Slashdot Mirror
RealNetworks Licenses MS Windows Media Codec
fReNeTiK writes, "RealNetworks have announced their licensing of the Microsoft Windows Media streaming format. That brings the number of codecs supported by RealPlayer to 9. CNet story here, Heise News (German) here. This, of course raises an important question: Realplayer being available under Linux, will the next version include the new codec, bringing WMF streaming to Linux and Unix in general?" Based on how slowly RealPlayer has ported their clients to Linux and Unix in the past, it may be a while until we find out. I would personally prefer an open source media player if the codec patent issues can be handled, but sometimes (sigh) you just have to make do with hand-me-downs because they're all you're going to get for a while.
Okay, here's a what-if scenario...
Would it be possible to circumvent patents if the OSS community released a bit of software that could (easily) "learn" codecs? In other words, something like this:
I realise this is a hell of a lot more challenging than reverse-engineering a format and releasing the (illegal) code, but is it technically possible? Would it circumvent the patent issue?
Yeah, maybe I'm too much of an audiophile, but the quality of realplayer's format is horrible. Why anyone would want to use it is beyond me. I guess all the modem users out there like it. I personally haven't used a modem in 5 years. I've had a broadband connection longer then most people have used the internet. Besides, there's a decent plugin for winamp at winamps homepage that lets you play RealAudio and RealMovie files through winamp, so why would anyone ever want to download and use RealPlayer??
No.
I may be a cynic, but I suspect you can answer these questions for yourselves.
1. They'll say whatever makes for good PR because they are a public corporation.
2. It depends on the licensing terms of the codecs to which you are referring. If it costs money to license the codecs, then probably not.
3. Turn Linux into more than a niche OS.
4. Give them enough money to make devoting more resources to linux players a worthwhile venture. (That means more than just 1000 Linux users paying $30 for RealPlayer Plus... $30,000 is a drop in the bucket.)
Of course this reverse-engineering is non-trivial,or it would have been done already. But maybe somebody will be up to the challenge.
Have widely distributed, impossible to suppress, illegal software will point up the ridiculousness of the current state of Intellectual Property law.
Of course any organization with deep pockets won't use such software for fear of being sued, but it should be great for home users.
Imagine napster-style video watching done completely open-source, once the network bandwidth becomes available.
The content-hoarding, monopolizing, dinosaur media-conglomerates are right to be afraid.
"...you just have to make do with hand-me-downs because they're all you're going to get for a while." It seems like a more appropriate course would be to come up with a better streaming media method. Apple, Real, and Microsoft have all come up with their own streaming formats; it only follows logically that users of Linux should have their own as well.
We may already have access to several of the codecs in the form of Xanim shared objects. I thought Real open sourced the code to the streaming piece of Real Player (around version 3 or version 4?).
We can either start coding our asses off...
OR we can spam the codec creators until they give in to our demands!
HAHHAHAHAHAHA
Hey dudes you shuld try this new OS I found called Linux, it rules!!! I can run slashdot on it too. It makes Win2k (which I have never used) look like a hard to use piece of shit!!!!
If the link is to a .ram file, it will contain a valid URL you could paste into the location bar in RealPlayer
'Nuff said.
I've often wondered why Real, or even Microsoft, hasn't raised a hubbub over this feature.
;-) No, seriously, I don't think even most Live! users are aware of this feature, at least not the ones I know.
Because they are too clueless to figure out what it does.
It raises some cool possibilities, notably DVD sound ripping. Matrix desktop sound them, here I come!
The "free" SDK consists of an ActiveX control and the documentation needed to use it. Unless you are running Windows, it is utterly useless.
If Linux users are willing to settle for closed formats, then they might as well just switch to Windows now.
Care to explain the logic behind that statement? Got you there, didn't I Sloppy ol' Poppy!
W S BWSB
You can download both the Windows Media Player SDK and the RealPlayer SDK. (both free, as in beer) Both of these allow you to write plugins.
You can easily write plugins that save the video as it comes in (before it is decoded, or after, or whatever) to disk. Voila! VCR capabilities! Of course, watching it at the same time is a bit more difficult of a problem, but doable.
For the RealPlayer, all you need to do is alter one of their example plugins to save the data to a file, and get the correct MIME type. Record whatever you want.
The Windows Media Player is a bit more tricky. I haven't touched that code in awhile.
I believe that in both the license agreements that it says you're not supposed to do this, or at least that if you do, you're not supposed to distribute it.
