the last version known (by me) to support the
>>gen_lyrics.dll plugin.
>
>Hmm, never mind! I reinstalled the lyrics plugin and it's now working
>with 5.92.
>The release notes for 5.601 say that they've disabled support for that plugin,
>but it's still working.
>
I never knew about a lyrics plugin! Where did you get it, how does one
use it, and so on? Does it fetch lyrics live, or need a special file
(.lyr or something), if so where do you get them?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Nunc Tutus Exitus Computarus (It is now safe to turn off your computer).

On Wed, 15 May 2024 00:52:27 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>In message <ihr74j5m06su88qd1jek9028jae23sdhcl@4ax.com> at Tue, 14 May
>2024 18:06:56, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
>>On Tue, 14 May 2024 18:03:30 -0500, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 4 May 2024 20:01:30 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I default to WinAmp for sound, and VLC for video. My WinAmp is 5.9.2,
>>>>but I use a "Skin" called Winamp Classic (comes with, not a third party
>>>>one) that makes it look like a WinAmp of years earlier (a bit line a
>>>>1980s music centre, with components). I'm happy with the sound quality I
>>>>have.
>>>
>>>John, do you have a working lyrics plugin for Winamp? I was using an older
>>>version of Winamp, along with the gen_lyrics.dll plugin, but that plugin is no
>>>longer supported as of 5.601, so 5.92 doesn't stand a chance, I guess. I may
>>>have to revert to about 5.61. the last version known (by me) to support the
>>>gen_lyrics.dll plugin.
>>
>>Hmm, never mind! I reinstalled the lyrics plugin and it's now working
>>with 5.92.
>>The release notes for 5.601 say that they've disabled support for that plugin,
>>but it's still working.
>>
>I never knew about a lyrics plugin! Where did you get it, how does one
>use it, and so on? Does it fetch lyrics live, or need a special file
>(.lyr or something), if so where do you get them?

I believe I got the plugin from https://www.lyricsplugin.com/, where I would
have selected the Windows one, of course. I've been using it for at least 20
years, so my memory of the download is hazy.

Close Winamp before installing the plugin. Installation takes just seconds
because it's basically only extracting the .dll and placing it into Winamp's
plugins folder. No need to reboot. The next time you run Winamp, it should
immediately use the new plugin, but you can manually enable/disable it via
Winamp's View menu. The GUI indication is that a new floating window will be
open, but you can dock it to the main Winamp program. I dock it on Winamp's
right side, which is thereafter remembered. You can also look in Options,
Preferences, Plugins, General Purpose, to make sure the Lyrics Plugin is listed
there. There are no configuration options on this plugin, unlike most of the
others that you'll see.

It should automatically retrieve the proper lyrics, but it requires a few
things, including an Internet connection. If it doesn't show any lyrics, or it
shows the wrong lyrics, it's usually because the embedded Title and/or Artist
are blank or wrong. Use Alt-3 to bring up the tag editor to verify that.
Usually, lyrics get displayed immediately.* The lyrics window doesn't auto
scroll, so you may have to manually scroll.

Winamp's lyrics plugin on Windows 10 worked fine until very recently, but now
there's about a 15-second delay before any lyrics are displayed, and sometimes
the lyrics never come up. Earlier Win 10, Win 8.x, and Win 7 are all fine.

There's a second way to get lyrics, sort of. You may have seen .mp3 files that
have a companion .cdg file, usually packed in a single zip file. Those are
karaoke files and Winamp knows how to use them. The .cdg files need to be in the
same folder as their same-named .mp3 files, and Winamp will show you only the
lines that you'd need to sing along, karaoke style. The lyrics plugin, on the
other hand, shows all of the lyrics, all of the time.

In message <i3ra4j90e18l2a8okvhafb28vr4bpnrsb0@4ax.com> at Wed, 15 May
2024 21:46:27, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
>On Wed, 15 May 2024 00:52:27 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
[]
>>I never knew about a lyrics plugin! Where did you get it, how does one
>>use it, and so on? Does it fetch lyrics live, or need a special file
>>(.lyr or something), if so where do you get them?
>
>I believe I got the plugin from https://www.lyricsplugin.com/, where I would

That still worked, thanks.

