Slashdot Mirror


Quicktime In Linux

brianmed writes "Yes, it works. Codeweavers has just announced their crossover plug-in. It enables users to access popular Windows files and plug-ins in Linux. Right now it is geared towards Quicktime, Shockwave, and Word viewers. Quicktime trailers play just fine. I also have pine setup to launch the the MS Word viewer on command. It is a happy day." Alright, time to start testing. I've also been talking with Jeremy White of Codeweavers: he's got a request for help, as well as an interesting piece on business models -- the Crossover is not entirely GPL. See the above for more information.

354 comments

  1. Cool this rocks by Dax_is_a_geek · · Score: 1

    FINALY QT in linux

    oh yeah FP!

    1. Re:Cool this rocks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Too bad Microsoft is no longer supporting browser "netscape-style" plugins. Just when they start to work, they won't be developed anymore. Acitve X for Linux anyone?

    2. Re:Cool this rocks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just downloaded it yesterday, even the quicktime VR works great!

      -Cnik

  2. Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The more we make Linux behave like Windows, the sooner it will make serious inroads!

    Viva le no difference! (Pardon my French)

  3. Fabulous! by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 2

    Well, now I have two out of three of the major video codecs available... often, things only offer either Windows Media or Quicktime.

    Of course, what I'd really like would be native Flash authoring...

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

    1. Re:Fabulous! by jchristopher · · Score: 2
      Of course, what I'd really like would be native Flash authoring...

      Oh, I'd kill for a native Dreamweaver... Macromedia has not shown much interest in Linux, unfortunately. Anyone know of a petition for this?

      Unlike some people, I have no problem using closed source software (I wouldn't know what to do with the source if I had it) - I'll just use whatever the best tool is, and Dreamweaver is IT.

    2. Re:Fabulous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Macromedia sucks cock.

      I'm so sick of all the sites that demand that you enable JavaScript, Java, Flash or something else to access their content.

      If I can't access a fucking train timetables without enabling JavaScript (which in turn makes me vulnerable to fucking pop-up windows) then I won't use trains.

    3. Re:Fabulous! by GreyPoopon · · Score: 1
      Unlike some people, I have no problem using closed source software (I wouldn't know what to do with the source if I had it) - I'll just use whatever the best tool is, and Dreamweaver is IT.


      I'll second that. Dreamweaver is absolutely the ONLY reason I'm still running a Windows box on a regular basis. I would certainly pay the same price for a Linux version.

      --

      GreyPoopon
      --
      Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?

    4. Re:Fabulous! by jchristopher · · Score: 2
      Um, no. Macromedia is not to blame for all the javascript driven sites. It's up to the developer. You can use it to create javascript-free, flash free, etc. sites, if you choose.

      Javascript lets developers do all kinds of things which are sometimes otherwise impossible. If the developer doesn't give you an alternative, blame them, not a quality tool.

      If you don't like having popup windows, maybe you should look at switching to a browser or some other tool that lets you disable them?

    5. Re:Fabulous! by seanmeister · · Score: 1
      Of course, what I'd really like would be native Flash authoring...

      Yeah, me too... :(

      The Labs has put together some Perl stuff that will do basic swf creation and manipulation, maybe someone could build on that?

    6. Re:Fabulous! by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Do petitions really work? Would 1,500 signatures of people mean Macromedia would turn a profit if 60% bought linux verisons?

      Aren't most macromedia/adobe users Mac users?

    7. Re:Fabulous! by jchristopher · · Score: 1

      I don't know, that's a very good question. I would buy Dreamweaver for Linux, but maybe a lot of people wouldn't. Does anyone have any sales figures for closed source applications that been ported to Linux?

    8. Re:Fabulous! by iomud · · Score: 2

      Macromedia (authoring tools) and Microsoft (browsers) are responsible for the propagation of non compliant html code. So as for quality tool's we may want to re-evauluate the meaning of quality. IE 6 has come quite a ways though at least enforcing more standards than it previously had. I have no problem with javascript it can be a useful tool in the right hands.

    9. Re:Fabulous! by lubricated · · Score: 1

      which two?

      avifile and aviplayer offer support for divx and
      asf this plugin offers support for qt, what's left?

      --
      It has been statistically shown that helmets increase the risk of head injury.
    10. Re:Fabulous! by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      Well, now I have two out of three of the major video codecs available...

      "Available"? I think that's too strong a word. Maybe "Available read-only, and only inside of a web browser". Still, that's better than nothing.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    11. Re:Fabulous! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're actually going to forego a major type of public transportation simply because you don't like the possibility that a small piece of your screen real-estate might be obscured with a 100x200 popup browser window for a few second? You're so fucking stupid I can't believe that you actually managed to type and submit your post.

    12. Re:Fabulous! by onosendai · · Score: 1

      I'm holding hope that once there's a OSX release of Macromedia products (FLash, Dreamweaver) etc, it won't be long before i have absolutely no reason to boot back to windows .. thanks to gphoto2 ..

      --
      <? include ('signature.inc'); ?>
    13. Re:Fabulous! by Corrado · · Score: 1

      Check out JShock. It is a Java system for creating and displaying interactive web-based presentations similar to Shockwave. It's not exactly what you want, but it's free (and GPL'd I think).

      --
      KangarooBox - We make IT simple!
  4. Still waiting for Sorenson by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 2

    That is great to hear ( I am being serious ). The only catch is that the most of the QuickTime trailers use Sorenson and I can't see any legal way of getting this working on Linux, unless Apple changes the licensing between them and Sorenson. Maybe its time to encourage the use of a non-Sorenson codec?

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  5. Cool by SpanishInquisition · · Score: 2, Funny

    Linux is now a stronger than ever platform for watching porn.

    --
    Je t'aime Stéphanie
    1. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I so fucking drunk. I bet I'm gonna throw up tonight.

      Anyway. Back to my high paying work tomorrow. It's great to write code for financial transaction security protocols while hung over...

      Only in Europe!

    2. Re:Cool by Trollificus · · Score: 0

      And 10 to 1 odds are that it's at least twice as stable as anything that ever came out of the US. ;p~

      --

      "People should be allowed to keep midgets as pets."
      - Gov. Jesse Ventura

    3. Re:Cool by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      but you need the Vivo plugin for the rest of it.

    4. Re:Cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please provide links ...

  6. The good news: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we won't have to call it "GNU/Crossover"

  7. But its not free (as in beer) by Christianfreak · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And that can cause problems. The website says that the plugin costs $19.95. I understand the need to compensate developers for their work but charging for a plugin that is free (as in beer) on other platforms is not going to migrate people to Linux. This will be news when there are free plugins that install right and work just as well.

    1. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by MaxVlast · · Score: 1

      Sheesh! Can't people ever get enough? These people did a lot of work, and they deserve to be able to have a company for it. Just because you have a free operating system, that doesn't mean that you deserve everything for no cost.

      --
      There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
      Max V.
      NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
    2. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 1

      No one's saying that the developers shouldn't be allowed to charge for their work. We're just saying that no one will pay for the work. How many popular formatscan you name that charge for their viewers?

    3. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Shadowlore · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, you cpmpletely misunderstand the plugin. How about reading the details first?

      The plugin provides the means of runningn other plugins. With the crossover plugin, you can then run most non-ActiveX browser plugins.

      This is not just a QT plugin. YOu can do many things, such as Shockwave, QT, and many other Windows-only browser plugins with this. In addition to these, you can also use the plugin for viewing various MS attachements, such as MSWord documents, and Excel spreadsheets.

      What makes this useful, is that MS is trying to get rid of all non-activeX plugins in their newer browser. There are many die-hard Windows fans that are quite upset with this. This provides another opportunity for the disgruntled to see there are options. As for the price, come on. This is not twenty bucks to use QuickTime. This is twenty bucks to use a wide variety of plugins.

      Given the lack of accurate information in the parent post, it is not an 'interesting' post anymore than other misinformation is interesting. It needs moderated back down.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    4. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      it is not an 'interesting' post anymore than other misinformation is interesting

      It said it's $19.95. I found that pretty interesting. Saved me from visiting their website and trying to download the stupid thing.

    5. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by notext · · Score: 1

      You are correct. They don't have to offer it for free but if I am gonna pay, why not just pay windows and then I don't need any kind of wine?

      For things such as this, is why I still have a windows box sitting next to me. Let me ask you this. If this was sold by Microsoft would you purchase it?

    6. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Xerithane · · Score: 2
      I'd be willing to be a lot of people will pay for it. I know I will. It's handy to be able to view documents in Linux that previously were either a pain in the ass or impossible to view.


      Time is money, saving time to view this natively saves money.

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
    7. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by abischof · · Score: 2

      It's true that it's not free (bummer there). But, another way to think of it is that, instead of paying $100+ for Windoze, you'd only be paying $20 for Linux ($0 distro + $20 for this).

      --

      Alex Bischoff
      HTML/CSS coder for hire

    8. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by ecki · · Score: 1

      Well, what I would like to see is that the big Linux companies like RedHat, SuSE, Mandrake, ... make a deal with Codeweavers and bundle CrossOver with their distributions. I'm sure that would be profitable for both sides.

    9. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by yesthatguy · · Score: 1

      But then people who wanted just the software would go grab the RPM or other package direct from RedHat/SuSE/Mandrake/whoever for free rather than downloading it from Codeweavers and having to pay.

      --
      Yes! That guy!
    10. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by notext · · Score: 1

      Until everyone else decides the stuff they write is worth $20. Then you get ($0 distro +$20 +$20 +$20 +$20 +$20 +$20 and so on.)

      It's really not paying for software that I have a problem with, god knows I have purchased plenty. The problem is they want me to pay for a plugin that is emulating some other software. The whole irony is the fact that this stuff is free for windows.

    11. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by festers · · Score: 1

      I'm not paying for something that I can get free on Windows. End of story.

      --


      -------
      "Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."
    12. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I'd be willing to be a lot of people will pay for it. I know I will.

      It's remarkable how people think that they (sample size of 1) are somehow representative of the entire population. "Bah, smoking doesn't cause cancer! I've been smoking for 30 years and it never hurt me!"

      It's especially remarkable when they list their home page as nerdfarm.org and they still think they're representative of the general population.

    13. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      True, but it's like overpriced shareware, maybe if they dropped the price a notch, I'd pay.

    14. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by ecki · · Score: 1

      Actually, what I meant was that the Linux distributors add it to their retail versions only. It would then be an additional incentive to get a boxed version... I would definitely like it.

    15. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's a crazy idea, ain't it? something doesn't exist, someone comes along and goes to the trouble of inventing it, and they expect to get paid for it? what a joke.

    16. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, I've got to say you really need to stop your karma trolling. I've seen so many people say, "This post needs to be modded down." Great. Now the already clueless moderators are reading the even more clueless posters to make decisions on karma awarding. You want moderation? Then show it in the posts you write, make your best arguments and then let the moderators do their job.

      There are times to be an a**hole, but this wasn't one of them. I think he's right on track and completely on target. You completely missed his main point was THAT IT WASN'T FREE (AS IN BEER).

      Think first, then post. Okay?

    17. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Christianfreak · · Score: 2

      Its not that $20 is a lot of money, and I'm not saying I'm not going to pay for the plugin, I'm not even saying its a bad idea. -- I'm saying that this doesn't need to be paraded around as another reason to go use Linux because Joe Luser doesn't understand what an Active X plugin is or that MS is taking non-Active X plugin's out. Joe Luser understands that he can get Quicktime etc. [insert your favorite non active X plugin here] for free on Windows. How long will it be before Apple and others release their plugins as Active X plugins?

    18. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      Yeah, nobody pays RedHat for their work, nobody pays VMWare for theirs, and nobody pays for Win4Lin. Yeah, nobody pays anybody for their work on Linux.

      How about getting a clue. Linux users will indeed pay for quality work, at reasonable prices. We do not like paying for shoddy work, or even for quality work at outrageously high prices.

      Oh, perhaps you mean *you* wouldn't pay for it, and are looking for a way to scapegoat that to everyone.

      The fact of the matter is people *will* pay for it. The question of the price-point break is yet to be determined, the question of whether or not people will pay for it has already been answered.

      Your question is a very messed up analogy. They are not putting out a format. They (Codeweavers) are not making a format. They are providing a means to run existing plugins on Linux, that were previously only available on Windows. Oh, and by the way, Real charges for their player. Yes, there is a free (monetary) version, but they also sell a commercial version. But I suppose you will make the claim that nobody buys it?

      Also, Microsoft charges indirectly for their media player. You have to buy a MS OS to use it .. unless of course you violate their license and run it under WINE.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    19. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Royster · · Score: 2

      We're just saying that no one will pay for the work.

      It's attitudes like that which will keep commercial developers away from Linux. I was thinking about buying the plugin, but this post made me go ahead and do it.

      Support Linux where it counts -- with cash.

      --
      I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
    20. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 1

      Fine - what I meant to say is that significantly less people will get it than if it were free (and to save the rest of you the trouble, I'll put it here - "No shit Sherlock").

      I don't personally know anyone who paid for Redhat, VMWare, or Win4Lin for home use. I know of a few businesses, but no home users. I won't say broadly that *nobody* does it, but I'd say that home-use customers are in the minority.

      You're right about the messed up analogy, though - the headline threw me off, and I was thinking in "Quicktime-for-Linux" mode. A whole lot more people would be willing to pay for a Windows-plugin emulator than what I mistook this product for, so I'd like to retract my previous statement.

      My bad.

    21. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Gogo+Dodo · · Score: 1
      How long will it be before Apple and others release their plugins as Active X plugins?

      Apple already released an ActiveX plug-in for IE 5.5 SP2 and later.

    22. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But why is the plugin free on a closed source system, and costs money on a free system. Things are backward there. And besides, there are free plugins for quicktime and flash both, if you just look around.

    23. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Evil+Pete · · Score: 1

      Its worth $20. And I dont see why they shouldn't be rewarded. We Linux users get it pretty easy .. great OS, free (speech + beer), lots of fun .. and it'll boost linux's standing ... eventually a totally free competitor will arise but as I said why not reward them in the meantime ?

      --
      Bitter and proud of it.
    24. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by notext · · Score: 1

      you just don't get it. They didn't write quicktime, shockwave or the .doc viewer. They shouldn't be making any money off of those.

      If they want to make something original like writing quicktime for linux, then fine, charge for it. This is just an emulator. They are emulating others work.

    25. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
      "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer" - Adolf Hitler /

      You show that you are very ignorant with your comparison of Microsoft to Nationalist Socialism. It was never NS ideology to dominate people. They stood for strength through unity. The Third Reich did not rule with fear, it was a volkish movement for the people. They were voted in.

      So your comment at the bottom sort of pisses me off. You have no basis for your comparison. You are just another uninformed, unthinking lama.

    26. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by notext · · Score: 1

      Or they should have to pay royalties to every company who made the apps they are emulating.

    27. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't get it. This is worth more than the thing that you get "free on Windows." Doesn't it make sense to you that something that is worth more, would cost more?

      (What makes it worth more, is that it doesn't have the same library/environment dependencies, especially a huge and expensive one called "Microsoft Windows.")

    28. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Anonymous+Pancake · · Score: 0

      20$ to view common file formats

      windows98 does that for free

    29. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by jweatherley · · Score: 1

      Since when was Win98 freeware?

      --

      --
      Reverse outsourcing: it's the future
    30. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by flatrock · · Score: 2

      Let the rationalizations begin. $20 isn't that much. Companies that contribute to free software products need to make money to survive. I can run a lot of plugins with this.

      Here's some food for thought. If this plugin is worth $20, then all the things you get in Windows are definately worth $100. Of course you may just not like Microsoft for one of many good reasons, and therefore are willing to pay elevated prices for all the little pieces that come with Windows. That's your choice. Or maybe you prefer to use all free software, that's also your choice.

    31. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by festers · · Score: 1

      You don't seem to get it either. It's not worth more if I don't use those features. I live quite happily without Windows, and quicktime movies are just an occational annoyance. I don't need all those features and won't pay for it just to watch 1 or 2 QT movies a month. Is that clear now?

      --


      -------
      "Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."
    32. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      It isn't being "paraded around" as a reason to go to Linux. It is being properly billed as a step the removes some of the barriers people have to using Linux. There is a difference.

      Many of the people who would switch, but haven't have a few sticking points. This removes a couple of them. Notably, Quicktime, and Shockwave using sites.

      Be careful to not assign too more than what people say about these types of things. When I mention MS' dropping support for 'netscape-style plugins', I do not say it will be a big deal to most users. We don't need to get 'most' users to get what we want, or need. We just need a few groups here and there. It will be a big deal to a certain group of users. For some it will be the 'final straw', for others an indication of the future, a future they may not wish to partake of.