Would it be possible to create an Open Source CODED based on fractal image compression? This type of compression is supposed to give phenomonal ratios (200:1?). The math used for fractals is well known and based on some very advanced research. dnay@yahoo.com
One of WMF's strengths is a flawed implementation of MPEG-4. With it they are able to get pretty good compression to quality ratios, as this was what MPEG-4 was targeted at.
What we need is a Free project that encodes and decodes MPEG-4, but oddly enough there doesn't seem to even be one in the works. That is why we're stuck with this flawed implimentation.
Don't do what xanim does, it's not a solution at all. A pre-compiled binary is absolutely useless to those of us running Linux on real architectures (Alpha, PowerPC, SPARC, MIPS). If we wanted a $2000 video game console, we would have bought an Intel PC with Windows in the first place.
Is Microsoft using "WMF" for its streaming media? Isn't that their own Windows Metafile extension? I can view those with hundreds of free tools.
--
And I got it before you, and someone else before me. Both were declined. What do you want, a cookie? I'm interested to know why they were declined with such a big time span, but it's not important that mine be posted over any other version.
As a free software proponent it is hard for me to get excited about which codec RealPlayer supports on Linux. We need a totally free streaming solution as well as an improved file based MPEG encode/decode capability. It is only a matter of time.
Have you been able to get it to work as a plugin, or is that even possible? Many sites seem to want to have a pop-up, plugin window that won't work under Linux. At least ABCNews.com gives you the option, "Click here if your version of RealPlayer doesn't work with these clips", or somesuch...
you know there's a world around Linux, in this world there's BeOS, the RealPlayer (audio/video) is available for BeOS in a close beta, but according to feedback i had, it works great! so maybe the MS codec will be included in the BeOS RealPlayer too!
--
BeDevId 15453
Download BeOS R5 Lite free!
"Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
Just a question:
Is M$'s window media format codec better than the rest?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
awwwwwwwww. is little robin not getting his way today and going to pout? it's ok mr. robin, I'm sure real will hear your whines and open up the source JUST FOR YOU.
Real Networks is basically a company who has developed an entire market by keeping a single algorithm a secret. They basically implemented the "Real Time Streaming Protocol" and have kept it closed source and undocumented.
So that's their right you say? But they have an RFC on the topic! Why does a company have an RFC on a protocol, but yet has that RFC full of holes so you can't really build an implementation?
It's called pulling a Netscape with SSL, or pulling a Microsoft in general. In short, pollution of the landscape with misleading incorrect standards documentation.
Meanwhile, Real managed to "lock up" the streaming market for a while. They muscled a number of other streaming companies out of the market (not sure if any of them had better business practices) and continued to dress up their relatively tiny technological advance with GUIs and partner programs and so forth.
If Microsoft kills them and owns the market, we have really only Real and companies like them to blame, who have willfully created a market with misleading documentation and lawyers as barriers to entry, instead of keeping ahead technologically.
-josh
don't worry about it. I've submited many stories days before they got posted on /. and mine were rejected. It doesn't matter, I don't care, all I care about is that the community gets the story.
No! The question is: will it ever be free and open? Otherwise, who gives a rat's ass about Linux? If Linux users are willing to settle for closed formats, then they might as well just switch to Windows now.
---
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
jippee! go bill!! just what we need. is there any open source initiative for video streaming? i guess mp3 encoding is somewhat available in opensource. Its good to see swift generator is available as a cost effective solution for flash, but i havent seen anything that i could use for video streaming :(
meridian at tha.net
I for one have never cared for the quality of the WMV format. It pales in comparision to QuickTime. Let's face it, Real and QuickTime are the 2 most used formats on the web. Now, if only Apple and what's-his-name would stop pointing fingers at each other saying "They are keeping us from porting QuickTime" we might actually see a QuickTime player that can actually PLAY stuff off the web. It's a shame these companies can't see beyond their bottom line. I'm not asking them to give up any patents or profits or whatever. It would just be great if they could stop all this wasteful squabbling and produce some quality software.
"Klaatu, verada, necktie!" -Ash
a monopoly...
seriously though, only a company with a fat revenue stream can afford to give away ie, and now according to the nytime a free format. Its there attempt to make windows a dominant platform.
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/03/bizte
(sorry I can't get html linking to work..)
NYtimes article also seems to indicate it was given away for free. MS is currently the # 3 format.
Because it claims it's expired. Yet on Real's website, it's very difficult to find and download anything Linux.
In the past, my G2 player had worked well, except for consuming 100% CPU time. So until Real release a decent, modern player for Linux, I'm not holding my breath.
I have no love for M$, don't get me wrong. But..
:) (Read I am lazy...)
1) Windows Media does Multicast Streaming Better then Real.
2) At least to me the quality seems better at similar Bitrates .