>have selected the Windows one, of course. I've been using it for at least 20
>years, so my memory of the download is hazy.

Well, it offered me a choice of (Lyrics Plugin for) Windows Media
Player, Winamp, or iTunes - no selection for OS, so I presume it
preselected that.
>
>Close Winamp before installing the plugin. Installation takes just seconds
>because it's basically only extracting the .dll and placing it into Winamp's
>plugins folder. No need to reboot. The next time you run Winamp, it should

Seemed to go fine, including finding the right place (I think the
default).

>immediately use the new plugin, but you can manually enable/disable it via
>Winamp's View menu. The GUI indication is that a new floating window will be
>open, but you can dock it to the main Winamp program. I dock it on Winamp's
>right side, which is thereafter remembered. You can also look in Options,

It did, and I did the same as you.

>Preferences, Plugins, General Purpose, to make sure the Lyrics Plugin is listed

It is.

>there. There are no configuration options on this plugin, unlike most of the
>others that you'll see.

Indeed. On clicking on it the Configure selected plug-in button was
un-greyed, but clicking it did nothing.
>
>It should automatically retrieve the proper lyrics, but it requires a few
>things, including an Internet connection. If it doesn't show any lyrics, or it
>shows the wrong lyrics, it's usually because the embedded Title and/or Artist
>are blank or wrong. Use Alt-3 to bring up the tag editor to verify that.

I've been using WinAmp as my tag editor for years (if anything it's why
I use WinAmp as my default mp3 player! Though I like the old appearance
too.)

>Usually, lyrics get displayed immediately.* The lyrics window doesn't auto
>scroll, so you may have to manually scroll.
>
>Winamp's lyrics plugin on Windows 10 worked fine until very recently, but now
>there's about a 15-second delay before any lyrics are displayed, and sometimes
>the lyrics never come up. Earlier Win 10, Win 8.x, and Win 7 are all fine.

Hmm. This is where it failed. I tried a Baccara track, then a Boney M
one, and finally one where alt-3 (actually I usually double-click on the
scrolling part of the display) shows, under all three of Basic Info,
ID3v1, and ID3v2 - Title: Dancing Queen, Artist: ABBA. For all of those,
the new window remained blank; I thought that last one at least should
work! I let it play all through. I just tried renaming the file - I have
it called "[1974] Dancing Queen.mp3" and tried removing the leading 7
characters - but no, even after a minute.
>
>There's a second way to get lyrics, sort of. You may have seen .mp3 files that
>have a companion .cdg file, usually packed in a single zip file. Those are
>karaoke files and Winamp knows how to use them. The .cdg files need to
>be in the
>same folder as their same-named .mp3 files, and Winamp will show you only the
>lines that you'd need to sing along, karaoke style. The lyrics plugin, on the
>other hand, shows all of the lyrics, all of the time.
>
Hmm. As I had the lyrics (actually in the Comment field of ID3v2, as I
often do), I tried creating (in Notepad) "[1974] Dancing Queen.cdg" in
the same folder, but nothing happened - I didn't expect it to, as I
presume for Karaoke it needs more than just the plain text.

So thanks, even if it didn't work! I'll leave it in place - maybe one
day it'll burst into life! Though I suspect there's fundamentally
something stopping it. (I even tried changing ABBA to Abba - no change.)
Final thought - I have a big hosts file, so looked there for "yric" - I
found one entry, ad.lyricswire.com, so tried unblocking that - no
change. But I may be blocking something else it needs.