      The approach is called incrementalism, and is very effective. It is used in politics, and market encroachment. In fact, for those bent on "world Domination", you don't want end-users to migrate en-masse, you want them a group at a time. This would cause a big signal on the opponent radar, triggering a correective response. By obtaining them group by group, and not en masse, we gain a solid footing, and by the time the giant has noticed, he finds himself on the losing side, or at a minimum, on equal terms in the battle.

      Each step brings us closser, each group that converts adds to the stability of the movement, the market for vendors, and detracts from the opponent's ranks. Each step raises the question "Why not?" instead of "Why?". Some respond better to the former than the latter.

      This plugin product removes another of the answers to "Why not?", not providing an answer to the question of "Why?".

      If successful, and I anticipate it will be, it will also be another example of how one can make money in the new world of open source operating systems that Linux is making more acceptable.

      Note: Successful here is used not in the sense of 'makes them filthy rich', but rather, makes a profit.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    33. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      Sorry, the comparison betwen this product being worth 20 meaning that all windows has is worth 100 is not a correct comparison.

      In this case, I would argue the twenty bucks is providing the convenience of using Linux, and combining that with the convenience of using these plugins without booting into Windows. The comparison does not follow that if it is worth 20USD for me to run Linux, and use this to take advantage of other plugins made for MSWindows, that Windows is thus worth 100USD.

      However, there is something to your argument that you, and many, may not have understood.

      MS' Focus in marketing is on getting people to belive they are getting value for their expenditure; just as Apple's marketing attmepts to appeal to people who see themselves as beating their own path.
      Micorosft must continue to maintain it's chosen image by 'adding value' to the OS. The only way they can do this is to keep adding their other products into it. As such, to keep their OS viable in the market, they must continue to make their products a part of it, or suffer the comparison to better valued OSes.

      It was solely based on maintaining their perception of value, that they 'integrated' IE in to Windows. It is likewise the reasons they are now 'integrating' other products into their 'OS'.

      The problem is one they have made for themselves. They stake their OS on being one of perceived value, when we have, in fact, reached a perido of time where the value of a computere system is being seen in the applications and service it provides, not solely upon the OS.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
    34. Re:But its not free (as in beer) by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      Of course, that extra machine running windows costs more than 20 bucks.

      Your question is a non sequiter. Windows would not be selling this, as it is NOT something to run on their OS. it also begs the question. If MS was selling something like this, they would be making Linux apps. If MS was making Linux apps, there would be a much larger array of apps on Linux, not just from MS, but from other companies. As a result, there would be little, if any need for such an app.
      I would not buy it from MS for other reasons. Now, if they were contributing useful code to the WINE project, I'd consider it.

      Windows is more than 20 bucks. A seperate machine for windows is more than 20 bucks.
      The price is for convenience. The convenience of NOT having the second machine, or NOT rebooting to Windows just to view a quicktime or shockwave, or MS Word/Excell/PowerPoint file, is what you are buying when you buy the Crossover Plugin.

      When buying it, you are also supporting the model, the idea, and the company that contributes code, and makes appropriate use of open source. In turn, you are providing the evidence other companies need to make applications available on Linux. By purchasing Crossover for the measly 20 bucks, you are showing there is indeed, a demand for the plugins to be supported on Linux.

      It would not be unreasonable for Apple, or Macromedia, to see the demand, and port their plugins over, charging a small fee in the early days, to recover their costs. As the model is proven, and reasons for using a Linux desktop equal or exceed the reasons not too, more companies will proceed to code for, and/or port to Linux.

      Each step has to be taken in context, and appreciated for it's own contribution to the progress and growth of the operating system. I have found that those lamenting the lack of commercial apps such as Dreamweaver, and Games are the same people who refuse to pay for such things when offered. They want all or nothing. From where I sit, they can bugger off. To all those who will refuse to pay for something like this for poorly thought out (if at all) reasons, such as theone your provided, you will have no acceptable beef when the step following this doesn't happen. Each step in the chain requires the one before it.

      If you don't have what it takes to take the steps in between, just sit back and wait for everyone else to do everything for you. Be sheep.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
  8. Is this good? by Wind_Walker · · Score: 1, Troll
    I'm gonna get modded to hell for this, but who cares about Karma, anyways? :-)

    Exactly what are we (meaning the Linux community) doing when we reverse-engineer these kinds of procedures? I mean, we rant and rave and scream about how terrible proprietary formats are, about how they destroy innovation, about how they are held by Evil Corporations (tm)... And then we reverse-engineer the system calls until we have something that works for us.

    Shouldn't we, as a community, be concentrating our efforts on ways to make the computer world a better and happier place, rather than trying to emulate the big companies that are constantly oppressing the minority Operating Systems (Linux, BSD, etc)? These corporations are doing nothing but destroying our rights, and we emulate them.

    It's time for the free software "movement" to destroy these corporations and their powerful, vice-like grip on information (including Quicktime formats) and instead develop our own methods of showing video on operating systems that are not inferior *cough*Windows*cough*

    1. Re:Is this good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one pays for the quicktime viewer, name me one person or business that did. Apple loses nothing on this.

      Now if this product were distributing a quicktime encoder for enterprise level systems, then I would have to agree with you.

      >and instead develop our own methods of showing video on operating systems that are not inferior *cough*Windows*cough*

      We are using our own methods to use the free players they hand out to any person that clicks a link. I love linux but lets be honest here, can you name me a better streaming codec than what microsoft has to offer ? No, dont think so.

      Thanks, But your troll was not worthy. Have a nice day.

    2. Re:Is this good? by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 1

      The second anyone creates a popular, free video format, Windows will offer it. Don't Linux users deserve the same thing? And in any case, this isn't hurting the creaters of these formats financially - it's helping by providing more computers to view their content.

      I'm all for superior, innovative formats, but I'd like to be able to view older, crappier *cough*Windows*cough* formats as well.

    3. Re:Is this good? by VersedM · · Score: 1

      I use Kword but I still need to be able to read .doc files. I use ogg vorbis but still need .mp3 for compatibility. I use Linux but need Win4lin to connect to a citrix application server.

      If Linux didn't support these proprietary formats, I couldn't have migrated over to it. Changes have to be made gradually. Free software has a much greater chance of winning if it is able to play on the same field as the competition. If you force people to make either/or choices by not supporting recognized standards (even if proprietary), you will forever shut out the majority of users from ever even trying free software.

    4. Re:Is this good? by Arcturax · · Score: 1

      Not really, I just see this as the free software community using "embrace and extend" against them. After all, Linux isn't going anywhere on the desktop until it runs what most people are used to, and that means quicktime, active x, and direct-x, .doc files, ect. You and I may not like some or even all of them, but that is what the majortiy of people are using. If we get them hooked on Linux first by letting them use this proprietary stuff in a free OS, then we can later introduce better things when Linux or insert-free-os-here has a large enough user base.

      First convince them to use Linux or whatever other os you want. THEN mop up the rest.

      --

      --Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop. - Dr. Walter Gibbs
    5. Re:Is this good? by mcelli · · Score: 1
      I'll explain exactly why this is good. Right now I can't watch these formats in Linux. Thanks to Codeweavers, a measly $20 will let me. That is good.

      Sure, this doesn't conform to some Stallmanist ideology, but people who adhere to ideology often totally lose sight of functionality. (eg. the whole GNU/Linux debate). Personally, I just want to watch the video files, and I don't care how this fits into some guy's utopian dreams.

      I think that the fundamental error in Stallmanism is it's strict adherence to law. True Marxists will violate laws that get in the way of their revolution. I call for a Neo-Stallmanism in which if we can't get codec's, we break into coroporate offices and steal them (or hack them, whatever's easier).

    6. Re:Is this good? by quartz · · Score: 2

      Well, I personally share your point of view. I always use the Free alternative, and when there is no Free alternative I don't buy (download) the product. It's not like I'm gonna die or anything just because I won't see a stupid movie trailer. But apparently there are people who *do* feel like they're gonna die if they won't see the stupid movie trailer, or people who feel that they should imitate everything under the sun in order to "make the migration path easier for users of other platforms", and they write stuff like this. I see nothing wrong with that. I get what I want, they get what they want, everybody's happy. It's not like anyone is opressed, on the contrary: when a Free alternative to something proprietary is released, it means less oppression, because there's more choice available. Unless, of course, the one who wrote the Free alternative gets thrown in jail over it. :-(

    7. Re:Is this good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Personally, I just want to watch the video files, and I don't care how this fits into some guy's utopian dreams.

      Pornography beats freedom every time.

    8. Re:Is this good? by mcelli · · Score: 1
      Pornography beats freedom every time.

      Pornography is the hallmark of freedom. It is only allowed in free societies. If we restrict people's rights to view it in Quicktime, how are we better than extremist religious regimes found in Afghanistan, etc.?

      Give me pr0n or give me death!

    9. Re:Is this good? by mprudhom · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't we, as a community, be concentrating our efforts on ways to make the computer world a better and happier place, rather than trying to emulate the big companies that are constantly oppressing the minority Operating Systems

      Why don't you try asking the employees of BE, Inc that question?

      In short, unless there is a minimum level of compatability with the 800 lb gorillas of the world, any efforts to make the computer world a "better and happier place" will arrive stillborn.

    10. Re:Is this good? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ya.. should be simple..

      transport layer: mpeg
      audio layer: gee.. lets take ogg
      video layer: (waveflet|fractal)+motion compensation

      sounds easy.. someone ? no ? thought so :P

      the problem is that apple and MS throw big bucks into research. even intels indeo 5.0 suxx in the bandwith/quality ratio comparsion to MS's mpeg4 or sorenson. no chance you can come up with a format that took others years to make. they will always be ahead.

      now.. windows codecs on the mpeg transport layer.. that would be something...

    11. Re:Is this good? by stikves · · Score: 1
      There are alredy many good thing on linux side. check opendivx site for example. The open divx -- which is supposed to be better than Divx ;) -- has native Linux support.


      It does not end here. There is also ffmpeg (also on opendivx site). it supports video capture, playback and "streaming". It supports major formats (MS MPEG4: Windows Media, DivX, MPEG1, MPEG2, Open DivX, Real).


      The problem is not "having" the tools ready. The problem is making companies "install and use" them.


      (By the way I did not like the way you beg for karma :)

    12. Re:Is this good? by DahGhostfacedFiddlah · · Score: 1

      For what it's worth (and I'm pretty sure it's close to nil), reverse engineering something is a lot harder than writing the format in the first place.

      And "windows" (it's an entity now?) probably would "steel" the code from an open source format, considering it would be posted along with the standard.

    13. Re:Is this good? by grubby · · Score: 1

      Dude you might want to check out the citrix website, they have native clients for linux, no need for win4lin to use citrix.

  9. It's not Free by luugi · · Score: 1

    Damn! I was hoping for it to be free. I understand they have to make their money someway.

    --
    Think like a man of action, act like a man of thought.
  10. For every action, there is an equal and opposite.. by Alcimedes · · Score: 1
    Reaction!

    he he, so IE6 drops quicktime, and Linux picks it up. good deal. i must say i'm a little surprised that Apple is better about making a Linux friendly quicktime viewer, especially in light of what asses MS have been over the quicktime plug-in....

  11. Somebody should tell these guys... by MaggieL · · Score: 1

    ...that there's a Flash plugin for Mozilla on Linux already.

    --
    -=Maggie Leber=-
    1. Re:Somebody should tell these guys... by quinto2000 · · Score: 1

      Shockwave is not the same as Flash. It is much harder to port because of the number of OS-specific calls it makes.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post
    2. Re:Somebody should tell these guys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes there is a flash plugin for linux, but not a shockwave plugin for linux. You can either use the native linux plugin or use the codeweavers flash plugin

    3. Re:Somebody should tell these guys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "In the open source world where intellectual property is not real property no product such as this can survive."

      Well, as I'm sure you're aware, we're not nearly there yet. Don't forget your Russian dictionary so you & Dmitry can chat about the *current* state of affairs..

  12. So let me get this straight, Apple... by PCM2 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    ...QuickTime is actually going to run under Linux on Intel hardware before it works on PowerPC hardware? Forget the "Megahertz Myth," let's talk about the "Platform Superiority Myth"...

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
    1. Re:So let me get this straight, Apple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get your facts straight :all versions of the MacOS including OSX support Quicktime. Get back to your commodity hardware and maybe set some jumpers troll.

    2. Re:So let me get this straight, Apple... by Cyno · · Score: 1

      Okay, so you have a point about the MegaHertz Myth, but how can PowerPC compete with 2 Ghz systems shipping today and dual/quad+ 2Ghz systems on their way before christmas? I want some real world benchmarks to show me that these PowerPC chips are more than hype, that they really are supercomputers! Then I'll think about spending the extra $1000 over the cost of my cheap/modular PC hardware to get into a Mac. Now if all the Macs came with titanium cases it might be different. (MacOS is quite nice!)

    3. Re:So let me get this straight, Apple... by zephc · · Score: 1

      dual 800s are like 11 or 12 GFLOPS (peak rate, anyway), i'd say thats damn fast =]

      --
      "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
    4. Re:So let me get this straight, Apple... by Zoop · · Score: 1

      Since Quicktime isn't actually running in Linux but running under windoze with a hack...by your logic isn't it the "Linux superiority myth"?

      ;-P

    5. Re:So let me get this straight, Apple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So take one of the MacOS emulators out there, and hack it into a LinuxPPC plugin that will run MacOS plugins.

    6. Re:So let me get this straight, Apple... by Cyno · · Score: 1

      So, what's the GFLOPS rating of a dual 1.2 Athlon MP?

  13. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

    Don't worry,IE6 lost the QT plug-in but is likely to have gained the QT active-x component.

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
  14. License is not cool either! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If it ain't GPL, don't let your friends run it.

  15. Pay for watching Quicktime? by Synn · · Score: 1

    20 bucks so I can watch Quicktime movies using a product that may or may not work with the next browser release?

    Pass.

    Closed video codecs = waste of time.

    Funny thing is if Quicktime was open it probably would've been the standard by now(can you say pdf, mp3).

    Too bad there isn't a video version of Ogg.

    1. Re:Pay for watching Quicktime? by flimflam · · Score: 2

      1) It's not just for quicktime -- it's works with lots of different plugins.

      2) Quicktime is open. That's why xanim works. What isn't open is some of the codecs (like Sorenson).

      --
      -- It only takes 20 minutes for a liberal to become a conservative thanks to our new outpatient surgical procedure!
    2. Re:Pay for watching Quicktime? by kilgore_47 · · Score: 2

      Quoted from the "real dirt" page at codeweavers:
      (in fact, we have significantly aided the development of the ReAktivate project, which has the potential to make our product obsolete)

      At least they give the impression that they're honest guys. I mean, they're asking us to buy their product and they can't help but mention its about to get made obsolete by a free alternative program.

      --
      ___
      The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
    3. Re:Pay for watching Quicktime? by acceleriter · · Score: 1
      2) Quicktime is open. That's why xanim works. What isn't open is some of the codecs (like Sorenson).

      So what's the practical difference?

      --

      CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.

    4. Re:Pay for watching Quicktime? by SmileyBen · · Score: 2

      Seem fine to me. I mean there are plenty of people that want to be able to use QuickTime NOW, and paying 20 dollars isn't terribly much, even if it is for only 6 months or a year. Something that is interesting is if you think about software-for-hire - if people really do end up renting software, it may in fact make it much easier to move over to an open source version if one becomes available later.

    5. Re:Pay for watching Quicktime? by Dwonis · · Score: 2

      Quicktime itself is on the same level as AVI: It's just a container for encoded video and audio. You can create Quicktime videos in Linux, it's just that anyone with a Sorenson codec uses it.

    6. Re:Pay for watching Quicktime? by acceleriter · · Score: 1
      OK, thanks, I think I get it--QuickTime is a file format independent of the codec used, and is therefore "open," but (nearly) all who use QuickTime have the Sorenson codec, so QuickTime appears to be a (evil, hellbound, other disparaging adjectives) proprietary format. But it's not. It's the Sorenson codec.

      Surely there's some kind of evil hack that can call the Windows x86 Sorenson codec code (say that three times fast) and recode on the fly, or even play the video.

      --

      CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.

    7. Re:Pay for watching Quicktime? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Surely there's some kind of evil hack that can call the Windows x86 Sorenson codec code (say that three times fast) and recode on the fly, or even play the video.

      That's almost exactly what this story is about! This comment explains it very well. The only difference between your idea and CrossOver is the level at which it is done. You're talking about emulating just enough to get the codec to run, and CrossOver is emulating around the whole Quicktime Netscape plugin. The only difference is what level the emulation is at.

    8. Re:Pay for watching Quicktime? by dyslexia · · Score: 1
      Too bad there isn't a video version of Ogg


      There is, sort of. If you check out the ogg page, there is mention of ogg tarkin, an open source video format. It doesn't appear to be anything but talk though.
      --
      --Have a Johsonville brat.
  16. Is this a good idea by skrowl · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If I can write my software in Windows (90+% of the market) and know it will eventually be able to work through emulation on other platforms (EVER write a native app for a platform other than windows?