3) It is also easier to have a "Entry Level" Person take over the mundane task of managing the server
As an Idea on how to get around this.
Do what xanim does. Have the developer sign an NDA and then provide the library as a precompiled one, binary only. While the OpenSource Zealots will complain. It will allow people with linux desktops to view WMF files.
To E-mail me, replace the first period in my domain with an @
greetings, eMBee.
--
Gnu is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX
Eh?
Well, there is mtv (http://www.mpegtv.com)
(which is NOT btw, by Loki, they do the smpeg
library).
If you have a creative dxr2 board, go to opensource.creative.com and get dxr2 drivers, those are cool.
But if you don't want a commercial solution and do not have the hardware, there is Xtheater at http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jbjohns4/Xtheater/ The main site is down but will be back up on Sunday, but the latest version should be there anyway.
Of course, there is also kmpg 0.5.4 if you have KDE, do a freshmeat search for it's location.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
I hope that it comes to Linux but for my part but I just don't know a killer reason why I just need ASF on my Linux box. I would just rather have a good VCD player.
Does any know of a good linux VCD player?
The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
If all you want to do is grab the audio stream going to your sound device, you can use the ALSA (http://www.alsa-project.org) drivers for that.
/proc/asound/card1/pcmloopD0S0p > sound.raw
.wav or whatever. eg. sox -r 20100 -w -s sound.raw sound.wav
.wav's.
Basically you do: cat
Once your sound sample has finished playing you cancel the above operation and then use 'sox' to convert the raw audio format to
The only problem I had with this is that the sampling rate of the RA stream is not one accepted by any of the MP3 encoders I could find, so I'm stuck with big ugly
Though I don't doubt what you say is true, I've got to ask; then why does my sound card let you do this? It's a reasonably popular sound card, by a large company (Create Labs, SB Live!). Among many other nifty features, the Windows drivers supports a sound recording source called "What-U-Hear"
As its name would imply, it lets me record whatever is coming out of the sound card. This is great, and I've used it to easily resample MP3's for CD burning, as well as recording streaming sound that I couldn't save directly. I've often wondered why Real, or even Microsoft, hasn't raised a hubbub over this feature.
-- It is too late for the pebbles to vote, the avalanche has already started.
Just an hour before this story broke I was reading the Squid user manual concerning the issue of "caching Real Audio". Basically what Squid says is that only the http "psuedo streaming" mode of operation is cachable.
I have no enthusiasm to see a Linux client which can play a bunch of proprietary formats which don't interact cleanly with *everything else* that makes Linux what it is.
I think these formats are the disease, not the cure.
Care to explain the logic behind that statement? Got you there, didn't I Sloppy ol' Poppy!
What happens when your Linux is obselete? If you have an open solution you can port it over, but if you settled for closed binaries, good luck getting the program ported again (especially if it's a dead format). The purpose of Open Source software is not so you can have a free (beer) OS, it is to allow the user to do whatever they want with the software (including porting to their OS of choice).
-tsunake
Am I the only one who finds users who say "Yay, we get a free comercial player for our fovorite OS, but I'd still perfer something open source."
/usr/local or /opt you go. I have no problem with non-open source software running on my linux box. Loki, Real, Netscape, Star Office, etc. currently have space on my harddrive, and it doesn't look like it's about to change anytime soon.
Granted most of what Real Player does is propitery, but at least they're attempting to be crossplatform and provide a free player to something besides windows and mac.
It's not open source. Oh well, at least it works. Off to
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein
Also, from the point of view of Real, they want to be able to play *everything* in Windows, but they don't want the M$ media format to be crossplatform, because this is one of their major competitive advantages (If the Linux port of the player really works some day).
Porting the M$ codecs to Linux would be a bad move. They are more interested in the format used by content providers (they pay for the servers) than what the users are running (for free) and they would be doing a favor to M$ by giving its format a bigger user base that could tilt content providers towards M$ media format.
If Linux on the desktop catches up, and this could happen this year with kde2, USB, mozilla, the new 3D (games) stuff in XFree and the new office suites, then, crossplatform will be very important for streaming content, the same way it is for html now, and the content providers could favor a format that can be used in every desktop (as opposed to Win and Mac only).
When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
Nevermind the fact that the RealPlayer uses 100% of the computers resources when running and it actually tends to interfere with other streaming video players when it is just sitting idle in memory.