Queen to Nana Mouskouri, Doris Day to Bonnie Tyler, Bing Crosby to Mungo
Jerry, Beatles to Procul Harum (I have eclectic tastes, though leaning
towards easy listening) - remained stubbornly blank! (-:

(But I've had an enjoyable few minutes playing snatches of my
collection!)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Norman Tebbitt has the irritating quality of being much nicer in person than
he is in print. - Clive Anderson, RT 1996/10/12-18

On Thu, 16 May 2024 06:20:39 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>In message <i3ra4j90e18l2a8okvhafb28vr4bpnrsb0@4ax.com> at Wed, 15 May
>2024 21:46:27, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
>>On Wed, 15 May 2024 00:52:27 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>[]
>>>I never knew about a lyrics plugin! Where did you get it, how does one
>>>use it, and so on? Does it fetch lyrics live, or need a special file
>>>(.lyr or something), if so where do you get them?
>>
>>I believe I got the plugin from https://www.lyricsplugin.com/, where I would
>
>That still worked, thanks.
>
>>have selected the Windows one, of course. I've been using it for at least 20
>>years, so my memory of the download is hazy.
>
>Well, it offered me a choice of (Lyrics Plugin for) Windows Media
>Player, Winamp, or iTunes - no selection for OS, so I presume it
>preselected that.

Good catch. What was I thinking... :)

>>Close Winamp before installing the plugin. Installation takes just seconds
>>because it's basically only extracting the .dll and placing it into Winamp's
>>plugins folder. No need to reboot. The next time you run Winamp, it should
>
>Seemed to go fine, including finding the right place (I think the
>default).
>
>>immediately use the new plugin, but you can manually enable/disable it via
>>Winamp's View menu. The GUI indication is that a new floating window will be
>>open, but you can dock it to the main Winamp program. I dock it on Winamp's
>>right side, which is thereafter remembered. You can also look in Options,
>
>It did, and I did the same as you.
>
>>Preferences, Plugins, General Purpose, to make sure the Lyrics Plugin is listed
>
>It is.
>
>>there. There are no configuration options on this plugin, unlike most of the
>>others that you'll see.
>
>Indeed. On clicking on it the Configure selected plug-in button was
>un-greyed, but clicking it did nothing.
>>
>>It should automatically retrieve the proper lyrics, but it requires a few
>>things, including an Internet connection. If it doesn't show any lyrics, or it
>>shows the wrong lyrics, it's usually because the embedded Title and/or Artist
>>are blank or wrong. Use Alt-3 to bring up the tag editor to verify that.
>
>I've been using WinAmp as my tag editor for years (if anything it's why
>I use WinAmp as my default mp3 player! Though I like the old appearance
>too.)
>
>>Usually, lyrics get displayed immediately.* The lyrics window doesn't auto
>>scroll, so you may have to manually scroll.
>>
>>Winamp's lyrics plugin on Windows 10 worked fine until very recently, but now
>>there's about a 15-second delay before any lyrics are displayed, and sometimes
>>the lyrics never come up. Earlier Win 10, Win 8.x, and Win 7 are all fine.
>
>Hmm. This is where it failed. I tried a Baccara track, then a Boney M
>one, and finally one where alt-3 (actually I usually double-click on the
>scrolling part of the display) shows, under all three of Basic Info,
>ID3v1, and ID3v2 - Title: Dancing Queen, Artist: ABBA. For all of those,
>the new window remained blank; I thought that last one at least should
>work! I let it play all through. I just tried renaming the file - I have
>it called "[1974] Dancing Queen.mp3" and tried removing the leading 7
>characters - but no, even after a minute.

Basic Info (Title and Artist on that tab, nothing else) is the only one that I
ever change, and the lyrics should update almost immediately upon pressing OK.
In fact, with "Gone Shootin' - AC/DC" displaying its lyrics, I changed the Basic
Info to "Dancing Queen - Abba" (and clicked OK) and the lyrics updated
immediately. Same when I changed Basic Info to "Burn - Deep Purple" and a few
others. If I enter a nonsensical title-artist, my nonsense just gets displayed
at the top of the lyrics window, without any lyrics underneath the title.
Obviously, the plugin is only looking at those two text entries rather than
trying to analyze the file or whatever else might be possible, so it's easy to
fool it. I'm actually not sure where, on the Internet, it gets its lyrics.