    No flames / "Trolls!" / etc. This is a SERIOUS question from a professional (I get paid to do it!) Windows developer.

    --

    Prevent linux based DDOS's!
    http://linux.denialofservice.org/
    1. Re:Is this a good idea by mr100percent · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I dislike the idea. It's like windows developers telling mac users to "get VirtualPC."

      Bad idea, and it might not help much.
      Good question though.

    2. Re:Is this a good idea by stikves · · Score: 1
      Well for an avarage "VB" programmer your statement is true.


      But if I know that I can write my program on windows with VB/Delphi/VC++ and it will be supported "badly" on other platforms via emulation and it will be "painful" to be ported to other "hardware" (mac, ps2, xbox, sun), I would better use portable tools (kylix, gtk, sdl, gcc). This is especially true for "game" programming. (hey! blizzard hear this!)


      The problem is not people relying on emulation for "other" platforms. The problem is people are not "aware of" other platforms and porting possibilities.


      If (game) companies had known that SDL, OpenGL and OpenAL along with gcc or kylix would to their work, they would not use DirectX, and MFC.

    3. Re:Is this a good idea by drudd · · Score: 2

      This is why windows beat out OS/2...

      OS/2's claim to fame was that they could run windows apps faster than windows...

      All the apps developers look at that and say "hey, if I develop native OS/2, only OS/2 users can buy my app... but if I develop for windows, everyone can buy it"

      So everyone made windows apps... and the people buying the OS looked around and saw a billion windows apps and very few OS/2 apps and said "all these apps are 'for windows' so I might as well run windows just to be sure"

      It's always a problem with emulation... unless you can do it much cheaper, people will go with the original.

      Doug

      --
      Venn ist das nurnstuck git und Slotermeyer? Ya! Beigerhund das oder die Flipperwaldt gersput!
    4. Re:Is this a good idea by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1
      There is a lot of software for Linux, and quite a chunk of that is better than the software Windows has to offer. (1) I like to use Linux because it's advantages outweigh it's disadvantages for me - however there are distinct disadvantages, for example access to certain types of media, games etc. With a tool like this, some of the disadvantages disappear, and as a result Linux market share might further increase.

      I think with a greater market share, the incentive for developers to target Linux would also increase. Realistically you always have a benefit from writing a native version, e.g. speed or integration with other apps. If the market is big enough you might consider providing that benefit to your users.

      Also some developers particularly enjoy developing for (and in) Linux. Their commercial efforts become more viable with an increased market share, and this could then also lead to more software being written for Linux.

      (1) Of course the reverse is also true.

    5. Re:Is this a good idea by PurpleBob · · Score: 2

      How does it assist "communication" if you put "random" words in "quotes"?

      --
      Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
  17. I don't get it by luugi · · Score: 1

    The world is upside down. We now have to pay for something for Linux , when we could have it for free on Windows.

    --
    Think like a man of action, act like a man of thought.
    1. Re:I don't get it by Enahs · · Score: 2
      Not upside down at all. You've just not been around long enough. :-)



      At one point, the best way to get a great X server was to buy one. Always struck me as somewhat stupid to have to buy one when I'd be paying more money for the server than I did for the card (I once priced an X server, don't remember if it was Metro, Xi, or what) and it would have run me $150. The card in question was $50. Part of the price of that card was to help pay for the development of Windows drivers, of course.



      So get off your ass if you don't like it and start a Free project. This is based on WINE, after all.

      --
      Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
  18. Quicktime sucks anyways, at least off-mac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know mac users just love QT, and it looks/runs great on a mac, but it absolutely blows on a PC (similar to WMP on mac, of course). It's totally different - not even close to the same thing. It bogs down everything and redraws the whole window over and over again if you look at it sideways. I really wish people would just use mpeg and let people use whatever the hell player they want - mac can stick with QT player, or use something else even.

    If anything, I think this is bad because it might help extend the life of QT movies.

  19. QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by BigBlockMopar · · Score: 1

    FINALY QT in linux

    Yeah, but let's face it, Quicktime is for the most part dead.

    If Apple had been serious about it, there *would* have been at least precompiled Linux binaries for it; my only guess is that Microsoft's financial interest in Apple may have helped to prevent that from happening.

    Of course, Windows Media Player's ASF support for Linux would be great, but I see no mention of it in the press release. Given that Microsoft went after Virtual Dub for its support of ASF files (read the news archive):

    "If I remember correctly, my reverse engineering of the ASF file format structure took place after the DMCA was enacted but before the anti-reverse-engineering clause took effect, and between the filing and issuing dates for the Microsoft patent. I will have to look up the exact dates, but ASF functionality existed in VirtualDub long before the infamous V1.3c release that will seemingly roam the Internet for eternity. This is, unfortunately, the same ASF parser that ended up in the Linux avifile library in modified form -- so anyone using that library needs to be careful. Frankly, I'm amazed my parser ever worked at all, given how nasty it was."

    [sigh]

    Please join with me in wishing cancer on Mr. Gates.

    --
    Fire and Meat. Yummy.
    1. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by felipeal · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's totally dead yet, as (unfortunately) a lot of movie trailers are still being released in Quicktime format at their site...

    2. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MPlayer plays ASF files fine in linux.

      Although ASF format sucks IMHO. If you ask me, ASF is the dead format, not QuickTime.

    3. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by felipeal · · Score: 1

      Also, do Trolltech a favour and don't call QuickTime QT :)

    4. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not? Both are dying.

    5. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by jchristopher · · Score: 2
      Yeah, but let's face it, Quicktime is for the most part dead.

      Anyone working with digital video on either Mac or Windows is likely using Quicktime for some or all of the process. Is that what you would call "dead" ?

    6. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But for how long?

    7. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MS ASF is supported using avifile. it looks great and supports seeking/fullscreen and even encoding. Linux supports every media format now and it does it well!

    8. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. If the final product is released in any other format, then what does it matter what the intermediate format is?

    9. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by mr100percent · · Score: 2

      Once again MS does NOT have a controlling interest in Apple. They USED to have 5% of nonvoting stock, but sold a good portion of it when Apple was at their 52-week high.

    10. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by jchristopher · · Score: 2
      Huh? What does the 'final' format have to do with the 'intermediate' format?

      I work in Photoshop (.psd) files all the time. When done, I export them to either .tif or .jpeg. Since my final output is not .psd, does that make .psd 'dead'?

      Of course not. There are many file formats that are useful even if they aren't the 'output' format, and Quicktime is one of them.

    11. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, they do. It's called "Office"

    12. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by mimbleton · · Score: 1

      "Please join with me in wishing cancer on Mr. Gates.
      "
      Oh come on, we all are jealous of his success but you are going too far with this here.

    13. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by uchian · · Score: 1

      Of course, Windows Media Player's ASF support for Linux would be great, but I see no mention of it in the press release. Given that Microsoft went after Virtual Dub [virtualdub.org] for its support of ASF files (read the news archive):

      Although not an integrated solution, if you just want to view downloaded .asf files, then you can use mplayer, a pretty neat little movie player, and the most durable that I have found on linux.

      It requires the dll's from microsoft to play them, but if I remember correctly, they are freely downloadable.

      I'm not saying it's a good solution (I hate having windows dlls in Linux), but it is a solution.

    14. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by spectecjr · · Score: 2

      Please join with me in wishing cancer on Mr. Gates.

      Speaking as someone whose mother died of cancer, please, everyone else, join me in beating this asshole to a pulp.

      Get a freaking grip. It's just software.

      --
      Coming soon - pyrogyra
    15. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by jeffehobbs · · Score: 1

      Please join with me in wishing cancer on Mr. Gates.

      Not that I'd wish cancer on anyone, but honestly I can't think of anyone better to contract it. Think of the money he'd throw at research...!

      ~jeff

    16. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Better. by windi · · Score: 1

      ->Yeah, but let's face it, Quicktime is for the most part dead.

      Just like Apple, right ? Apple has,for the last few years, supposed to be dead, but Apple doesn't know this :-)
      Apple keeps on going on and on.

      And I agree with you that Microsoft was the main factor in keeping Quicktime of Linux.

  20. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by jchristopher · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Apple needs Quicktime to run on Mac, because they want to sell their hardware to content developers.

    Apple also needs for Quicktime to run on Windows, because that's what the content consumers use.

    Apple does not care about Linux, because by comparison, very few of the content viewers use Linux.

    Now, as much as you and I would love for there to be a Quicktime app/plugin for Linux, I don't see that support coming from Apple.

    The only thing that will convince Apple to make Quicktime for Linux is a dramatic increase in the amount of desktop end-users running Linux. The best way you can make that happen is by increasing the usability and friendliness of Linux as a whole, by writing programs with clean GUIs and good documentation.

    To put it in other terms, Apple does not care about a platform where you have to know to type "rpm -iv quicktime_plugin.i386.rpm" to install it. That needs to change first! 99% of the computing population can not, and will not understand the command line!

  21. I Might be Wrong,,, by kilgore_47 · · Score: 2

    ...but I think that this is one of the most important news items I've seen in some time. Getting QuickTime to the linux desktop is an incredible step towards making linux viable for the average joe's desktop OS.

    Its a shame that apple's "open source commitment" doesn't reach to the QuickTime team, or this would have happened a long time ago...

    --
    ___
    The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
  22. Another milestone achieved! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If that doesn't make Linux win the desktop then I don't know...

    "stuff that matters" yeah right this site is getting better and better.

  23. That's what this *IS* by ClayJar · · Score: 5, Informative

    You really should read the article before you post obviously stupid comments, but I'll forgive you of that, since I've done that myself (haven't we all). Anyway, to sum up the whole thing in one little line, CrossOver is a Wine-using thingy that lets you install the Windows version of the said plugins and use them as if they were Linux native Netscape plugins. (In other words, since you're using the Windows install of the Windows plugin, of course it works with Sorenson, and next time, click the link... it wasn't even slashdotted.)

  24. Linux wins again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Keep 'em coming boys. We win again and it feels soooo fine! Truly an awesome accomplishment.

    More Linux News here.

  25. Waffle much? by dnorman · · Score: 1

    The penguins bitch about the degradation of the web into "proprietary standards" like QuickTime and Shockwave, yet rejoice when these finally become available on Linux...

    At least stick to your guns. If you dislike these formats because they are proprietary, it shouldn't matter if they are available for whatever platform you use, because you don't want it.

    If you disliked these simply because they weren't penguin-friendly, then admit that, too...

    --


    It is pitch dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    1. Re:Waffle much? by frknfrk · · Score: 2

      which is why some real gnu distros like debian 'gnu/linux' will NOT ship this plugin, even if it was free. they'll leave the waffling to red hat, etc, etc.

      --
      The REAL sam_at_caveman_dot_org is user ID 13833.
    2. Re:Waffle much? by aussersterne · · Score: 2
      The penguins bitch about the degredation of the web into "proprietary standards" like QuickTime and Shockwave, yet rejoice when these finally become available on Linux... At least stick to your guns. If you dislike these formats because they are proprietary, it shouldn't matter of the are available for whatever platform you use, because you don't want it. If you disliked them simply because they weren't penguin-friendly, then admit that, too...


      This is the fallacy of the 'other' -- assuming that all members of communities other than your own are similar to one another.

      Have you considered that there may be many 'species' of penguins? Among them, for example, may be both those that hate proprietary standards and those (a separate 'species') that simply don't like anything which doesn't support Linux. And there are more types of penguins, too. For example, those (myself included) which couldn't give less of a rat's ass about Quicktime one way or the other. And how about those 'VM Penguins' who have QuickTime running under NT in one window and Linux running under NT in another window?

      It takes all kinds. There's nothing wrong with allowing the 'Yay, Quicktime for Linux!' penguins to have a moment in the sun. Please don't assume, however, that all penguins are the same. Linux users are no more homogenous than Windows users, motorcyclists or ethnic minorities.
      --
      STOP . AMERICA . NOW
    3. Re:Waffle much? by dnorman · · Score: 1

      Point taken. Sorry for overgeneralizing and stereotyping.

      --


      It is pitch dark. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  26. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The reason for that is usually not because they can't understand the command line but rather they have no need to understand it and their time is better spent doing other things that are more productive in their line of work.

  27. Lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    This requires Wine, which makes it completely
    unacceptable. No distribution will be able to ship with a
    functional quicktime viewer.

    Nice try, and I'm sure they'll sell a few, but this will not help
    Linux one bit unless they are able to obtain distribution
    agreements with all of the application vendors; and since it
    is Apple's goal - under contract with Microsoft - to not allow
    QuickTime to work on Linux, it will never happen.

    1. Re:Lame by zangdesign · · Score: 1

      What in the hell are you talking about? Have you actually read the contracts? Do you have proof?

      Apple doesn't produce for Linux because a) there isn't enough demand - despite the preponderance of Linux users here and b) they have their own POSIX OS to work with.

      Frankly, they don't NEED Linux yet.

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
  28. What CrossOver is, and what it isn't by rkent · · Score: 5, Informative
    CrossOver is NOT:
    • quicktime for linux
    • flash for linux
    • Word for linux
    CrossOver IS a "netscape for linux" plugin that interfaces with a custom build of WINE, the Windows Emulator. Through this windows emulator, you may install and run the Quicktime (for Windows!), Flash (for windows!), and Word Reader (for Windows!) plugins. And CrossOver will handle the interaction for you, to make the windows VM appear in the appropriate window/panel for your browser of choice.

    Since it's a Netscape plugin, it will work with varying degrees of success with other browsers, like moz and konq. Remember, the Netscape plugin format is the one IE is abandoning, so there might not even be any plugins to use with CrossOver after a couple of years.

    That said, it's pretty damn neat. And I can see why they're charging for it - it's kind of a way to get *any* windows plugin to work as native plugins would under Linux. Of course the functionality isn't perfect, but I can definitely see business customers being interested if they have a need for things like that. Could be the essential migration tool for some shop...

    1. Re:What CrossOver is, and what it isn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This brings in an interesting scenario.
      I buy an Apple PPC(lets say $1000), put on it,
      but can't run the quicktime plugin. (wine doesn't run on LinuxPPC last I heard)--and I can't use the quicktime plugin or any quicktime software

      I buy a regular PC, put that other OS on it with quicktime plugin, and install along side it, never give apple a penny--and I can run quicktime, plugin and all

    2. Re:What CrossOver is, and what it isn't by NonSequor · · Score: 2

      I just bought it and I'm going to see if I can get it working under Galeon.

      --
      My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
    3. Re:What CrossOver is, and what it isn't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wine Is Not an Emulator.

    4. Re:What CrossOver is, and what it isn't by Anonymous+Pancake · · Score: 0

      an apple for 1000$ ?

      are you crazy?

      maybe you could buy one g4 cpu for that much and a cardboard box, and pretend you have an apple

    5. Re:What CrossOver is, and what it isn't by Cyph · · Score: 1

      Works fine for me with Mozilla 0.9.3 and Galeon 0.11.5.

  29. Good and Bad by GrEp · · Score: 2

    It's sad that this plug-in isn't free software, but I wouldn't mind buying it because they do contribute a fair amount to the WINE project. It would be great if the FSF or some government organization would buy the code and GPL it.

    If the US government spent as much money in grants to write free software as they do fighting M$ the computer world would be a much happier place.

    --

    bash-2.04$
    bash-2.04$yes "Don't you hate dialup connections?"| write USERNAME
    1. Re: Good and Bad by Asic+Eng · · Score: 1

      I like that idea, maybe it would be worthwhile to have a fund which would negotiate a purchase price for certain software and then release it under GPL? I'd pledge the first $100 to it. :)

  30. MS didn't drop QT, they dropped a legacy plugin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    format. Apple's had years to make plugins in the proper format for IE, and failed to do so until recently, when they HAD to. So if anyone is to blame, it's Apple. Quit trying to pin everything on MS - they're guilty of a lot, but not this.

    1. Re:MS didn't drop QT, they dropped a legacy plugin by mr100percent · · Score: 2

      Yes, they're guilty of this.

      Netscape's plugin format is good, because it simplifies cross-platform and cross-browser porting. Why spend more to make an activeX and a Netscape plugin, when you can make one that works for everyone?

      Second, MS just dropped it unexpectedly. No reason, other than to play hardball and FORCE ActiveX development. Now, if they made an announcement that the next release won't have Netscape plugin support, then there'd be a lot less ill sentiment.

  31. Whew. by justin_w_hall · · Score: 1

    Now maybe we won't have to listen to Taco whine every time /. links to something Quicktime.. was the "well guess I can't watch that" starting to grate on anyone else? :)

    --

    ---
    "how can the same street intersect with itself? i must be at the nexus of the universe!" - cosmo kramer
    1. Re:Whew. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      was the "well guess I can't watch that" starting to grate on anyone else?