Does this story sound familiar to anyone? Heavy competition between MS and company X. MS gives their version away for free. The press mentions that company X charges for theirs. Although most people just use the free version from company X. The market share of company X begins to slide. The stock price of company X begins to slide. Soon company X is bought by another company and their product quietly shipped into oblivion. Can RealNetworks stay around much longer. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions. I hope that Judge Jackson hears about this. Textbook example of Microsoft's so called "competition",
THIS SPACE FOR RENT
it's about time these companies started playing a little nicer..
but i can just see the wired news story now..
"Joint MPG-8 Codec from MS and Real Crashes Systems / has Security Hole / Collecting Customer Information."
"..Constructive critizism is always welcome however."
*Especially* if it's chilled first...
"..Constructive critizism is always welcome however."
A program for Windows that does this already exists!
It's a shareware program, Total Recorder, and it is essentially a "null" sound driver, that saves sound data to memory instead of playing it. It's accompanied by a user-mode program that saves that data to disk and redirects the data to the actual sound driver (so you can still hear sound while recording).
http://www.totalrecorder.com/
(I've tried it, but the shareware limitation is quite severe, so I didn't keep it: only a few seconds of recording time is allowed)
Dr. Demento On The 'Net!
While I agree that /. can border on hypocrisy, the argument above is precisely why Open Source development should be lauded. If there is a 'problem to be solved' with Linux, or the myriad of packages, by it's very nature, anyone with the inclination can fix the problem and feel pretty smug, whereas the developers behind Windows are forced to release patch after patch, and the problems aren't usually solved as reliably as with a true OS project.
OK, OT rant over, I agree that it is depressing that we have to rely on partnerships with the companies we vilify in order to 'further the cause', but it is necessary. Standard MPEG won't be adopted by major media companies, as it is way too easy to save/re-distribute. It also doesn't stream too well (in my experience). An OS player that allows closed-source plugins would be the ideal solution, to my mind, but these companies want the whole hog, and to develop the player as well (probably because of the advertising revenue that they can rake in on the unregistered versions). It's greedy, but it is also an unfortunate consequence of the lie of the technological landscape right now.
We're shaking the Devil's hand in situations like this, and for now that is necessary, but we're not selling our souls, and that's the important thing.
- "How do we do it? Volume!" - The Bursar of Unseen University.
Any pointers to there work?
Even when a good & open codec is available there's the problem of getting it widely used enough to make it of any significance. As others have stated, the music and consumer electronics industries isn't going to jump on the bandwagon of anything they see as undermining their profitability.
I believe that for such a codec to become widely used it would take rapid porting to all common platforms, as stable releases.
Beyond that it will take the use of the format by enough of the musicians to make the music companies pay attention. This likely means getting enough upcoming performers to distribute using the format that the industry views _not_ supporting the format as losing money.
This would perhaps lead to a change in how the industry works. Rather than focusing on the distribution of recordings as such, they would concentrate on getting payment for other's use of the tunes and lyrics, and distributing hard formats - albums - with physical goods such as photos, buttons, nose rings, noisemakers, and whatever, that don't do so well over electronic distribution.
The only 2 reasons I would like WMF to come to Linux is so that 1) I can go to sites that support ONLY WMF 2) There can be a free Streaming Server for Linux (I know there are others, but then Windows users have to install plugins and stuff )
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
I agree about open codecs...maybe there could be a player that takes advantages of the new features in xfree86 4.0??
I'm still running 3.3.5 on a moderate video card...frame rate while playing mpeg still a wee bit slow. Anyways...it works and I'm happy we've got these things to play around with.
Vin
I submitted this article HOURS before it was posted on /., and it was declined HOURS before the post as well. This is what I see:
2000-03-14 21:44:14 RealNetworks licenses Microsoft's Windows Media te (articles,news) (declined)
WHY? Why does someone else get the article and not me since I clearly got to it before them? Slashdot's flawed moderation/sumbmission system fails again.
I think we've had enough of the hastles with trying to get Linux support for 'mainstream' closed a/v codecs. The community needs to develop their own codec that is of equal or better quality to offerings by Microsoft, Apple, and RealMedia. If we could provide the industry with a superior format, we could ELIMINATE big corporate control over this increasingly important form of media.
Yeah, but don't forget, this is Microsoft were talking about. Who here wants to bet on the outcome of a Realplayer vs. Microsoft slugging match of codecs? I'd bet on the great M$, myself, in which case Windows would have WMF, Linux wouldn't and M$ would have just one more lever to use against Linux. "Why, why would you want to use THEM? They don't even have WMF. And since we blackmailed , you HAVE to use WMF to do ". We'd all love an open source codec, or failing that, one that doesn't have M$'s hands on it, but we might not have the choice. And if the contract IS clean, there really isn't that much M$ can do, legally.
This is pretty damn cool. The trend just gets better.
