MediaMonkey forum

Hi,

Just noticed that Wikipedia has massive catalogs for Free software that people might want to peruse looking for cool media players... such as Media Monkey. I noticed it wasn't too easy to find Media Monkey anywhere because it's not in very many categories.

So, I went to Wiki's entry for Media Monkey and added it to the categories Free Media Players and Free Audio Software. I was gratified to see MediaMonkey immediately appeared in both of these categories. I couldn't think of any others off the bat, I'm sure there are more.

I'm rather pleased now, this is the first time I've actually made a contribution to Wikipedia...

Now the millions of users looking for an awesome free media player will be able to find what they are looking for more easily.

Hello, James
I think you misunderstood the "Free Software" expression in this case.
As stated in the very begining of Wikipedia's Free Software Portal and Free Media Players page, "Free Software" stands for "Open Source" software, not "no money" software. See:

Welcome to the portal to Wikipedia's content on software which can be freely run, studied, examined, modified, and redistributed by everyone who has a copy. This software, dubbed "free software" in 1983, has also come to be known as "open-source software", "software libre", "FOSS", and "FLOSS". "Free", here, is about being unfettered, not about cost.

Although I'd love so, MediaMonkey IS NOT free software. Its source code is proprietary.
Your efforts to spread the word about MediaMonkey are highly apreciated, but unfortunately, I had to change Wikipedia's page back to its previous version, for the sake of correctness. Sorry.

Well, anyway it's good that you bring the Wikipedia MediaMonkey article back in the spotlights. I had forgotten about it a bit.

@Steegy: I agree with you.

I also think that the article deserves to be expanded a little, but I'm not so confident to write in english as I'd like to be...

A question: What "Form of software distribution" is software like MediaMonkey? Reason: to put on the wiki page with the License.

It's "Proprietary software" ("Closed Source" / "Non-Free") and partially "Freeware", no doubt about that. But what next?
According to Wikipedia it's nor "Shareware", nor "Crippleware". But what is it then? Or is Wikipedia wrong?
According to other internet definitions, MediaMonkey is "Crippleware", although that term sounds bad compared to what MediaMonkey really is. Does there exist a term for "light-crippling-of-some-most-advanced-functionality" software?

Maybe we can put something like "Proprietary software (largely Freeware)" as license? (or just leave it as it is)
The term "Freeware" does attract people...

Imo MediaMonkey should be added to the Comparison of iPod Managers too, but personally I don't know enough about that. Someone else maybe?

ok sorry about that! I should have read their definitions more carefully.

MediaMonkey is Freeware just like WinAmp is. MediaMonkey Gold is obviously not, just like Winamp pro. If you regard them as two seperate programs for the purposes of defining them then you will have less problems!

MediaMonkey can be added to most of the categories winamp is - so Freeware seems reasonable to me.

i think what james.faction says seems reasonable enough!

Freeware and Free Software is not the same thing.

JFYI, I updated the Wikipedia MediaMonkey article. I hope it's clearer and more complete that way (I linked to MM's complete version history, as the previous one was incomplete and not really helpful imo). Some extra useful things might be: a good looking preview screen shot, a list of the default supported music formats, a small description about the extensions (scripts/plugin/...: what they are, what the most noticable ones do, ...) and a little word about skins.

Morten wrote:Freeware and Free Software is not the same thing.

I'm still not clear on this. You're saying the free version of WinAmp can be called freeware, but the free version of MediaMonkey cannot?

I'm confused.

james.faction wrote:

Morten wrote:Freeware and Free Software is not the same thing.

I'm still not clear on this. You're saying the free version of WinAmp can be called freeware, but the free version of MediaMonkey cannot?

I'm confused.

MediaMonkey Standard is Proprietary Freeware, but it's not Free Software as for example VLC media player and foobar2000.

so in other words, the answer to my question is yes, Media Monkey could be categorized Freeware, just as WinAmp is.

james.faction wrote:so in other words, the answer to my question is yes, Media Monkey could be categorized Freeware, just as WinAmp is.

Yes. In terms of licensing, they're actually the same.

Freeware = software that's for free / gratis / € 0 / $ 0 / ...
Free software = software that has rights (or no rights... read the wiki for that) that let you copy/change/... it "freely" (and yes, that's a strange way of saying something is open source or similar; much too confusing).