      Actually, no...not as much as the fact that apple (and M$, and others) exclude people who don't use their operating systems. Its *really* annoying to be the victim of corporate greed, you should try it some time.

    2. Re:Whew. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      was the "well guess I can't watch that" starting to grate on anyone else?

      Yeah, especially since he always talked about playing Diablo II, which of course means he was running Windows, so his argument was bullshit anyway.

  32. I think you're wrong by jimmcq · · Score: 1

    I think this is one of the most important news items I've seen in some time

    Unfortunately it's not free (it costs $20) and it doesn't include the Sorenson codec which means that it won't play most Quicktime clips.

    1. Re:I think you're wrong by Megahurts · · Score: 1

      It doesn't have to include the Sorenson codec, or any codec for that matter. It's an emulator. It'll run plugins for Netscape for Windows on Linux. Apple will be distributing the codec.

    2. Re:I think you're wrong by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      from what I understand, isn't it the unmodified QT plugin, with codecs, run through an adaptor like WINE?

      Then codecs shouldn't be a concern, right?

    3. Re:I think you're wrong by dinivin · · Score: 1


      Read the freakin' article, OK? Sorenson video plays back just fine.

      Dinivin

  33. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    99% of the computing population can not, and will not understand the command line!

    That, by the way, pretty much correlates with the moron factor of the world.

    Fuck them!

  34. This isn't the first... by ddstreet · · Score: 2, Redundant
    ...unless they specifically mean they can play the Sorenson codec. There are Free programs out there already that can play AVI, ASF, etc files; some I know about are:

    Note that the avifile project has links to many other players...

    XAnim is (AFAIK) the oldest player. It supports some AVIs but (IIRC) not ASFs...

    Most of the ASF et. al. support comes from using the Windows binary codecs...

    1. Re:This isn't the first... by ddstreet · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I should have added they can play some quicktime movies (since that's the topic here). I've been able to play every QT movie I've encountered except Sorenson codec'd movies.

  35. jobs killed quicktime for linux by m@ltese · · Score: 4, Flamebait

    A buddy of mine was recently hired onto the streaming quicktime team at apple. When I asked him about QT for linux, he told me the team had it working months ago, but Jobs killed it.

    Seems that quicktime is the feature that keeps Macs on the forefront of digital video production. To port it to linux would eat into Apple's niche market position.

    --
    to mail me, first remove the evil spam.
    1. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you can convince your buddy to leak the linux version? I'd gladly mirror it on my server and risk the consequences.

    2. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although I usually take slashdot posts about this kind of thing with a grain of salt, I can believe this one. Apple are JUST as concerned about the popularity of Linux as Microsoft are, only they are doing their best to make themselves out to be "one of the gang" by releasing mostly-useless code as "open source" and claiming it makes them an open source company.

    3. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by hobbs · · Score: 1

      That does not make sense. QT is already on Windows - something much closer in terms of video production capabilities off-the-shelf than Linux. Apple still has some authoring software that is only on the Macs - I can understand that. You have to buy a Mac to author, but then anyone can view. I don't see where making a *viewer* available on all platforms makes for anything more than business sense (so more people want to author).

    4. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Resources. Apple's human and financial resources have been extremely tight. For this entire year, Apple has been cutting everything that isn't profitable or central to our strategy to make estimates. Additional funding to complete that product, continual updates, marketing, and a support team for a product that will not generate revenues just isn't going to make the cut no mattter how you look at it at this point.

    5. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by dgenr8 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I wrote native QT (using licensed portions of XAnim) and native QTVR support for OS/2 some years ago and have been on a jihad for 5 years to get Apple to wake up and port the QT client -- PLAYBACK ONLY -- to Linux. Just because it makes so damn much sense.

      If your friend has any direct line to Jobs at all, I wish he could get one simple message through.

      The enemy of your enemy is a BIG friend.

      QT + Linux would deal a major blow to Windows Media Format.

      When is Apple going to stop trying to out-microsoft Microsoft?

    6. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by mr100percent · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Just what Mostly useless code are you talking about? Apple is more standards-compliant than MS, Quicktime files are pretty open format, it's the sorenson codec that's closed. MPEG-4 is based on QT's file format.

      Apple is not bad at open source. Darwin runs pretty well, and they're financially motivated to do so, unlike some other companies.

      The quicktime streaming server is not just "open source then do nothing", it's ported to NT, linux, Solaris, etc.

      Apple is now tied closer to BSD. They hired Jordan Hubbard, and used to have Wilfredo Sanchez. Both are really good at tieing *Nix stuff to OS X. Try using Perl or PHP on it. It kicks.

    7. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      When is Apple going to stop trying to out-microsoft Microsoft?
      Huh? Apple invented most of the tactics MS uses, they just never had the muscle to enforce them as well. Like many other things, MS is copying Apple, not the other way around.
    8. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by mattkime · · Score: 3, Informative

      Seems that quicktime is the feature that keeps Macs on the forefront of digital video production. To port it to linux would eat into Apple's niche market position.

      Uhhh....does _anyone_ do professional digital video production on a linux box? (Hint: no.) Hell, QuickTime is out for Windows, yet Windows is not a very good platform for doing video. The vast majority of digital video is done on Avid machines or Macs running Final Cut. Doing professoinal digital video requires software and machines that meet very srtict specifications.

      True, Apple does keep some of its digital video software for the mac only. Howeer, Macromedia worked on Final Cut Pro for more than a year before selling it to Apple. Macromedia just couldn't get it to work on both platforms, so apple bought it and eliminated the windows side.

      Linux is very good at some things. However, it has a loooong way to go before it can chip away at Apple's client base.

      --
      Know what I like about atheists? I've yet to meet one that believes God is on their side.
    9. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by m@ltese · · Score: 1

      >Uhhh....does _anyone_ do professional digital video production on a linux box? (Hint: no.)

      Uhhh... that's kind of the point of my post. If quicktime tools were available, then people might use linux for professional video production. That could be bad for apple's share.

      "A journey of a thousand miles", and all that...

      --
      to mail me, first remove the evil spam.
    10. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by blakestah · · Score: 1

      Just what Mostly useless code are you talking about? Apple is more standards-compliant than MS, Quicktime files are pretty open format, it's the sorenson codec that's closed. MPEG-4 is based on QT's file format.

      It would be great if the Sorensen codec were only closed - then it could be reverse engineered. Instead, it is patented, so Apple has the exclusive right to refuse anyone else the right to use it. Apple will not allow the Sorensen codec to be used.

      Apple is SHITTY at open source. They use it as a powerful business would - whenever and however it benefits them most without concern for any non-MacOS users. And in some instances, with specific disrespect for non-MacOS users. Such as Quicktime.

      I can't wait for Jobs to think about how he could use the TrueType patents...

      The Sorensen codec uses patents issue in the early to mid 90s - they will not expire until 2012 or so. Until then, Jobs will effectively block users on a per-OS basis from being able to receive streaming video.

      IBM contributes to open source BECAUSE they derive value from service. Until Mac moves to such a model, they will be viewed as a true enemy by anyone that uses only open software.

    11. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      No, but people could do video production on linux. Personally I think it would make a great platform to develope on because of its superior io performance to windows and the mac.

    12. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by praedor · · Score: 1

      Since Apple is going with MacOS X, which is essentially a *BSD, ANYTHING that can be done on a BSD can be done on linux. There is nothing magic about BSD in the form of MacOS X that makes it magically better at professional digital production other than the commercial software sold for that purpose. This isn't the older, TOTALLY propriatory MacOS now, this is unix which is sooooo frickin' close to linux and every other unix that it can no longer claim, in myth or reality, any special place as a particularly good media production platform.


      Jobs could very well feel threatened by linux and want to prevent it from getting a foothold in the media development arena (yet - it is inevitable that it will get there) before the new MacOS X systems can fully move in and replace the old MacOS systems. He is merely pulling a Bill Gates here...he just doesn't have as much oomph to do more damage because the Mac is still such a niche player.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    13. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Avid released their Symphony product for NT only. Symphony is their high end non-kinear editor directed at the film industry specifically. While you can get Media Composer 9000 with the film option, it's not the same. Check your facts before you post a comment like this. Windows is a fine platform for video editing.

    14. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      looking for Apple to just HAND you stuff?

      God, I'm sick of whiny people expecting stuff to be open sourced. Apple says sorenson won't allow a linux version, not them.

    15. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by blakestah · · Score: 3, Interesting

      looking for Apple to just HAND you stuff?

      They provide Quicktime viewers for Windows and MacOS. They make the Sorensen codec the default for creating video content.

      Adobe provides PDF viewers for ALL operating systems, and has made their document format, PDF, into an OPEN standard. Even if they didn't provide a viewer, I could write my own.

      Apple, OTOH, uses patents to block me from viewing copyright content I own under linux.

      God, I'm sick of whiny people expecting stuff to be open sourced. Apple says sorenson won't allow a linux version, not them.

      Stop lying. Apple has exclusive licensing rights. They can do whatever the heck they want with Sorensen.

      http://xanim.va.pubnix.com/xa_unsupported.html

    16. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by Watts+Martin · · Score: 2

      Apple says Sorenson won't allow a Linux version, not them.

      Bzzt! Thank you for playing.

      I actually wrote Sorensen (I think it's "-en," not "-on," isn't it?) about this a couple years ago, when BeOS R4.5 came out and its Media Kit was (mostly) functional--in theory, it could have played and written Sorensen QuickTimes if only Sorensen made a codec for BeOS. Sorensen's response was quick and polite: "we've licensed the codec exclusively to Apple, so it's up to Apple to port their QuickTime player to other platforms."

      And of course, that was sure likely. At least judging by actions, Gassee and Jobs have been in a pissing contest for years. Linux doesn't have Jobs' personal animosity directed at it, but--again judging by actions--it doesn't quite penetrate Steve's personal reality distortion field. (Apple's support of MkLinux predates Jobs, and I suspect there are reasons what support they give to the open source world these days is BSD-centric.)

    17. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by Knobby · · Score: 1

      Adobe provides PDF viewers for ALL operating systems, and has made their document format, PDF, into an OPEN standard. Even if they didn't provide a viewer, I could write my own.

      BE VERY CAREFUL!.. Quicktime is an API and it uses a very open and well documented wrapper for it's media content.. Take a look at Xanim which can play a number of *.mov files.. Now, the CODECs are not open, but neither is the encryption/security algorithm that Adobe uses with their PDF documents.. If this were the case, then there would be absolutely no case against Sklyarov, right?

      The point I'm trying to make is that Apple hasn't stopped you from writing a Quicktime client. They simply haven't provided you with a CODEC which they're paying to liscense from Sorensen.. It's a big difference..

    18. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by blakestah · · Score: 2

      The point I'm trying to make is that Apple hasn't stopped you from writing a Quicktime client. They simply haven't provided you with a CODEC which they're paying to license from Sorenson.. It's a big difference..


      They not only have not provided the CODEC, they have also not allowed its algorithm to be coded. It is a big difference. They are blocking me from viewing copyrighted content I own on the operating system I prefer using software patents.

    19. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Apple provides an open quicktime file format, which is what MPEG-4 is based on for ALL operating systems, and has made their document format, .MOV, into an OPEN standard. Even if they didn't provide a viewer, I could write my own. It's the codecs that are the stumbling block, so open it in QT, and save it as .MPEG for all you care.

      Adobe, OTOH, uses patents to block me from viewing ebooks I own under rot13.

      Maybe you have it backwards?

    20. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Isn't that more of the DMCA than Apple stopping you?

      Personally, I'd open the file in QT player, and save it as a MPEG. No problem there.

    21. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good one! Yeah, Apple's just chomping at the bit to release QT on all platforms, but they can't because of the DMCA. Could you be any thicker? It's never Apple's fault, and always MS's, an MS product's, or an MS backed law, or something else that's somehow MS-related.

    22. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by blakestah · · Score: 2

      so open it in QT, and save it as .MPEG for all you care.

      How exactly am I supposed to do this ?

      Opening it requires use of the patent, and software that doesn't exist except under MacOS and Windows - operating systems I do not use.

      It doesn't exactly help for streaming software either.

      Free Unices have exactly NO viable QT viewers that can use the Sorenson codec, which is used by almost everything. The patent doesn't expire for another decade plus. Users of these operating systems are blocked from viewing free (as in beer) copyrighted content on the web.

      Apple could solve this merely by making an agreement with the writer of xanim, who has a QT viewer that supports other patented codecs by Intel and Radius Cinepak. So far they will not. Steve Jobs would rather those users not be able to see content, or be forced to buy Windows or MacOS to be able to use free players.

    23. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by TheSync · · Score: 2

      I've done all my video editing on Windows boxes. In the age of ultra-ATA and software disk striping, it is pretty trivial to put together a hardware solution for DV.

      I'll admit that there are a lot of people using Mac based systems, especially with Media 100 and uncompressed video, but there are probably more people (especially at the "wedding/event videographer" DV level) using PCs today, because the PC solution is cheaper.

      Check out DV 411 for examples of DV level NLE systems.

    24. Re:jobs killed quicktime for linux by P.+Legba · · Score: 1
      >The point I'm trying to make is that Apple hasn't stopped you from writing a Quicktime client. They simply haven't provided you with a CODEC which they're paying to license from Sorenson.. It's a big difference..



      They not only have not provided the CODEC, they have also not allowed its algorithm to be coded. It is a big difference. They are blocking me from viewing copyrighted content I own on the operating system I prefer using software patents.


      To be fair, it is actually a pretty sweet deal for Sorenson to have inked the exclusive deal with Apple. Sorenson didn't have to, but it did. Apple didn't have to, but it could. It gives Apple a tremendous advantage in the DV field, having exclusive rights to the best codec...the best things typically aren't developed for free.


      P.

  36. Congrats by iggly_iguana · · Score: 1

    Personally, I would like to congratulate the guys on a job well done. I think the implications of what these guys have done have yet to be seen.

    What I would suggest is that people look past what some consider to be the "limited" aspect of what has been completed, and imagine what can be accomplished with what they have learned.

    Yep, I'll buy a copy. It won't be the first "non-open" software I've run on my linux box, and if they continue on the path they've chosen, hell, I'd like to help them!

  37. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by kilgore_47 · · Score: 1

    o IE6 drops quicktime, and Linux picks it up. good deal. i must say i'm a little surprised that Apple is better about making a Linux friendly quicktime viewer, especially in light of what asses MS have been over the quicktime plug-in....

    If there isn't one already, there will soon be a QuickTime active x component for ie6. And the quicktime-for-linux bit isn't by apple, its by the people at codeweavers. It allows the apple quicktime plugin for windows to work in linux. There is no apple support for quicktime on linux.

    --
    ___
    The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
  38. In "related" news... by felipeal · · Score: 1


    ... Micro$oft announced it would not support netscape plugins anymore, including Quicktime.

    Maybe it's just a sad coincidence, but who knows...

  39. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by RickHunter · · Score: 1

    That needs to change first! 99% of the computing population can not, and will not understand the command line!

    From that statement, I can see you've been involved in the technical community for even less time than I have. People will use whatever interface they've been trained to use. All the people screaming for Linux UIs to imitate Windows don't want an easy-to-use or easy-to-learn UI. They don't want a UI that they have to learn any more to use.

    I know numerous non-technical people who got by just fine with a command line and text-based programs for years. Switching them over to a GUI system is almost invariably painful, especially a Microsoft GUI. There's too much inconsistancy and randomness (from the view of the user).

    As for install, what about having two files in a .gz archive, one being quicktime_plugin.i386.rpm and the other being install.sh, containing the fillowing:


    #!/usr/bin/sh

    rpm -iv quicktimeplugin.i386.rpm

    That brainless enough for you?

    Or you could just use a distribution with a halfway-decent package management system and type: apt-get install quicktime_plugin

    (This post will be modded down for containing a clue, a real-world estimate of the intelligence of the average human being, and a positive opinion of Linux.)

  40. Re:QT Good. ASF Support = Worse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    ASF is the suckiest suck that ever sucked.

  41. yes it is by Smthng · · Score: 1

    RTFArticle

    this can play sorenson video from what i see.

    the quicktime for windows plugin plays sorenson videos.

    this enables linux users to install the quicktime plugin for windows.

    So you go figure it out.

    Geez.

    1. Re:yes it is by ddstreet · · Score: 1

      Flamebait? No thanks, I'm not hungry.

  42. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Velex · · Score: 1

    I agree totally. Might I add also that Linux also needs to get away from X and "su root." Don't get me wrong, both methods work fine, but X has some clear limitations, and always having to be the root user to install software is very annoying.