I can finally watch asf files in linux (maybe, we don't know that real's agreement extended to linux, or that they are going to port the version supporting asf within a year or so)
Another area where linux is starting to catch up.
negative:
Microsoft media will become a more dominating, proprietary format. (I always thought it was based on open formats, like Mpeg-4, which wouldn't require licensing, guess not)
Linux (and other) users will no longer fight against sites who don't choose open formats, since we can still see the microsoft format.
There is a small team of very talented people working on a wm and qt decoder for the opensource community, there results so far have been impressive.
Java Media Framework 2.0 supports a ton of media codecs. It is an api that would allow developers to easily integrate multimedia, including mp3 and mpeg into their application. In general java is slow, but will not always be. Their is currently a pure java implementation of jmf which mean that it would run anywhere. Sun has also put out packs that allow the api to hookup with the codecs natively, improving performance. JMF is also a plugin based, so codecs can be added and removed through the manager. If an open source player was written using the codec it would run on all platforms automatically, and run decent if the platform had native support.
addict (-dkt) v. tr. addicted, addicting, addicts. 1.To devote or give (oneself) habitually o
I think Realnetwork just signed its doom.
In a year MS media format will be the facto standard on 90% of servers.
MS says "Our mediaserver is free use it..." and many admins will do just that.
MS will sell more server and to use the w2k server fully you will need to have w2k clients.
And the next big market will be streaming media as Television will move to the net.
What are the alternatives? Realmedia costs money and most companies will change there NT4 server(they have to...) to w2k servers and the MS mediaserver is included so why use realmedia.
And i don't think we will see any open source streamer in the near future, even if some gurus code an open source alternative it will need to have support from companies (remember coda and nfs) and MS will never agree on that and we all know why...
I hope in the next couple of years companies start to replace there MS win clients with Linux, but that will take time.
The next couple of years will be interesting.
Most of the articles say that RealNetworks are licensing the codec - and to me this suggests them paying M$ money. This being and the case, and given what we know about billg et al. and their mentalities, I don't think you'll be seeing WMF in an open source GRealPlayer any time soon. You can bet your life that in trying to develop an open source codec some corporobod will claim patent violation or infringement of their DMCA rights. That's the kind of pants that these people like to throw at us well-meaning types.
ø`ø,,ø`ø,,ø`ø,,ø`ø,,ø`ø,,ø`ø,ø`ø
It was avail.: http://www.microsoft.com/netshow/download/unix.ht
But the file still live on some ftp http://ftpsearch.lycos.com/cgi-bin/search?form=me
and the install instructions: http://www.intradenver.net/linux.htm
Well, maybe if they've hugely improved the user interface, stability, and performance since the last version, they can gain market share under windows. But nobody I know of with windows prefers RealPlayer to Windows Media Player.
Are the specifications available for using the RealPlayer shared objects? Probably the best thing RealPlayer could do (presuming they don't want to release source for their protocol) is release the shared objects and documentation on how to use them, and let the community make grealplayer and krealplayer. This would save them having to keep up the whole interface side of the application, they'd just need to release the codecs.
-- Erich
Slashdot reader since 1997
How do you think they got the money to licence the codec? Redhat...has deep pockets at the moment...
I would expect that the next major release of RealPlayer will have it, unless the Windoze Streaming Codec is so wonky that it will take a major re-write of RealPlayer to incorperate it. Then it will be two revisions.
I have to admit, i am real impressed with the Realplayer 7 I just started using under Linux. We should all be thanking them for their support!!!!
To re-cap...Windows Streaming Codec will be in the next one, unless it is really hard to code, then it will be in the release after the next.
ttyl
Farrell
CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
Seriously. If I must support, encourage and use a proprietary media format, it's going to be Quicktime, 100%. Quicktime is absurdly broader and more advanced than this, offers sprites and SMPTE transition effects and panoramas and Star Wars trailers, and all WMP offers is the chance to hand all control of media over to MS who will never give it back. At least Apple plainly doesn't have enough clout to crush and stifle all innovation in the damn industry- they have to compete by actually competing, and when they don't do it well they suffer. MS neither needs to or wants to compete in the capitalist sense people constantly worship them for. I really will suffer just about any loss or hardship to simply deny them further support. Screw video streaming if this is what it's going to be. God knows I'll never see it either on my Mac or the Linux partitions. I am the enemy to them and my role is to be stomped into submission by getting as many media outlets as possible to boycott me. Works both ways.
Just like the Frauhofer patents have prevented the distribution of MP3 encoding software? OK, so I know the situation is slightly different for MP3, but it's incredibly difficult to prevent the spread of software whose time has come, legal or not...