>>There's a second way to get lyrics, sort of. You may have seen .mp3 files that
>>have a companion .cdg file, usually packed in a single zip file. Those are
>>karaoke files and Winamp knows how to use them. The .cdg files need to
>>be in the
>>same folder as their same-named .mp3 files, and Winamp will show you only the
>>lines that you'd need to sing along, karaoke style. The lyrics plugin, on the
>>other hand, shows all of the lyrics, all of the time.
>>
>Hmm. As I had the lyrics (actually in the Comment field of ID3v2, as I
>often do), I tried creating (in Notepad) "[1974] Dancing Queen.cdg" in
>the same folder, but nothing happened - I didn't expect it to, as I
>presume for Karaoke it needs more than just the plain text.

Yes, .cdg files have a specific structure that tells Winamp what to display and
when to display it. It's sort of a video file, almost.

As for your song title example, the leading [1974] will be a dealbreaker, in my
experience. When you removed that, did you hit OK?

>So thanks, even if it didn't work! I'll leave it in place - maybe one
>day it'll burst into life! Though I suspect there's fundamentally
>something stopping it. (I even tried changing ABBA to Abba - no change.)

I'm disappointed that it's not working for you.

>Final thought - I have a big hosts file, so looked there for "yric" - I
>found one entry, ad.lyricswire.com, so tried unblocking that - no
>change. But I may be blocking something else it needs.
>
>Queen to Nana Mouskouri, Doris Day to Bonnie Tyler, Bing Crosby to Mungo
>Jerry, Beatles to Procul Harum (I have eclectic tastes, though leaning
>towards easy listening) - remained stubbornly blank! (-:
>
>(But I've had an enjoyable few minutes playing snatches of my
>collection!)

Thanks for giving it a shot!

In message <e9id4jdvqmg0ngh2jeg95qhadpmb67r8a3@4ax.com> at Thu, 16 May
2024 22:37:48, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
>On Thu, 16 May 2024 06:20:39 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <i3ra4j90e18l2a8okvhafb28vr4bpnrsb0@4ax.com> at Wed, 15 May
>>2024 21:46:27, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
[snip]
>>>immediately use the new plugin, but you can manually enable/disable it via
>>>Winamp's View menu. The GUI indication is that a new floating window will be
>>>open, but you can dock it to the main Winamp program. I dock it on Winamp's
>>>right side, which is thereafter remembered. You can also look in Options,
>>
>>It did, and I did the same as you.
[]
>>>Usually, lyrics get displayed immediately.* The lyrics window doesn't auto
>>>scroll, so you may have to manually scroll.
[]
>>>the lyrics never come up. Earlier Win 10, Win 8.x, and Win 7 are all fine.
>>
>>Hmm. This is where it failed. I tried a Baccara track, then a Boney M
>>one, and finally one where alt-3 (actually I usually double-click on the
>>scrolling part of the display) shows, under all three of Basic Info,
>>ID3v1, and ID3v2 - Title: Dancing Queen, Artist: ABBA. For all of those,
>>the new window remained blank; I thought that last one at least should
>>work! I let it play all through. I just tried renaming the file - I have
>>it called "[1974] Dancing Queen.mp3" and tried removing the leading 7
>>characters - but no, even after a minute.
>
>Basic Info (Title and Artist on that tab, nothing else) is the only one that I

I fill in quite a lot of them - I just like doing so! I usually edit on
the ID3v2 tab, as that has the most fields, but the relevant ones appear
in the Basic Info one.

>ever change, and the lyrics should update almost immediately upon pressing OK.

Not in my case.

>In fact, with "Gone Shootin' - AC/DC" displaying its lyrics, I changed
>the Basic
>Info to "Dancing Queen - Abba" (and clicked OK) and the lyrics updated
>immediately. Same when I changed Basic Info to "Burn - Deep Purple" and a few
>others. If I enter a nonsensical title-artist, my nonsense just gets displayed
>at the top of the lyrics window, without any lyrics underneath the title.