    Nobody wants to compile his own software just to put it under his user's home directory instead of globally. There needs to be something like InstallShield or Wise Install for Windows -- I double click the executable on my desktop, answer a few simple questions, and, *poof*, my scripts are updated and the software is installed. Something else that the installer should do is put icons all over the place -- sometimes annoying, but generally helpful: I hate going into the menu editor ("kdesu" this time, but still from a cli) to set up a launcher.

    That point also brings me to another thing: icon embedding. There's nothing more annoying than having to do "rpm -ql whatever | grep xpm" to find an icon!

    X needs a color pointer. It's just as simple as that. Ok, so ub3r geeks find Onna-Ranma's head for a pointer cheesy, but I like my pointer in windows, and I wish I could use it in X. GTK for the Framebuffer seems to be on the right track. When X was written, video accelerator cards weren't very common. However, nowadays everyone has one. I really would like Quake III to run at more than three seconds per frame!

    As for the plugin itself, I won't buy it because that's what I already have Windows for -- mass multimedia. I don't watch any kind of video in linux because X is too slow and there isn't an mpeg or divx decoder around that will do fullscreen under Linux. If you think that Linux is multimedia -- you're kidding yourself: my 750 MHz Thunderbird with 224 MB memory linux box doesn't even compare to my Packard H3ll 300 MHz with 64 MB of ram for multimedia.

    --
    Join the Slashcott! Stay away entirely Feb 10 thru Feb 17! Close all tabs to prevent autorefresh!
  43. too late for Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yes its too late to have this in the systems. Linux is dead....LONG LIVE XP

  44. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by zangdesign · · Score: 1

    And that pretty much translates out to a negligible loss of 1% market share.

    --
    To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
  45. ActiveX grrrr by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Isn't Micro$oft trying to eliminate Netscape style plugins, so basically Quicktime won't work for long.

  46. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's already there. Run Quicktime and a window should appear. Click OK and IE6 will take you to the Apple page to auto install the component.

  47. so what? by tewwetruggur · · Score: 1
    If twenty bucks is that steep for something so potentially useful, that's just a sad commentary on some people. I welcome the chance to spend $20 to boot Win98 less often.

    --
    Hi! This is the Sig, blatantly attached to the end of this comment.
    1. Re:so what? by WNight · · Score: 2

      Twenty bucks isn't much, but QT (for me) isn't essential. Neither are any of the other pluggins.

      While I don't mind supporting developers whose work I would use, I'd rather just not watch Quicktime than pay $20 for the ability, especially as it's a rare activity.

      Sure, I could pay for it even though I don't use it much, but at that point it does get expensive.

      I realize authors need to eat (I write code for a living) but I don't see that their need to eat creates an obligation for me to support them.

      The sad fact is that the bar is a lot higher in Linux, for useful shareware. In the windows world, I've seen shareware *ping* programs, (with a small GUI), in Linux cool programs like mtr and nmap are free, you've got to write something pretty cool to compete as freeware, let alone as shareware.

  48. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Apple does not care about a platform where you have to know to type "rpm -iv quicktime_plugin.i386.rpm" to install it

    Ever hear of GnoRPM? Red Carpet? Or are you too busy trolling?

  49. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And gaining skills and knowledge that involve things other than computers, anime, and sci-fi/fantasy.

    • Writing Poetry
    • Selling Stuff
    • Talking to persons of the opposite gender

    You know, stuff geeks aren't interested in.

  50. I'll pay (and so will many others, if its good) by cowtamer · · Score: 1

    The truth is that I use windows just because
    there are certain sites that are designed to be useless without these (IMHO bloated) plugins.

    This may not be a huge help in getting Joe Schmo to try LINUX, but I'll _happily_ fork over $20 for something so useful.

    In fact, if this is a decent product, let's try not to write an open source competitor to this so that the company can make some (well deserved) money.

    If we want mainstream acceptance of LINUX, maybe having some decent commercial products out there will help.

    1. Re:I'll pay (and so will many others, if its good) by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      actually, there is an open-source competitor for Konqueror. And, in fact, these guys have _helped_ the people behind it!

      sorry, the name escapes me momentarily .. something like 'ReaKtivate'.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
  51. Possibilities with Bundling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would it be a viable solution for RedHat and Mandrake, and the other large commercial linux distributions to include this sort of patch in their distro? Obviously they could work out some sort of profit sharing deal with the developers, and they would be providing a desktop environment that has more to offer the average user.

    KAPOW KAPOW KAPOW

  52. Why hasn't this Happened Already? by 3J0hn · · Score: 1

    We already have a free(ish) playing for divx (and various other) video codecs using Windows DLL's in the form of avifile (http://avifile.sourceforge.net/). So why can't someone do the same trick for non-open Quicktime codec?

    --
    If you keep your mind open, you're never sure what might wander on in.
  53. "Free software company"? by oddo · · Score: 1

    How can they be a free software company when some of the components in their products are closed?

    "You will be helping to provide a much needed source of income to a Free Software company [...]"

    --
    give me bongo
    1. Re:"Free software company"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess you missed that this is based on WINE, and that they're involved in WINE development. developmmmmmmmmmmmmmjahdsflkj

  54. Re:This IS the first... by Nailer · · Score: 2

    ...unless they specifically mean they can play the Sorenson codec.

    They can. Read the article.

    Most of the ASF et. al. support comes from using the Windows binary codecs...

    Until FFMPEG came along, or more importantly, Xine 0.51, which plays MSMPEG and DivX encoded AVIs just fine, natively. Not sure about ASFs - should be pretty triviual to do, but I haven't texted it yet.

    Oh, and if you want Xine with the ability to play the DVD movies you paid for, you should get the packages from here.

  55. SWEET by Ulwarth · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is EXACTLY the sort of thing that Linux needs right now. Funny to think that with all the awesome software we have (Apache, KDE, the Gimp, Linux itself...) the thing we need the most right now is a lame little viewer for some proprietary media formats. But it's true.

    I have no problem at all paying for software like this. Especially since they have priced it quite reasonably.

    Now, let's hope it actually _works_ and isn't just marketing hype surrounding a shoddy product. :)

    1. Re:SWEET by Centove · · Score: 1

      Oh it works just fine.. Its rather well done there are a few glitches here and there but they are more then tolerable.

    2. Re:SWEET by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Price would be better if it could use the Pro version of Quicktime as well, but I don't think that's possible without 30 bucks and windows first.

  56. Groovy. by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

    > I also have pine setup to launch the the MS Word viewer on command.

    Macro viruses and all?

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:Groovy. by sporko · · Score: 1

      "Viewer" means no macros, read only.

  57. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by aussersterne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Uh-oh, here we go again.

    What are the "clear limitations" of X? We now have anti-aliased text, direct-rendered 3D hardware support, true-type font support, support for running on embedded devices (i.e. iPaq)... What else do you want?

    Meanwhile, X has some *clear* advantages: much more seamless multi-display support, remote display capability, network font servers, easy extensibility...

    Installation and icons are the responsibility of the distribution and the API. It's not about X, it's about Red Hat and GNOME, which could solve both problems. And color pointers have been done by several software packages, among them many of Loki's games. There are also X extensions around (or at least there used to be -- search freshmeat) for color and animated color root window pointers. Your speed claims are ridiculous. I personally watch full-screen DVD video all the time using vlc in X. It looks great to me, no frames are dropped, and my hardware is virtually identical to yours. Just search for 'vlc' at freshmeat. I also own and play Quake III all the time under X using my GF2 card, and it's within just a few frames of the Windows speeds I get, with some definite advantages -- like being able to run it in a window. If your 3D card isn't as fast, just maybe you should ask your video card manufacturer for some drivers! And don't make fun of my Nvidia card and their 'closed' drivers -- all of your Windows 3D drivers are closed.

    Just because you don't know how to do it doesn't mean it isn't possible. And the things you're talking about would be just as difficult to get together if you had to do it by hand under Windows -- so blame the people who put it all on your CD-ROM (whoever made your distro) and not X, which is a great piece of software that is very stable, mature, and well-designed.

    --
    STOP . AMERICA . NOW
  58. Re:Oh yeah?!! QT found dead. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ESR hates GNU. You must mean RMS.

  59. cool... by mandria · · Score: 1

    that's good news. People that don't like to open star office to read a MS office document ought to be happy. personally, i'm using star office. It works just fine for me. Now for the the quicktime and shockwave it propably worth buying since more and more web sites are using shockwave and i haven't found anything to view quicktime movies in my computer.

  60. Re:Whew. (Offtopic) by cbwsdot · · Score: 1

    I don't tire of it either. But what do you expect Apple and other for-profit companies to do? Their number one priority at all times is making money for themselves and their investors. They simply aren't concerned with anything else. Don't take it personally. The user Linux user base on Apple hardware is far too small for them to care.

  61. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Mr.+McGibby · · Score: 1

    Why isn't this modded as -1 : Offtopic?

    Yes, we all know of the problems with Linux. However, the story really has nothing to do with Apple creating quicktime on Linux and especially not the reasons that they are not doing so. The story is about "Guys get quicktime working in Netscape on Linux"

    Please don't use this space for your rant about the "State of Linux".

    --
    Mad Software: Rantings on Developing So
  62. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by jchristopher · · Score: 2
    I'm not trolling. I know about GnoRPM and Red Carpet. But you have to be root to run either of them, which is yet another step in the way.

    They also don't come with every distribution of Linux (no standard). Mom's PC at home may or may not work the same as the one she has at work.

    These are usability problems that need to be addressed. The point is that GnoRPM and Red Carpet are GREAT - if you already know how to use RPM! But neither is as easy as "click setup.exe and look for your new program in the start menu".

    Please note, I'm not saying to dumb it down for everyone - but there does need to be some standard for installing and updating programs. The Red Hat network is a good start (still too hard for a newbie, in my opinion) that is moving in the right direction.

    You want nice stuff like the Quicktime plugin ported to Linux? You want Flash or Dreamweaver for development? You want the latest games? Then you're going to have to give a little on usability - these companies aren't going to be interested in selling those titles to 1% of the computer market.

    You may hate "Joe Sixpack" and think he's an idiot, but the fact is, the market FOLLOWS Joe Sixpack. So if you want more stuff for Linux, figure out how to make it easy enough for Joe Sixpack to understand!

  63. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    Every time I hear somebody say this, I wonder why bother improving the GUI for Linux, if you obviously don't want it user-friendly. My grandmother will not use Linux, so I got her an iMac.

  64. Server Tax, Black Slacks, and a New Hairdo by UNIBLAB_PowerPC · · Score: 1

    That was an extremely lucid observation until the "it's a shame" bit ... Sorenson codec, 'nuff said. Yeah, Apple should probably seriously consider releasing QuickTime for Linux, if for no other reason than to keep from essentially saying, "I don't give a good flying fsck that you no-good commie open-source pinkos can't see view/see/hear content in this format." But it's not so cut and dry, or else folks wouldn't keep bringing up the Sorenson codec point over and over in these threads today. I'll just go ahead and show my arse by asking a question: who's out there developing open-source A/V codecs? Those are the guys who deserve some serious patronage, but that's another story entirely.

    But what about the server tax? Am I missing something here? How about free, as in beer and speech. Let me get this straight: I can go to Apple's site and download the source code and/or compiled binaries for QuickTime Streaming Server 3 (Darwin Streaming Server 3) that will work under Windows, FreeBSD, and Red Hat Linux 6.2? WTF am I missing here? I guess all I'm missing is about $60k per server from Real, but I might be wrong ....

    1. Re:Server Tax, Black Slacks, and a New Hairdo by kilgore_47 · · Score: 1

      But what about the server tax? Am I missing something here? How about free, as in beer and speech. Let me get this straight: I can go to Apple's site [apple.com] and download the source code and/or compiled binaries for QuickTime Streaming Server 3 (Darwin Streaming Server 3) that will work under Windows, FreeBSD, and Red Hat Linux 6.2? WTF am I missing here? I guess all I'm missing is about $60k per server from Real, but I might be wrong ...

      Its funny... until recently you could stream quciktime from linux, but you couldn't play it...

      Could it be that apple would like linux to stay in its server-niche?

      --
      ___
      The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
    2. Re:Server Tax, Black Slacks, and a New Hairdo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Could it be that apple would like linux to stay
      > in its server-niche?

      Yes!

    3. Re:Server Tax, Black Slacks, and a New Hairdo by kilgore_47 · · Score: 1

      >> Could it be that apple would like linux to stay
      >> in its server-niche?

      >Yes!

      apple IS trying to push their *nix desktop OS afterall ;-)

      --
      ___
      The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
  65. Milk For Free. by broody · · Score: 1

    Dude, if you just want to view quicktime files, save the twenty bucks and use real free software.

    Install plugger and Xanim.

    Now shockwave is an entirely different matter...

    --
    ~~ What's stopping you?
    1. Re:Milk For Free. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shockwave? I don't have any trouble viewing this under Mozilla using Netscape plugins. ln -s is your friend.

  66. Not entirely GPL? by DVega · · Score: 1
    "... the Crossover is not entirely GPL. See the above for more information."

    It is a propietary, comercial, closed and non-free application. It is as far from GPL as it can be!

    --
    MOD THE CHILD UP!
    1. Re:Not entirely GPL? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure.

      So what ?

      Codeweavers does a whole sh*tload of OSS development (can you spell "Wine" ?).
      And any company that wants to stay a healthy
      company in order to be able to develop new,
      innovative (sic !) code needs decent money flow.

      So if they decide that a small proprietary extension best suits their need this time,
      what's the point ?

      The GPL is NOT the whole world.
      There are many things other than that
      (such as making sure that people can make use of proprietary content on Linux in order to be able to migrate painlessly).
      Anybody who thinks the GPL is everything
      is totally und fatally blinded IMHO.

      I'm sick and tired of such views.

  67. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    This numerous people does not include my grandmother, or people who bought a mac because it was easier to use and no DOS.
    Regardless of 'brainless' it's still more difficult than 'the mac way.'

    Try to imagine it from a non-geek perspective.

  68. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    There needs to be something like InstallShield or Wise Install for Windows

    Ah yes, those tireless innovators who invented the phrase, "Uninstall complete, some files could not be removed." We need to see more of that on Linux.

    I really would like Quake III to run at more than three seconds per frame!

    Quake trolling -- always a good way to start a flame war. Fun for the whole slashdot family.

  69. Some helpful information before downloading! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most Internet download pages include the file name and file size to make it easier to locate the file and confirm that it the download did not terminate in the middle after the download complettes. Unfortantly, the current Codeweaver/Yahoo store page does not provide that information. So:

    File name: install-crossover-plugin-1.00.sh
    File size: 8,039,422 bytes
    md5sum: c15e7acda68e885c142c260026d763e1

    Also provided after-the-fact is the intention of the license being *per user*, not per machine. If you attempt to run the script as root, the following error message appears:

    *** WARNING ***
    This version of CrossOver Plugin is intended for use only by a single user. As such, installing this product as the root user is strongly discouraged.

    Based on this message, I believe CodeWeaver intends that you pay $19.95 *per user* account install, but they are not up-front about this until you already payed/downloaded.

    1. Re:Some helpful information before downloading! by knitfoo · · Score: 2, Informative

      These are all excellent points.

      The file stuff is a problem. We're using
      the Yahoo store front, so we have a remarkably
      limited amount of control over both the
      file and the amount of information we can
      add to the actual order pages. We're
      working on it.

      I've asked our sysadmin to post the EULA
      to our pages; we very much intend for
      our customers to know exactly what
      they're getting before they buy.

      Thanks for the input,

      Jeremy White
      CEO
      CodeWeavers

    2. Re:Some helpful information before downloading! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Several companies will include per user licensing as part of the product title such as "Novell Netware (2-user license)"

  70. And this is a good thing? by Guppy06 · · Score: 2

    My experience with the various video formats on Windows boxes suggest that QT for Windows is intentionally crippled by the folks at Apple to help sell more Apple hardware.

    QT files (like the Mario 128 demo I downloaded from IGN) on my HDD constantly lagged and skipped on my old 233 MMX machine with 128 MB of RAM and a Diamond Stealth III (while RealMedia and mpeg files did fine). I assumed that Apple's QT player was bloatware and required something a bit more robust to play well. However, if I'm still having the same lagging/skipping problems with a Pentium 4 1.3 GHz, 256 MB of RAM, and a GeForce board, will I ever have good enough hardware? I know the Pentium 4 isn't the best-designed chip under the sun, but this is ridiculous! Especially when other video formats work just fine on comparativley ancient hardware.

    And of course this problem is only worsened by sites like IGN that offer media excluslively as QT files. (And then IGN expects me to pay money for their premium content?)

    Go ahead, mod me down as flamebait, but I don't even want QT software touching my Windows installs. Why would I want it running under Linux?

    1. Re:And this is a good thing? by stikves · · Score: 1
      Sorenson codec is very "CPU" intensive. 128 MB of RAM and a Diamond Stealth III does not mean anything but did you try that file on say ... PII 500, or something like that?