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
In Windows, the kernel is controlled by Microsoft, a company sympathetic to the IP lords' interests. It is conceivable that, if requested, they could add an API call to guarantee that output is not redirected, or return a false value if not possible. Players could then call this and refuse to work if integrity cannot be guaranteed.
Of course, this is impossible under Linux, as an Evil Pirate could just rewrite the function to say that everything's OK no matter what.
Then there is reverse engineering. Under Linux it's easier to debug binaries; under Windows it's possible to make binaries impossible to reverse engineer without an ICE debugger (which are expensive and, a few court cases from now, may require locksmith-type licenses to possess under the DMCA, but that's another story).
Its about time that there is some WMF support under UNIX. There are just too many sites that only support WMF nowadays that have content that I want to view. Next we'll have to get the 3D Jokeman to be in some non-windows format!
--
Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
The problem with open codecs is (at least in the eyes of content providers) copy protection.
Copy protection for audio will die for the same reason it died for software: it's not the best thing for the consumer. In the end, what's best is what survives - the simple and irresistable logic of evolution. However, this silliness about copy protection could go on for quite a long time before it finally dies, leaving us with the free, open codecs we actually want.
We can speed the process up. Just by insisting that all the players we use include, among other things, at least one free codec. Can you say streaming MP3?? Ask for it. Insist on it. Write emails. Get the software (xmms etc. etc.) Don't go to sites that don't have it. We know we can make a difference, and we will.
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
I belive the problem lies in complexity of these and the knowledge to develop them
Or i'm missing something?
Short term solution could be that one of the companies releases their format to the public, we grab it, polish it where necessary, and develop all kind of players & stuff for it
I wish it would be different...
Linux represents a very big threat to Microsoft.. Why would they allow important software like this to be ported to Linux, if they can stop it ? It is very much possible that the licensing terms specify that the WMF format shouldn't be made available to Linux.
True, but wasn't it the case, at least in the past, that versions of RealPlayer Plus had a ``VCR'' feature where you could record and replay live Real streams? I could be wrong; I never actually bought RealPlayer Plus :-)
Yes, but only if the stream provider allows it. Otherwise the record function is turned off. Its kinda a weak security, but for a closed source solution, it works.
"If MS allows a Linux port of its technology, it could face content companies withdrawing licenses to release their content in its format, in favour of more restricted players."
:)
Well, diddums to that..
More to the point, if it requires running as root, or closed-source binary kernel modules, it won't be running here, and possibly in quite a few other places too...
~Tim
--
Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
The "if you can hear it, you can rip it" maxim applies equally to video: If you can see it, you can rip it.
There are open source implementations of standard CODECs such as H.263 (at least one version of vic) and H.261 (openh323.org) which are fine for dial-up and DSL/cable speed streaming video respectively. MPEG-4 is also a good standard low bandwidth CODEC, although I don't know of any open source implementation. At higher bandwidths, MPEG-2 (source from berkley) is available.
I know that some of these such as H.263 and MPEG-2 have patent issues, but the unchallenged existence of these widespread implementations means that they are at least safe to use.
As for an open source streaming video protocol/framework, the MBone stuff or H.323 again make more sense than starting from scratch.
Good point. But even if the contract looks squeaky clean, history suggests that it is a Bad Thing when Microsoft can control or strongly influence a protocol. An open protocol would seem be the proper answer. Anyone know if there is any activity out there working toward this?
Geeky modern art T-shirts
About 1.5 years ago, there actually was a beta Windows Media Player released for Linux. There was a web site (http://www.microsoft.com/windows/mediaplayer/down load/unix.htm) which is now defunct. I probably even have the beta somewhere, but it didn't work very well. The page always said "come back here soon to see future releases of Windows Media Player for Linux".
---gralem
The copy of netshow linked here is capable of playing MPEG4v1 (but not MPEG4v2/v3), H263, and Duck Truemotion 2 video streams, raw, MPEG layer3, ADPCM and I think it also has support for some vivo audio codecs.. But, I am sure about MPEG4v1. If there were a way to get this binary to utilise codecs from mplayer2/win32 such as WMA or MPEG4v2, at least, we would be on our way.
* Netshow for Linux
I don't think the file is actually gzipped, but, it has the extension. Recommend attempting gunzip but just renaming if it fails. Off to find another hack to get mplayer2 to work..
You'll get no argument from me on this; hence the word ``legal'' as a qualifier in my original statement. The RSA patent says you can't use non-RSA libraries in the US (at least until September 20, I'm having a party that day, btw) but that hasn't stopped quite a bit of SSL software from being distributed illegally in the US...