Ah, so should at least the title/artist content appear in the lyric
window even if nothing else does? I just tried changing both title and
artist on Basic Info to xyzzy (hello to those that recognise that!), and
_did_ click OK - and the lyrics window remained stubbornly blank.

>Obviously, the plugin is only looking at those two text entries rather than
>trying to analyze the file or whatever else might be possible, so it's easy to
>fool it. I'm actually not sure where, on the Internet, it gets its lyrics.

Hmm. I'm not sure if in my case it's not getting access, or just
(because the xyzzy didn't appear either) not working at all.
[]
>Yes, .cdg files have a specific structure that tells Winamp what to display and
>when to display it. It's sort of a video file, almost.

I've never actually encountered any. I guess they're more like subtitle
files for videos.
>
>As for your song title example, the leading [1974] will be a dealbreaker, in my
>experience. When you removed that, did you hit OK?

That was only in the filename in Explorer - not the Title field in the
Basic Info (or other) tab(s). (Those all have a Year field.)
>
>>So thanks, even if it didn't work! I'll leave it in place - maybe one
>>day it'll burst into life! Though I suspect there's fundamentally
>>something stopping it. (I even tried changing ABBA to Abba - no change.)
>
>I'm disappointed that it's not working for you.

Anyone else use it (ideally with WinAmp 5.9.2 set to Winamp Classic
shell under W7HP-32) and know what I'm doing wrong?
[]
>Thanks for giving it a shot!
>
Thanks for replying!
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"I'm tired of all this nonsense about beauty being only skin-deep. That's deep
enough. What do you want, an adorable pancreas?" - Jean Kerr

On Fri, 17 May 2024 11:00:48 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

>In message <e9id4jdvqmg0ngh2jeg95qhadpmb67r8a3@4ax.com> at Thu, 16 May
>2024 22:37:48, Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> writes
[]

>Ah, so should at least the title/artist content appear in the lyric
>window even if nothing else does? I just tried changing both title and
>artist on Basic Info to xyzzy (hello to those that recognise that!), and
>_did_ click OK - and the lyrics window remained stubbornly blank.

The lyrics window should always have the same color background as the rest of
the Winamp sections, (main program, equalizer, playlist, etc.), which is blue in
my case because I use the Modern skin. I'm thinking yours might be black, but
for me, when things are going horribly wrong, the lyrics window turns white,
with no text displayed at all. A white window is no good.

Somewhat related, do you add album art to your music, and if so, do you ask
Winamp to display it during playback? I don't, but it sounds like you might.
I don't even use any of the visualizations plugins that come with the program.

>>Obviously, the plugin is only looking at those two text entries rather than
>>trying to analyze the file or whatever else might be possible, so it's easy to
>>fool it. I'm actually not sure where, on the Internet, it gets its lyrics.
>
>Hmm. I'm not sure if in my case it's not getting access, or just
>(because the xyzzy didn't appear either) not working at all.
>[]
>>Yes, .cdg files have a specific structure that tells Winamp what to display and
>>when to display it. It's sort of a video file, almost.
>
>I've never actually encountered any. I guess they're more like subtitle
>files for videos.

Yes, but they also have video in them that Winamp knows how to play. You might
see something like a tropical island beach, with waves coming ashore and palm
trees waving in the breeze, and the lyrics that you need to sing are displayed
over the top of that, sometimes with a bouncing ball to help you keep your
place.

I'm told that thousands of karaoke songs are available online for free*, which
you can get in mp3+cdg format, but I haven't bothered. *Free because the songs
are out of copyright. Newer stuff can cost a quid or two.

This could be a possible source for free stuff but I haven't tried. House of the
Rising Sun is one of my favorites and they have it in the free section. It looks
like they want you to create an account, but there should be plenty of other
places to check out.
[]