      This is true for DivX also. Have you also tried running a 640x480 DivX on your PC?

    2. Re:And this is a good thing? by flashms010 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I recall when when QT first came to windows.

      Just after MS ripped off key Quicktime code from a 3rd party consultant (litigated, settled), it emerged that Quicktime for Windows was facing unusual, suspicious performance and compatibility problems sourced in the Windows OS itself. I believe that MS's shenanigans with QT were brought up again during the MS monopoly trial.

      Apple conscientiously produces good software, so its problems on Windows weren't due necessarily from bad coding. The whole situation brings to mind how MS used incompatibilities to crush DR-DOS (and IBM to crush a chip maker before that). Of course, shortly after all this, the windows Mediaplayer made its debut.

      So, going by this particular conspiracy theory, you bought into MS's crap hook, line, and sinker. Remember, Apple owns a massive chunk of hollywood because of the quality of its tools. On the one hand, MS has a good reason for helping you overlook this core fact.

      On the other hand, Apple has to work overtime to produce cool new products because so many people hate the very idea of Apple's existence: they won't release substandard software if they can help it.

  71. Linux macines running QuickTime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Imagine a Beowolf Cluster of THESE!!!

  72. Just purchased it - first thoughts by HunterD · · Score: 2, Informative

    I just purchased the crossover plugin, and here are my first thoughs with it: (testing with Netscape & Mozilla)

    Installer: Very cool - makes it way easier to get the plugins.

    Quicktime: Quicktime installed fine, but the opening video I played had no sound.
    following attempts with opening a .mov file on my system with browsers led to:

    Netscape: .mov file played correctly, and in line
    Mozilla: Tried to launch Xanim
    Gnome (nautilus): launches to Xanim

    Shockwave: Shockwave installer had to be downloaded, but it's install went fine
    Netscape: every file I have tried to use has worked to at least some degree. some things the sound only produces a crackle - but this could be my audio driver I suppose
    Mozilla: only aboul a 1/4 of th eflash files Ihave tried have worked. Some sites cannot detect tha mozilla has the plugin installed.

    Word: Word viewer installed fine, though it didthrow an error, saying the plugin wasn't detected.
    Netscape: Files loaded fine (Note, if file has a space in it's name, you need to escape it, or it will take you to netscape's search site) Note: the file was not viewed in line
    Mozilla: Didn't pick up the mime type, and so just displayed a normal dialog for running a file it does not recognize
    Gnome: Files launched to the word viewer fine

    Excel: Excel viewer installed fine, though it didthrow an error, saying the plugin wasn't detected.
    Netscape: Files loaded fine (Note, if file has a space in it's name, you need to escape it, or it will take you to netscape's search site) Note: the file was not viewed in line
    Mozilla: Didn't pick up the mime type, and so just displayed a normal dialog for running a file it does not recognize
    Gnome: Files launched to the excel viewer fine

    Note, the Excel & Word viewers did not show up in mozilla when one does an About:Plugin

    Final judgement: This works pretty well in Netscape, but needs alot of work for Mozilla. this is to be expected from the release notes. For me, the word and excel viewers are well worth the $20 - and the rest is fun to play with

    Devon Jones

    --
    - The unexamined life is not worth leading -
  73. Thank God by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 1

    Serisously man... this rocks. Esspecially for a web developer. I'll I have to see which codecs it supports though.

    --
    "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
  74. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by neuromortis · · Score: 1

    I fully agree with you about installing apps. It's no problem for most /. readers to go through the process of "download tar.gz, ./configure [options], fail, go get some libaries, repeat" or some other such system, but we're a relative minority. Unfortunately, we're the people in charge of making Linux easy to use; something that is never going to happen. I don't have any problem installing an rpm package so why should I spend my free time writing an easy-to-use installer for Linux?

    As for the "su root" issue I think you could theoretically install any app to your home folder. It'd take a bit of modification of the config files (mostly adding paths that refer to your home folder and such), but once it was done you'd never have to think about it again. For the most part, though, root and its abilities are a necessary evil in a multi-user system. If you're going to have a lot of (potentially hostile) users on one system you have to have something to distinguish between people who should be able to do anything and people who shouldn't.

    By the way, there was once an OS that was perfect for you. It was called BeOS and, if you had a supported video card, it would've kicked any other OS's ass in multimedia and had none of this silly "root" stuff to deal with. Program installation? Just drag it onto a special "Drag your app onto me!" icon and it would install. Don't remember whether it supported colorful pointers or not but it wouldn't surprise me.

    (I'd like to make a few notes, though: I don't know what's wrong with your machine but I play Q3 quite comfortably under Linux and I know that at least Enlightenment supports colorful cursors quite well, it's just rarely used.)

    --

    I build model citizens.
  75. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    You may hate "Joe Sixpack" and think he's an idiot, but the fact is, the market FOLLOWS Joe Sixpack. So if you want more stuff for Linux, figure out how to make it easy enough for Joe Sixpack to understand!

    I'm going to shout now. I don't usually shout, but you seem to be having a hard time with this, and also you've pissed me off, so I am going to shout.

    I NEVER SAID I THINK JOE SIXPACK IS AN IDIOT! I NEVER EVEN REMOTELY IMPLIED SUCH A THING! STOP PUTTING WORDS IN MY @#$%ING MOUTH!

    There I feel better now. I promise not to do it again.

    I was merely refuting your assertion that you need to type rpm -iv BlahBlah.rpm at the command line. Refuting it was easy, since it's so transparently false. All your other points were good, but you only discredit your argument when you include a demonstrably false statement (and then try to cover it up by changing the subject and attacking me for things I never said).

  76. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Eloquence · · Score: 2
    Whether you can handle command lines or not is not a simple question of what you "grow up with", although this does indeed play a major role. It is also a question of how your brain works. (Of course, if you really grow up with a certain GUI, this directly influences how your brain works.) Many, if not most people are very visual thinkers who need pictures and symbols and are easily confused by complex words and grammar. This is not a character flaw -- it is simply the result of a different learning environment. So GUIs make sense for many people. Linux has fairly decent GUIs by now, and it offers people a shell with a complex and logical "grammar". So it gives the user more choices, not less.

    What has to happen is that the different layers of user experience have to be separated more clearly. Any user should still be able to configure procmail, compile his own kernel or set up a firewall or router, if he so desires, but if he doesn't, he must be able to use Linux day-to-day without ever having to deal with the "uglier" parts of the OS. This is gradually happening, but it is a process which is not yet complete (mostly because of Microsoft's monopoly stretches out to so many areas).

  77. Mr. 100% Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Why, oh why shouldn't they support a now obsolete and little used plugin format? Funny how nobody else of any significance hasn't upgraded to Active X. All of the crowing about "no x86 legacy crap makes PPC nifty" and OS-X doesn't run on any of the older systems, and in spite of the fact that netscape is somebody else's format that MS never had to support in the first place, you still find fault with them? Of course, they're MS, and anything they ever do is wrong. How is this not facilitating anyone from being cross platform? They can chose to only port to Deadscape, if they want to limit themselves to a small fraction of the computer using public. Funny how Apple, with their DIRECT control over QT won't port to Linux, where they could still protect the source code and make it closed source. WHO is not cross-platform friendly? WHO only makes OSes for one architecture of processor? (please, Darwin x86 does not count).


    I'll bet you don't like which charities Bill donates 100's of millions too - I'm sure he even picked the wrong ones. He can do no right. Mac is always right, MS is always wrong.


    BTW, who is the total dork you caught sitting on the chair at maclovefest?

    1. Re:Mr. 100% Wrong by Ridge2001 · · Score: 1
      I'll bet you don't like which charities Bill donates 100's of millions too - I'm sure he even picked the wrong ones

      Actually, you're right, I don't like it. Gates tends to donate to causes like third world vaccines while he holds stock in biotech companies. Sounds like a conflict of interest there.

    2. Re:Mr. 100% Wrong by Windows+nME · · Score: 1

      First of all, MS supported the Netscape plug-in architecture as part of their embrace/extend/extinguish philosophy. When they introduced IE, they needed plug-ins and forcing developers to write their plug-ins for two browsers would have been suicide for the adoption of IE at that time. Now that MS has succeeded in illegally destroying Netscape, they no longer need to support those plug-ins and can force developers to move to their exclusive plug-in architecture that cannot exist on other platforms, therby ensuring no more threat from potentially competative 3rd party browsers and OS's.

      Second, Netscape is not quite dead. Its userbase may be much smaller now, but it is the second most popular browser and has millions of users. Apple being a relatively small software company (software not hardware) doesn't have time or the excess cash necessary for maintaining and supporting two different versions of their browser plugin. MS used to pride itself on backward compatiblility (remember DOS stuck around for an eternity), yet now they drop Netscape style plug-ins because of a whim, or is this a deliberate act to make sure that developers are stuck developing for an API that MS controls and can weild as a weapon to limit competition?

      Thirdly, ActiveX breaks Quicktime webpages. Now tens of thousands of web pages need to be updated because ActiveX ignores the EMBED tag that Quicktime relies on. This is a serious problem. I cannot see how MS, a company that used to pride itself on backward compatibility, could justify this act. How long did it take them to get rid of DOS? Yet they don't seem to have any problem getting rid of something like this which affects millions of people. To me, this is MS at its worst.

    3. Re:Mr. 100% Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you weren't so busy being an anti-MS robot, you'd realize that Apple already solved this supposedly insurmountable, unmaintainable problem and let all of their developers know about it - A WEEK AGO.

      From: Apple Developer Connection <noreply@wwdr.apple.com>

      Date: Wed Aug 22, 2001 11:50:49 AM US/Eastern
      To: undisclosed-recipients:;

      Subject: Important News For Quicktime Developers

      Reply-To: Apple Developer Connection <noreply@wwdr.apple.com>

      Windows Internet Explorer 5.5 SP2 and 6.0 with QuickTime IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR WEB DEVELOPERS & WEBMASTERS Microsoft Internet Explorer for Windows, versions 5.5 SP2 and 6.0 (soon to be released) no longer support Netscape-style plug-ins, such as the plug-in installed as part of QuickTime 5.0.2 and earlier versions. Consequently, Windows customers using these versions of Explorer who visit your site may be unable to view QuickTime content in the browser. To mitigate this problem and to ensure a positive experience for your Web site visitors, you should add to your site the HTML code that makes available the new ActiveX control for
      QuickTime, as described below.

      ...


      But don't let facts stand in the way of you little mindless crusade, go for it!

    4. Re:Mr. 100% Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That charity money BG "gives" is not out of the goodness of his heart. He's an ass and has no heart. It is PURELY a tax writeoff. Get rid of the ability to write this sort of thing off and you'd see him drop his "charity" work faster than he eats shit out of pig's asses.

    5. Re:Mr. 100% Wrong by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      read the parent post. Moron. You can't just expect people to update dead pages that have been around since 1996. Didn't you figure that out when Code Red smacked people around?

    6. Re:Mr. 100% Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quicktime wasn't the only plugin broken. Some of my old 3D viewers and Vivo plugins are netscape. There haven't been new versions since 1998.

      I wish MS would at least announce it, so Apple could at least have some time to write ActiveX. Know how small their Windows branch is? A couple of poor coders were spending a harrowing 3 days while they coded a new plugin on pure caffeine.

    7. Re:Mr. 100% Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So it's OK when Netscape is non-standards compliant and uses the EMBED tag, but when MS becomes MORE standards compliant, they get blamed? You are such a moron.

      And speaking of Code Red, just wait until Code BondiBlue starts ravaging macs. Oh wait, nobody will care because there are about 12 macs on the internet at any given time. The advisories are already trickling in. Oh, but mac users will patch their boxes. Suuuure. They love change. They'd still be using MacOS 1 if it were compatable with new boxes.

  78. I love the license text by jfunk · · Score: 4, Funny
    I just bought and downloaded it and noticed the license text:

    YOU REALLY WANT TO READ THIS, ESPECIALLY THE PART ABOUT YOUR FIRST BORN
    CHILD...


    ...License text... seems fair...

    OKAY, WE WERE JUST KIDDING. THERE'S NOTHING IN HERE ABOUT YOUR FIRST BORN
    CHILD. BUT YOU REALLY SHOULD READ THESE THINGS, YOU KNOW.


    Just thought I'd share that...
  79. EULA with a sense of humor by NonSequor · · Score: 2
    I just downloaded the plug-in and found this at the top of the EULA:

    YOU REALLY WANT TO READ THIS, ESPECIALLY THE PART ABOUT YOUR FIRST BORN CHILD...


    And then a friendly notice:

    If you don't like this EULA:
    a) Let us know, we'd appreciate the feedback
    b) Stop right now, and ask for a refund. We'll cheerfully do so.

    --
    My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
  80. Yeah, as long as you don't need QT 3 support... by BlueTT · · Score: 1

    Xanim doesn't support any of the proprietary codecs that make up the majority of QT 4 and 5, and almost no one uses the versions of QT that Xanim can parse anymore. This is largely because of the Sorensen codecs, which Sorensen will allow an open source version of...

  81. Plugger by Darth+Maul · · Score: 3, Informative


    Try this:

    http://fredrik.hubbe.net/plugger.html

    Multimedia plugin for Linux which can handle Quicktime, MPEG, MP2, AVI, SGI-movie, Tiff, DL, IFF-anim, MIDI, Soundtracker, AU, WAV and Commodore 64 audio files.

    I'm using it in Mozilla 0.9.3 and it works quite well. That, and the flash plugin that is available here:

    http://www.macromedia.com/

    I'm all set with Mozilla under Linux: Java plugin, Flash plugin, Quicktime, etc...

    --
    --- witty signature
  82. Buisness plan by russ_allegro · · Score: 1

    I've just purchased it, but what they could have possibly done instead of charging us for it is offer it to other companies such as Apple. Goto Apple and say that we have a easy way to expand your quicktime viewer to Linux. Offer Apple a fair price and now you can download quicktime for Linux from Apples page using crossover. I guess they could still do that ;) You don't have to stop at Apple, then goto macromedia...

    Of course this isn't as good as native support, just my thoughts.

    Russell Valentine

  83. Re:For every action, there is an [...] by leppi · · Score: 1

    But you have to be root to run either of them, which is yet another step in the way.

    I don't know what you are trying to argue...

    You don't want to have a root account under linux? If one person is using the Linux Workstation, then why couldn't he be logged in as root all the time? If you are wanting to have multiple people use the machine, give all their accounts full super user privs.

    Doing this would be bad system administration, but Windows does precicely the same thing. Almost all applications under Windows (NT derivatives) require joe_user to be logged in under a superuser (administrator) acount to install software.

    'DOS-based' windows (95,98,ME) had no idea of user permissions, so that point is moot.

    Your argument doesn't make a whole lot of sense (if you saying that windows makes things easier to install from a security perspective).

  84. QuickTime dead? Not hardly... by BlueTT · · Score: 1

    As others have pointed out, most every video editing package on the market, even those that run on Windows, use QuickTime as their base technology. QuickTime is very much alive and healthy, for that matter.

    OtoH, RealAudio is, for all intents and purposes, slowly sinking into the sunset, between the fact that equivalent bit rate files sound better in Windows Media format than the RealAudio versions do and MS's "forcing" content providers to use WM in association with XP.

    Fun activity - go to a major streamer like WarpRadio and try to find a station streaming in RealAudio as opposed to Windows Media; good luck - they're few and far between...

    On the other hand, equivalent bit rate QuickTime files usually look better than the equivalent Windows Media files or Real files, so there's a plus...

  85. Plugger just calls xanim, which can't do Sorensen by BlueTT · · Score: 1

    In short, plugger just provides an easy way for a plugin to call an outside program to do its thing; however, you still need a program that plugger can call, and by default it calls xanim to display QuickTime.

    Unfortunately, almost all QuickTime 3, 4 and 5 content is encoded using one of the Sorensen codecs, which xanim does not support because Sorensen doesn't release source...

  86. Re:Yeah, as long as you don't need QT 3 support... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    God DAMN, you Linux people are stupid! If Sorenson wanted to release a codec for Linux, there is no reason why it would have to be open source! It could very well be a closed source, binary-only codec, just like what Real did.

    No, the reason Sorenson didn't/won't release a version of their codec for Linux is because there is no money in it. That's all.

  87. Paging Mr. Stallman, paging Stallman... by HongPong · · Score: 2
    the Crossover is not entirely GPL.

    "Quicktime is not, repeat, not now called GNU/Quicktime. And related services are not called GNU/MS-Word, or GNU/Netscape. Thank you.

  88. quicktime+wine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Using some build I got from www.bero.org I could run Quicktime4 with wine.
    It have lots of problems with the interface (almost all screen gets black, some blinking windows, etc), but it runs.
    I could get the Final Fantasy Movie trailer and open it, it worked ok with sound and all.
    If wasn't the quicktime bloated interface it would run fine, but I'm sure wine will get it working sometime near.