True, but wasn't it the case, at least in the past, that versions of RealPlayer Plus had a ``VCR'' feature where you could record and replay live Real streams? I could be wrong; I never actually bought RealPlayer Plus :-)
Yeah, it would be compromised, but given the patents on codecs, you'd never be able to distribute the software legally. I hate to say it, but it's pretty damned effective protection.
At least that's what they've been telling us at recent trade shows and in conversations we've had with them. They said we can expect, at the very least, a UNIX version about the same time that a Mac version of the most recent player is released (I think player 6? only runs on Windows, not Mac--can't remember for sure).
I have seen other solutions, however. At the CES show in Vegas, I saw a Cirrus Maverick chip on a board with another small chip that handled the Windows Media decoding. Cirrus released the chip for Windows, but a 3rd party vendor modified it for LINUX. One way around the LINUX problem I guess.
Nonetheless, I'm still going to support both formats in my Linuxradio.
I don't really care too much about Windows Media format. What I'd like to see is a version of Apple Quicktime 4 for Linux.
:- Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair
That'd be far more useful.
PEBKAC
If indeed RealNetworks does include WMF support in Realplayer for Linux, it will be valuable for convenience, since Real and Quicktime both have much better streaming codecs.
On the issue of open-source, even if Real doesn't release the code for their player or codecs, the fact that they are running on Linux/glibc may provide a unique oportunity for reverse engineering of the compression scheme. I don't have much experience in this area, but as I understand it, intercepting and logging the calls made to the kernel and the C libraries may allow wizard programmers to figure out what actually goes on when we watch streaming videos. A GPL'ed clone wouldn't be far off then.
Anonymous Luddite: "What do you think of the dehumanizing effects of the Internet?"
Andy Grove: "Not Much."
I have read that licensing the use of the WMF SDK is free. M$ wants to spread its Windows proprietary audio format as far and wide as it can ("resistance is futile").
WMF pales in comparison to MPEG2
Not true. This all depends on bandwidth. MPEG2 is much less effective than WMF (MPEG4), as well as Real's codec, but when you see MPEG2, it is usually given lots and lots of bits. Side by side at the same bitrate, MPEG4 would be significantly better.
A GPL'd program can link to propriatery libraries. For instance, the Linux Kernel can link to propriatery VMware modules, or xanim can link to quicktime codecs.
Or, as a better example, you can compile GPL'd software on a Solaris machine, which has a propriatery libc.
The Application would not necessarily be a RealPlayer application, it would probably be a general-purpose media application, able to link with lots of different codecs (mpeg, realplayer, avi, etc), both propriatery and not.
-- Erich
Slashdot reader since 1997
They seem to make some effort to suppor Linux, so why don't we do a slashdot interview with someone who has some authority and ask them. Here are my questions:
1. How far does Real's commitment to Linux go?
2. Is there any hope that Real will be the ones to provide use with the codec's that are currently unavailable?
3. How can the Linux community help real get the media play out of beta on our platform?
4. What incentives can we provide to make the effort worth while?
The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
A program called X-FileGet lets you save rm streams,its on this page.
http://www.aeternus.tmfweb.nl/WTold/Floor2.html
From Roblimo: ...sometimes (sigh) you just have to make do with hand-me-downs because they're all you're going to get for a while.
What kind of advocacy is THAT? Up until now the Slashdot group has been illicitly hypocritical (Amazon links and Amazon boycotts, Windows problems are bugs to laugh at while Linux problems are 'problems to be solved', information is free but buy Katz's information for $19.95) but coming right out saying the above?? "Well, we here at Slashdot love advocating free this and Open Source that, deriding all attempts at software companies to close source this or patent that...but when it comes to a comfort such as listening to streaming audio: "Well, what can you do...I guess we have to support RealAudio because we just HAVE to listen to live radio feeds! We like everything free, but listening to WLNX 96.1FM is more important?"
Nice to see the conviction, guys...
Perhaps the best way to reveal the problem with security via obscurity is to use the multi-monitor feature in Windows, design what is essentially a "null" monitor/card driver that looks like a second video out, and use it to capture any and all content that is video driven (perhaps with a a "null" sound driver).
Put the drivers under the GPL, and ask the content providers to open up their streaming codecs now that people can arbitrarily save them easily.
---
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
The question is will the codec be ported to Linux? Windows Media is touted as a copyright-enforcement technology as well as a format. Many proprietors of copyright-enforcing closed formats refuse to release software decoders for platforms with open-source kernels, as it is possible to modify the kernel to capture audio to a file (in a way that the player cannot reasonably defend against). For example, Liquid Audio does not support Linux, and neither do any software DVD decoders (well, any aboveground ones). If MS allows a Linux port of its technology, it could face content companies withdrawing licenses to release their content in its format, in favour of more restricted players. Remember, these companies are paranoid and scared, and not exactly the most trusting of the Net. (I believe Universal, for one, has its own format under development, and Sony is doing something with ATRAC and its own copyright-enforcement mechanisms; and that alone is almost half the music market.)
Look at for instance http://www.maz-sound.com/ - there are fake Windows audio drivers available that capture to .WAV files.
The Ogg project is as much about research as it is about coding - it looks like they're combing through existing signal processing research to come up with something that's patent-free.
With the ultra-bare-bones example encoder, I've encoded some songs - it sounds quite nice, at least as good as MP3, maybe a little better to my ears. Currently it only seems to do VBR streams, but I assume that will change in the future - the goal is to allow specifying fixed or variable rates, with floors and ceilings for VBR.
It'll be interesting to see if they make a video codec...
--
Oh, no! You have walked into the slavering fangs of a lurking grue!
If I read the articles correctly, this is only
the streaming AUDIO format (WMA), not MS's streaming video format.
Quote from CNet article:
Microsoft said today that RealNetworks and several other major Internet companies, including Yahoo, have agreed to license its Windows Media audio format.
They never mention the video format.
I suspect it could be quite some time before we see an open source player for Windows Media Format, if one appears at all. The CNet story doesn't say so, but I think we can assume that Real (and the other 70 companies) have paid Microsoft, and probably quite handsomly, for the license.
Even if one of the major distributions, Red Hat, SuSE, etc were to license it, you can bet the terms of the license would not permit the opening of the codec. What we could possibly see would be an open source player using plugins for various codecs (this would make it very expandable without the need to recompile a new version for new codecs of course) where the WMF plugin had to be closed source.
Course it could still be free for download and all that malarky, which is definately better than nothing.
WMF seems to unfortunately becoming a very popular standard amongst streaming media services, this does rather seem to strengthen Microsoft's grip (not monopolistic yet, but you know that's where they're planning to head) on the streaming media area. The more players support WMF, the more suppliers will serve their streams as WMF, and M$ control the standard.
Of course, WMF pales in comparison to MPEG2 (and newer versions). As broadband in the home becomes more of a reality, and the hardware to provide decent decoding for MPEG more accesible (most new video cards include hardware decoding, and even if they don't, something like the Creative Dxr* cards are not very expensive) the relatively open standard of MPEG could make a good showing, especially in the open source arena.
--
Listening for the sound of the coming rain...
By free, I assume you mean open. The problem with open codecs is (at least in the eyes of content providers) copy protection. They see an inability to save streamed RealAudio/ReadVideo, and are happy because their copyrighted works aren't being distributed around the net. An open codec would allow anyone to save the streamed data to a file for later use. In actual fact, the current closed codecs only provide security through obscurity anyway, and will eventually be compromised.
"The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." -- Delos B. McKown
By allowing Real to support the Windows Media formatt, they are opening up a wider base of clients to use their formats.. and therefore a wider base of clients to use their Windows Media Stream servers. These stream servers are only available for Windows.. and it wouldn't be a big shock for future versions to target W2K as its preferred platform.
This push helps to establish MS in data centers and server farms where it may not have had a presence.. and to expand the presence where it was previously located. They don't care a thing about RealPlayer and MediaPlayer per se.. if you can own the servers, you get a big boost in owning the clients as well.
Every time we get on a movie or music topic people whine about "when will X port Y" and "how come software Z keeps crashing in Linux but not on Windows", etc.
The slightly more clueful say "we need free software that can handle these codecs, that'll solve ALL our problems".
That solves nothing: What about free codecs? Is there anyone working on this? The advantage would be not only freedom, but then we'd also have a standard (or more likely, several standards). If I was halfway qualified I'd work on this myself, unfortunately this post represents the edges of my knowledge.
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
I haven't read the whole thing yet, but the first paragraph is intriguing:
Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq: MSFT) proclaimed on Tuesday that long-time rival RealNetworks Inc. (Nasdaq: RNWK) -- plus a handful of other vendors, including Yahoo!, Sonic Foundry, AOL Winamp and Lycos Sonique -- had agreed to license Microsoft's Windows Media format technology.
So it's not just about RealNetworks. This looks like a big victory for this format, and MS.
Does anybody know if WMF has SDMI support? I think it is, or at least there are a couple of copyright enforcement mechanisms in there. I have the vague feeling that the RIAA must be very pleased by this...
I strongly believe that trying to be clever is detrimental to your health. -- Linus Torvalds