  89. Gee-awd you're stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like a conflict of interest there.

    Gasp! I think he works for the same company that signs his paychecks! Clearly a conflict of interest!

    He's DONATING the money for 3rd World countries. How freaking awful. God forbid some of that generosity helps his biotech stocks.

    And YOU were not the one I was replying to, so maybe you don't like it, and you're free to chime in and entertain us with your idiotic anti-Bill Gates anti-establishment cheeseball theories, but unless you are another multiple personality of Mr. 100% dork here, it's a new fork in the thread.

  90. Re:This IS the first... by ddstreet · · Score: 1
    They can. Read the article.

    I already did, all I'm saying is for every codec I can think of except Sorenson there is already Free software than can play it. If this is the first that can do Sorenson, great, but personally I'd just rather see Sorenson stop being used than 'finally' have support for it.

    That's not even starting to talk about the fact they want $19.95 for their thing.

  91. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by spectecjr · · Score: 2

    Don't worry,IE6 lost the QT plug-in but is likely to have gained the QT active-x component

    It's already done - just go to the Apple quicktime site, and it'll pop up an ActiveX install box.

    --
    Coming soon - pyrogyra
  92. This functionality is already in KDE 2.2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please see this link http://dot.kde.org/994747675/
    for more info

  93. X11 has "clear limitations"? by phliar · · Score: 2, Informative
    Velex wrote:
    ... X has some clear limitations
    Sounds like you've never used X11. What are these "clear limitations"?

    In fact, X11 is still vastly superior to Win32 GDI (or whatever they're calling it today). I work from home two days a week, and I have DSL. I use Unix/X11 for everything - which means that I can do anything I need to using any program on any machine (whether it's at home or at the office) from either home or the office. Working from home is identical to working at the office - except for the noise, the constant interruptions, meetings, etc.

    That one feature by itself is enough to blow all the Micros**t crap out of the water. (Leaving aside the fact that X11 can do anything that can be done on Windows. You might say that "Program X on Windows does foobar, show me an X11 program that does that" but you will miss the point. The lack of existence of that program is not due to any weakness of X11; it's simply because no one has written that program yet.)

    Nobody wants to compile his own software just to put it under his user's home directory instead of globally. There needs to be something like InstallShield or Wise Install for Windows -- I double click the executable on my desktop, answer a few simple questions, and, *poof*, my scripts are updated and the software is installed.
    You don't really think that a significant proportion of Linux/Unix users today compile things from source, do you? (A few do - gluttons for punishment like me... but I like having the source so if some bug really starts to annoy me, I can jump in and fix it.) Everyone else I know runs some sort of desktop; on Linux, K or Gnome. On both those systems, when you want to install something, you click on it, a window pops up that you type the root password into, and voila! it sets everything up, including billions of annoying icons everywhere, just like you want.

    (If you really mean to argue for the Windows Way of "everyone is logged in as Administrator all the time" - well, I wish I hadn't typed all this stuff in, because there's no hope.)

    Don't get me wrong: if Program X that you need is only available on Operating System Y, of course your machine should be running Y. We use programs, not operating systems. (Again, except for the aforementioned gluttons for punishment like me - I've been writing code on Unix for 20 years and I just can't use any other OS. And I do watch video on Linux - you just need a video card that XFree86 supports well. And yes, it's not likely that Mom will be able to figure all this out.)

    But don't make airy claims about "X having clear limitations".

    --
    Unlimited growth == Cancer.
  94. QT and any platform by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I will not even install QT (yes I know the plugin does more than that) on a windows box, why in the hell would I want that crap to work on my beloved linux boxen? To hell with emulation programs of any kind! People are stunned when I tell them what I think of shit like VMWare and Wine, I am stunned that they would want to pollute a perfectly fine linux machine with that garbage. Windows does have it's place and I do use it for some things, but I am just sick of this "windows has it so linux must have it also attitude" that people insist on displaying.

  95. Re:For every action, there is an [...] by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Doing this would be bad system administration, but Windows does precicely the same thing. Almost all applications under Windows (NT derivatives) require joe_user to be logged in under a superuser (administrator) acount to install software."

    You are so incredibly full of shit, you must be a linux-zealot.

    There are NO programs that 'require' you to be an admistrator. File and process level access can be given to anyone by the administrator. If he knows his shit, it is an automated process when a user is created/needs modified permissions.

    Get a clue you dickless wonder.

  96. A punch to the gut of the Mac user. by BelDurnik · · Score: 1

    I guess that the Linux user inside of me stepped aside when I saw this posting. The Mac user stepped forward and read, then curled over when it saw that there was mention of Windows along with Quicktime and no mention of Macintosh. Not trying to be critical but props should have been given to where the technology was born. I remember back to the days when no one who used windows wanted anything to do with Quicktime.

    Well anyways it is good to finely see it coming over to Linux.

    1. Re:A punch to the gut of the Mac user. by Knobby · · Score: 1

      Not trying to be critical but props should have been given to where the technology was born. I remember back to the days when no one who used windows wanted anything to do with Quicktime.

      They weren't really discussing the origins of the technology. They were talking about the Windows plug-in for X86 (Native Win32)..

  97. Galeon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does it work with Galeon?

  98. Why not Reactiktivate? by uninet · · Score: 1

    After all, that KDE Kpart is suppose to offer the _same_ fuctionality, without being proprietary. And that is even better... :-)

    -Tim

    --
    -------------
    "You would not get a high grade for such a design" -- Andy Tanenbaum on Linus' Linux design.
  99. I bought it. by JohnDonagher · · Score: 1

    I bought it, and so did a coworker of mine. It is capable of a lot more than the /. story gave it credit for. Kudos to the authors

  100. YHBT=redundant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    welcome to slashdot.

  101. forget about downloading it by praedor · · Score: 1

    I bought it and have been struggling to download that bastard for 2 goddamn hours. I have a fat pipe but the yahoo.shit.server upon which the file resides is a PIG! The download makes it about 1 meg or so, then craps out and dies. Select download again and repeat ad infinitum.


    I'm THIS close to saying "fuck it!" and "Give me my money back". Get the damn thing OFF YAHOO. THEY SUCK!! THEY'RE SLOW. THEY'RE IDIOTS!


    If you wish to sell something for download, put it where IT CAN BE DOWNLOADED! Put it on an proper server so wget can be used (I tried it and it wont work on this goddamn moronic yahoo system). FIX IT OR QUIT SELLING IT FOR DOWNLOAD!


    &$$!#!@#$ and the horse you codeweaver clowns rode in on!

    --
    In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    1. Re:forget about downloading it by praedor · · Score: 1

      That's it. I cancelled my order. Fuck em. You get to spend 20 minutes trying to download a mere 150 to 200kbytes of an 8 meg file before the fucking yahoo server drops you and you have to reconnect and try again for another 20 minutes and 150k. Piss off.


      Order cancelled. I will gladly wait for the kde equivalent FOR FREE and from a fast server and multiple mirrors.

      --
      In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    2. Re:forget about downloading it by knitfoo · · Score: 2
      FWIW, this is the only complaint of this type we have had; we have hundreds of successful downloads, from people all over the world.

      We do have issues with Yahoo not providing file sizes to browsers. We're working with Yahoo to resolve these issues; we are also hoping that Yahoo can help to explain why this customer had such a severe problem.

      We are responding to issues as quickly as we can; please bear in mind that our store has been operational for all of 36 hours.

      We have been trying to work with customers that have problems, and we have had good success in resolving problems (you can review the support emails yourself if you like). Praedor was understandably upset and was not willing to allow us the time to correct the problem.

      However, please note that my guarantee is firm: if you're not satisfied, we refund your money, no questions asked - which is what we have done here.

      Cheers,

      Jeremy White
      CEO
      CodeWeavers

  102. Re:I R #1! All others R #2 or less!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF and this get modded up further as insightful?!!!

    (the whole point of posting such drivel as a response to such pseudo-intellectual claptrap was to point out what fsck'n mental masturbtion the poster was exercising!! virtual masturbation is always morally superior to pseudo masterbation. wankers.)

  103. Furthermore.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    EMBED is not a standards compliant way to embed information, and why the hell hasn't Apple gotten off their lazy asses and ported Quicktime to any other platforms while they had the luxury of this wonderful, "cross platform," non-standards compliant way of doing it? I mean, why should MS make a more standards-compliant browser, when they can bow to the wishes of a dead, profitless arm of AOL? Clearly MS is being irrational here....

  104. closed installation program by vu13 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The two proprietary components of CrossOver are our installation utility, which is of no general value, and

    If it's of no value the why not open it? I mean it seems rather daft to limit your costumer base to those who are willing to run closed code in super user mode. What does it do? It could install spyware or give my browser the yellow links for all I know.

    I care a lot less about the program that runs in normal user mode.

    1. Re:closed installation program by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

      It doesn't run in super user. It installs to your home directory. Try a little research first, please.

      --
      My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
  105. this compounds problems of proprietary formats by mj6798 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Proprietary formats are bad: they restrict fair use rights unreasonably, and they mean that data simply becomes inaccessible in a few years, when the companies that created those formats have moved on to the next thing or gone out of business. Giving companies that kind of control over content threatens the foundations of our academic, social, and political institutions.

    Using the kinds of workarounds CodeWeavers is making available only perpetuates such formats. You should instead ask web sites and content providers to use open, documented formats. Even if the open formats are encumbered by patents (like MPEG), that is still a better deal than using something proprietary; patents eventually expire, but undocumented proprietary formats never become open, they become obsolete and forgotten.

    Besides, don't fool yourself for a moment: Microsoft and Apple will only allow this sort of thing to go on if they see it as being either useless or in their advantage. Otherwise, they have plenty of legal and technical means for stopping it.

    1. Re:this compounds problems of proprietary formats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "they restrict fair use rights unreasonably"

      You mean they make things hard to pirate?

  106. Depressing party: I was there... by Natales · · Score: 1

    First of nothing, let me tell you that for me Linux is almost a religion. I draged my wife and my little sister and her boyfriend to this BBQ (that was about something they don't fully understand) with my linux T-shirt and my "Linux 77" license plate in my lexus, just to see a bunch of people without any life or spark. I felt depressed with the attitude of these guys. My wife (who is more sociable than I) just went out there and met some people, and it was like, "hey guys! here is someone with a job!" thing.

    I know most of us have our own lives and a lot of stuff to deal with daily, but I didn't expect these from my bretheren in the faith.

    I do have to tell, though, that we met an old guy who saved the whole afternoon. Really cool guy and we shared a lot of interesting insights about using linux in education. I contributed with my link to www.LTSP.org at least. Better luck next time. P.S. You need to hire my wife as a social director (she accepts stocks...;))

  107. Standards by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


    So it's OK when Netscape is non-standards compliant and uses the EMBED tag, but when MS becomes MORE standards compliant, they get blamed?


    You're saying ActiveX controls are standards compliant?


    At least the non-standards compliant EMBED tag was supported by a wider range of browsers and wasn't platform-specific.

    1. Re:Standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least the non-standards compliant EMBED tag was supported by a wider range of browsers and wasn't platform-specific.

      Like Quicktime is? Oh yeah, it's on TWO platforms.

    2. Re:Standards by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      Technically 3, if you don't count all the windows flavors.

      Yeah, only 3 platforms, but dozens of browsers thanks to the Netscape plugin archeticiture

    3. Re:Standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Technically 3, if you don't count all the windows flavors.

      Who's #3?

      Yeah, only 3 platforms, but dozens of browsers thanks to the Netscape plugin archeticiture

      Too bad it's a silly non-standard tag. And what good is a plugin architecture that nobody uses? Seriously, Apple's the only one to whine, because A) they've been lazy, and B) they like playing the victim. Were you here bitching when they killed support for 68K? How about their continual refusal to port QT to other platforms? How about their abandoning of their now legacy OS and all associated software? Oh, but Apple did it, so it's good. When Apple changes things, they're "innovating," and screwing over every single app on the platform. But when MS does it, they're "picking on Apple," because Apple has refused for years to either become standards compliant or make their damned plugin work correctly with the browser with about 80% market share. How fucking stupid is that?

      As it turns out, they fixed it rather quickly, so it is not nearly the cataclysmic event you mac zealots like to make it out to be. Too bad they're too lazy to take it a step further and port their shitty viewer to Linux, or FAR BETTER to start posting movie trailers with DivX so that we could be free of their crappy player. Note - it's very, very different on a PC!

    4. Re:Standards by mr100percent · · Score: 1

      #3 is Mac OS X, which Quicktime is tightly integrated into.

      You can't compare the migration from 68k and the conversion to OS X. Apple said over a year in advance they are moving to the new architectures, they supported it years later, giving every developer time to port stuff over. MS did it without even a developer bulletin a few days in advance.

      NS plugins were much more popular than ActiveX. Name one good plugin that was ActiveX only.

    5. Re:Standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would they make it DiVX? Quicktime doesn't support the format, and it's the movie studio's job to pick the format, not Apple. Most of the apple trailer pages are links to the studio's site.

    6. Re:Standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      #3 is Mac OS X, which Quicktime is tightly integrated into.

      Hey, if we're splitting hairs here, why NOT break it out into 95,95B,98,98SE,NT3.x,NT4,NT4-RISC,2K,ME, and XP, or at least 9x/ME, NT4/2K/XP(sorta), and NT4RISC? At least you could pretent not to be totally ignorant and recognize there are serious differences in certain lines of Windows. Don't forget Windows NT for RISC-based systems as well.

      You can't compare the migration from 68k and the conversion to OS X. Apple said over a year in advance they are moving to the new architectures, they supported it years later, giving every developer time to port stuff over. MS did it without even a developer bulletin a few days in advance.

      And Apple's already worked around it, and it was simple. Obviously not a big deal. And webpages can continue to be used by all of those other browsers, as well as now be compliant with the Active-X plugin structure. The parallel was that both moves locked out old, unsupported stuff. Maybe it's time to upgrade?

      NS plugins were much more popular than ActiveX. Name one good plugin that was ActiveX only.

      I can't, but I can name a really shitty one that was EMBED-only until a few weeks ago. Define "popular," and why does it matter? If EMBED were a w3c standard, you'd have a leg to stand on, but it's not, so all bets are off as to whether anyone supports it. Active X is just as valid a way to embed info. Does it just suck to be wrong all the time?

    7. Re:Standards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would they make it DiVX? Quicktime doesn't support the format, and it's the movie studio's job to pick the format, not Apple. Most of the apple trailer pages are links to the studio's site.

      OK, maybe Apple should support this open format? Ya think? You're kidding, aren't you? They don't support DivX?

      So let me get this straight: Apple continues to refuse to supply a QT player for anything other than Mac or Windows, their format won't support well documented open codecs, it won't support standards compliant plugin structures, and people are pissed off at MS now for dropping a plugin format that only Apple was still using, and worked around already almost immediately? Without breaking the Netscape EMBED tag? Hel-looooo?

  108. Impressive by salimma · · Score: 1
    I have been much impressed with CodeWeavers' Wine packages in the past, and this time is shaping up to be no different.

    Alright, it is designed to run Windows-based Netscape plugins. Necessary evil - with the current low level of desktop penetration by Linux, manufacturers and software designers will not immediately rush to providing support. Case in point: hardware drivers - hopefully rectified when a stable API for drivers ala WDM is defined.

    With KDE's reaktivate project offering ActiveX plug-in compatibility, whether or not Netscape plugins will continue to be produced is rather moot; there will always be a way for Linux users (unfortunately only those on the x86 platform) to run Windows browser plug-ins.

    Offered the choice, however, between increasing Microsoft's stranglehold on browser technologies using a free software program, and helping to maintain a competing technology (Netscape plugins) using a closed-source program developed by a company that gives back to the community, I would choose the latter.

    As someone who has bought shrink-wrapped Linux distributions and application suites, I am pre-ordering the CD version of CrossOver. Quite a nice touch, that gives you access to the download version as well :)

    Regards,

    Michel

    --
    Michel
    Fedora Project Contribut
  109. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " This numerous people does not include my grandmother, or people who bought a mac because it was easier to use and no DOS. "

    You seem to be implying that MacOS was more popular than DOS. Are you aware that this is false?

  110. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by bow · · Score: 1

    Actually, it is not so much about Quicktime (which is just a wrapper, like avi) but about the codec used.
    You can already get QT for Linux here or here. But you can't get the Sorenson codec used by most QT movies found on the net.
    Sorenson has got an exclusiv deal with apple.

  111. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by mr100percent · · Score: 1

    not more popular, just there was a substantial number of people who migrated to MacOS for it's LACK of DOS. It's a large number that I wouldn't ignore.

  112. Why do you bash non-Linux people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone posted a comment about not wanting to use command line to install a QT plugin...they were essentially called "brainless". WTF? Linux will continue to rot if you elitists continue to bash newbies who want to use Linux. Listen to them. They may like GUIS. I like GUIS. I dont want to use the F'in command line. Shoot me. But this is the reason people won't switch from the Beast to Linux. Make it really easy for people who want it that way, and sure leave the command line for the people who want that. But bashing someone cause they think command line stinks (like myself) will do nothing to endear others to your 'cause'. Sometimes the Slashdot zealots just plain bug me. Try looking away from your command line for 30 seconds to read Art of War by Sun Tzu - you may learn something.

  113. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    everybody keeps talking about their frickin grandma.. i bet you 90% of the grandmas cant even use windows.

  114. WE love everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, how do you extrapolate your generalizations about the whole Linux community based on one or two posts on Slashdot? In the first place, most the posts on Slashdot are borderline trolls or worse. And secondly, Slashdot is a magnet for misfits and malcontents. Check out any of the few dozen other Linux sites if you want a taste of the real community. Linux users are just ordinary folks, like Windows users, or BeOS users, or Mac users. No magic involved. There are assholes and saints to be found in every fan club.

    1. Re:WE love everyone by zangdesign · · Score: 1

      Hey, I'd love to get away from Slashdot and all the disgruntled anarchists here. Can you name one where Linux and Windows people have reasonable discussion without resorting to name calling?

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
  115. Well then the rest of us should ignore them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    starting with you, you chirpy little mac robot. Do you do anything other than post in slashdot to defend the honor of your fair maiden Jobs?

    1. Re:Well then the rest of us should ignore them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bitch.

  116. X is well designed? by renoX · · Score: 1

    You're kidding right?
    X has some nice capabilities but I wouldn't call it nicely designed.

    This is this "nice design" which explain that I have usually 3 toolkit in memory at the same time?? (Qt, Lesstiff, GTK, Tk sometimes, etc.)

    Talk about unnecessary memory usage! And these toolkits don't integrates together very well (look and feel, sometimes cut/copy/paste doesn't work very,etc.)

    And have you looked at XLib programming have you seen how low level the communication are between the client and the server?? How "chatty" the communication is between the client and the server??

    Berlin is well designed (but not ready for prime time), X design is at best so-so.

  117. Learning from the Master by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


    Apple invented most of the tactics MS uses, they just never had the muscle to enforce them as well.


    Eh? I was always under the impression MS got its Industry Hardball Bag-o-Tricks Start Kit from IBM.


    And then they began refining the art...

    1. Re:Learning from the Master by Black+Perl · · Score: 2


      You're both right. MS picks up its hardball tactics from every other company that has ever successfully used them.

      MS is also actively inventing new hardball tactics--why do you think their R&D budget is so big?

      --
      bp
  118. Linux and the Film Industry by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


    Uhhh....does _anyone_ do professional digital video production on a linux box? (Hint: no.)


    Your point may be valid - I'm not aware of any professional studios using Linux for video editing. But I think you might be dismissing a trend. Linux is making headway in the film industry.


    Two examples are Pixar (noteably Shrek) and Square (Final Fantasy). Linux has been doing some heavy lifting in render farms for a while now. But note that its also showing up as workstations. Existing product lines and tools are being ported to Linux, and some production houses are generating their own internal tools.


    This might not be a solid example of Linux in video editing today - but it does show Linux could compete with Apple for the same niche markets in the future.

    1. Re:Linux and the Film Industry by Lars+T. · · Score: 1

      You'd have a point if video editing and 3D rendering were in the same niche and Apple had much of a share in 3D rendering.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  119. A Jump to the Left by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2
    Nice dodge.


    Where Quicktime runs has nothing to do with it. The point is that an activex control is NOT anywhere near to standards complient (strike your "oh woe for the unfair bashing of microsoft" troll). Netscapes' interface has become a defacto standard in so far as many browsers (including IE) support it and it doesn't require a platform specific architecture to implement.

  120. If they only had trial... by Frodo · · Score: 1

    That's a pity they do not have a trial version of this. Yeah, I understand the trial makes it easier to steal, blah blah blah. But making even functionally-limited trial version would allow me to see if it works for my system before I shell out the money.

    --
    -- Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes.
  121. Quality Terrorists by masq · · Score: 1

    From the "Real Dirt" FAQ:

    > What we will make work: We will make Konqueror and Mozilla work as well as Netscape.

    Ohhhh shit. Terrorists.

  122. Conflict of interest stupidity by flatrock · · Score: 2

    Actually, you're right, I don't like it. Gates tends to donate to causes like third world vaccines [salon.com] while he holds stock in biotech companies [businessweek.com]. Sounds like a conflict of interest there.

    This rant is not intended to be polite political correct critisism. If you are offended by it, then good. If you're offended by it, then I'm probably offended by you.

    This is one of the stupidest things I've seen on slashdot for a while, and it has some good competition. It's so horrible that Mr Gates invests money in boitech companies. The article says he's actually interested in seeing that the drugs work, and that they do what they are designed to do. He donates millions of dollars to vaccinate children in third world countries. There is no possible way he is actually making a profit from that just because he owns significant amounts of stock in biotech companies. However, there is a chance that it shows he really does care, and he's investing in helping create new medicines to make people's life's better.
    Bill gates owns stock in a lot of companies. Someone always seems to want to whine that anything he does to help people is in some way a conflict of interest. He donates a significan portion of his income to charities to help people, especially those in dire need. He does a lot of good through those charities, and complaining about him donating money to vaccinate children so they don't die at a very young age, is beyond stupid. It's childish, craven, and pathetic. People's lives are at stake and you want to complain that possibly one or two percent of the money he donates may somehow find it's way back to him through profits of a company he owns stock in. You truely disgust me.

    1. Re:Conflict of interest stupidity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is one of the stupidest things I've seen on slashdot for a while, and it has some good competition.

      Ditto. Amazing, isn't it? If Bill Gates cured cancer, this guy (and others) would say he did it so that he could live longer so that he could torture and kill more kittens.

  123. Re:Yeah, as long as you don't need QT 3 support... by Myrv · · Score: 1

    Releasing the decoder for Windows has absolutely no money in it either (you can download the viewer for free). The money is in selling the encoder for which having the widest level of acceptance in the community is a must. Thus it would only make sense to port a viewer to Linux so you can say your viewer is available on the highest number of possible platforms. Why they haven't done this is still a mystery.

  124. MOD THIS UP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah baby.

  125. MOD THIS UP! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Closed video codecs = waste of time.

    I agree. Same with closed source software and closed hardware. CLOSED IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL! Open up your source so I can be a cheap bastard and not pay for it! Yay!!

  126. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm, thats weird. My grandma doesn't frick but she uses windows. Go figure!

  127. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by spitzak · · Score: 2
    You got to be kidding, or you are not too familiar with X.

    X does not do color cursors. The call to set the cursor takes two bitmaps, giving you 3 colors at most (plus transparent). Most X servers use only 2 colors and make the third color be "xor" (perhaps this is required). Nobody has bothered to modify the call to take an X Pixmap, because they are all paranoid about back compatability.

    Similarily, yea there is this marvelous XRender "extension" to do anti-aliased fonts, but use of it requires a huge library on the client end, completely defeating one of the main purposes of X! Why didn't they just replace the existing X font rendering? People always tell me "well, that's technically impossible, you don't know shit about X", but I know for a fact that the MicroSoft that we all love to deride successfully replaced *their* non-antialiased interface with an anti-aliased one and it didn't break any programs and all programs, including old ones, suddenly got anti-aliased text! I think it is pretty disgusting that the X designers cannot do this. Of course it is due to the absrudly complex internals of X and the horrid complex toolkits that are atop it that make them completely unwilling to change the slightest thing about how the calls work for fear they will break something.

    And all that 3-D stuff is added on. I have to create different "contexts" for OpenGL than for X, I have to use totally different calls to set the color I want to draw in, and I can't share the fonts (especially I can't share the new XRender fonts). This is just stupid and has absolutely nothing to do with intelligent design. (Of course MicroSoft's 3D has the same problem so we aren't inferior to them there, but still...)

  128. And a step to the riii-iii-i-i-i-ight... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Netscapes' interface has become a defacto standard in so far as many browsers (including IE) support it and it doesn't require a platform specific architecture to implement.

    So the "defacto standard" of just 1 or 2 out of 10 net surfers trumps the "defacto standard" of the rest of them? Please. I'm sure you'd LIKE that, only because it's something that goes against MS, but out here in the REAL world, that's unworkable. Where do we draw the line for your cross-platform (NON standard compliant) bliss? What about Vic20s? Oh, clearly ridiculous, right? Where do you draw the line? It's quite arbitrary. Why shouldn't we just remove all multimedia and images altogether to make everything "compliant" with Mosaic? Why, we can't leave THEM out, they're cross-platform.

    Why not just say "I hate Microsoft and everything they have done and will ever do" and just be honest about it?

    Cross-platform is good. Netscape plugins still work on everything else. But the plugins themselves are (generally) hardly available for anything beyond Windows and Mac, and there are no signs that this is changing (hence this program to circumvent this gap). Why aren't you complaining that the lazy developers at Mozilla/Netscape, Opera, etc. are not adapting to the REAL defacto standard of ActiveX? Notice how NOBODY besides Apple/Anti-MS zealots complained, except some guy elsewhere on this thread about some viewers he has from 3-4 years ago that are unmaintained? Apple already solved this almost before anyone heard the story and have not only an ActiveX compliant plugin (after years of dragging their feet here) for IE, that still works in all the other browsers using EMBED, and they have already distributed work-arounds to their developer's list over a week ago. So MS didn't break anything for anyone, at least stuff that has been maintained in the last 4 years or so.

    Now is the time on Sprokets where you dance.

  129. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by spitzak · · Score: 2
    Re: But neither is as easy as "click setup.exe and look for your new program in the start menu".

    What the f**k is this? Since when is "install" user friendly? People have been so biased by Windoze crap that they call crap that is only slightly better than Linux "user freindly".

    In reality the average user has no idea that you "install" anything.

    How about this for user freindly:

    The user clicks on the program and it RUNS!!! It does not "install" or any such crap. It RUNS, like programs did THIRTY F**KING YEARS AGO!

    Then the user can try out the program. If they don't like it, they quit, and they throw the icon they clicked on in the trash, and it is GONE with no cleanup necessary!

    Yea, of course "installation" is necessary. How about if the programs, if they need installation, would pop up a warning "Until you decide to install me, I can't do this wizzy network thing, so I will show you a simulation of what I do". The user can still experiement with it.

    When the user quits the program it pops up a box that says "Would you like to make this program available to all users of your system?" (or if it needs root stuff to function, "Would you like to make this program able to do it's stuff for all users". It would then pop up a box that says "Please type the root password for your machine" (possibly with a button that says "this is what I am going to do" that shows advanced users the exact script it is going to run as root). The user does this and the program is then "installed", and the icon they clicked is removed (because a new icon appears on the startup menu or whatever).

    When the user tires of a program they installed, they can pick "uninstall" from the program. It says "please type the root password" (and the "this is what I'm going to do" button) and then the program is removed and it exits. It may also offer "Do you want to save me so I can be used again" and if you say yes it asks for a location and an icon identical to the original one is created there.

    I'm really don't understand, though, where people who otherwise appear intelligent, will go and say "Linux needs easier installation". What we need is *NO* "installation".

  130. Garbage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh? Do tell. Who is your friend?

    I know all the new guys on the Streaming team and none of them would have said that. Heck, they wouldn't even have said it if it WERE true.

    -Fred

  131. Linux Invades Niches by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


    You'd have a point if video editing and 3D rendering were in the same niche and Apple had much of a share in 3D rendering.


    Fair enough. There is quite a leap from one application to another. And Linux has yet to make that jump.


    But the point I'm trying to make is - why discount Linux as unable to MAKE that jump? Linux made inroads in professional movie production handling server farm hardware. Now its showing up running workstation hardware (and not just for 3D rendering - I can't find the article, but I remember reading a studio had developed inhouse applications for storyboarding and inking animation frames). Movie studio professionals are being exposed to, and becoming comfortable, with Linux. Why wouldn't these same professionals start looking at Linux as a solution for video editing?


    If I had aimed my hopes on a niche market, and watched other's niche markets slowly invaded by Linux (ie: SGI), I might be a bit wary of it myself. Especially if neither my software NOR hardware really was included as Linux's selling point.


    In short - I could understand Apple being wary of Linux... if, in fact, that's what is actually happening.

  132. Tapping out the same old tune... by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


    Why aren't you complaining that the lazy developers at Mozilla/Netscape, Opera, etc. are not adapting to the REAL defacto standard of ActiveX?


    That's the problem right there - just how is ActiveX ANY kind of standard (defacto or not)? The closest thing to a standard ActiveX manages is Microsoft's standard. Nobody else's.


    Where do you draw the line? It's quite arbitrary. Why shouldn't we just remove all multimedia and images altogether to make everything "compliant" with Mosaic? Why, we can't leave THEM out, they're cross-platform.

    Of course - the img tag IS a standard. Whether Mosaic has implemented it is not the issue.


    But for all your posturing, you've stumbled on one valid point. When do we not get upset about non-standard extensions? It doesn't happen. Netscape pushed forward the development of HTML standards by creating their own extensions while pushing standards bodies to adopt them (or adopting extensions before they became standards - can't remember the exact timing off-hand). Netscape had its detractors (for valid reasons, IMHO, although I'm not critical). The difference is - these non-standard extensions were easy to adopt, were not platform specific, and were presented by Netscape to become standards to the appropriate bodies.


    ActiveX follows none of this.


    Once again - Microsoft is NOT following a standard. They are NOT being criticised for following a standard. They are being criticised for forcing development towards a solution that exists nowhere else but on their own platform.

    1. Re:Tapping out the same old tune... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the problem right there - just how is ActiveX ANY kind of standard (defacto or not)?

      Because it's available to over 90% of the people brosing the net out there? That's an overwhelming majority. That is as defacto as practically anything gets. Sorry, when Netscape shrunk to the teens of market share (90% = MS OSes, MSIE is somewhere just over 80%) they don't get to set standards any more. Well, actually they can, it just becomes difficult to get anyone to follow them. Again, plugins barely exist outside of MS and Mac, it's been that way for years, it showed no signs of changing, so this isn't harming anyone. If anything, this is good, because it allows a unique identifier to each type of format, and you could assign different players based on which CODEC was used even. This is also a good thing, because it even would allow Linux users to interperet the ID tag and see if it's one of the few QT formats that have a codec available to them. Plus it would allow potentially circumventing QT altogether, which is a very, very, very good thing. QT on PC sucks. Big time. Even worse than Real.

      ######

      <OBJECT CLASSID="clsid:02BF25D5-8C17-4B23-BC80-D3488ABDDC6 B"

      width="160" height="144"

      CODEBASE="http://www.apple.com/qtactivex/qtplugi n. cab">

      <param name="src" value="sample.mov">

      <param name="autoplay" value="true">

      <param name="controller" value="false">

      <embed src="sample.mov" width="160" height="144" autoplay="true"

      CONTROLLER="false"

      PLUGINSPAGE="http://www.apple.com/quicktime/down lo ad/"></EMBED>

      </OBJECT>

      ######

      Is this really such a horrible thing? This really only effects QT, they're the only Windows plugin that hadn't already migrated to Active X. They are also a distant 3rd in multimedia. And they have a workaround.

      And why can you allow leaving Mosaic users out in the cold for not following the standard, yet defend Apple alone (basically) when they weren't following a standard?

  133. Re:What WINE is, and what it isn't by Devil's+Avocado · · Score: 1
    WINE is NOT:
    • "the Windows Emulator"
    • An Emulator

    Wine is a compatability layer that supports the Windows API. There is no emulation going on. For God's sake, the name is a recursive acronym for "WINE Is Not an Emulator." How much more clearly can they make this point??

    -DA

  134. Shouldn't Apple do this? by archnerd · · Score: 1

    Uh, now that MacOS is UNIX, wouldn't it logically follow that Apple, the maintainers of QuickTime, should release a UNIX version themselves?

  135. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by Shadowlore · · Score: 1
    The only thing that will convince Apple to make Quicktime for Linux is a dramatic increase in the amount of desktop end-users running Linux.



    Not true. All it would take is the number of people running Linux desktops to exceed the number number of macs in the same use.



    ou have to know to type "rpm -iv quicktime_plugin.i386.rpm" to install it.

    And you apparently do not care about knowing that you do not have to do that. Point of Fact: There have been, and are, usefull GUI tools for manageing RPMS. "OH, I just have to click on this quicktime checkbox? That's easy!"



    Oh, and 99% of the computer using population can understand a CLI. I would say, that at least 99% of the computing population certainly can, and most of them do, understand the CLI.



    Availability of apps is a means to the end, but there also needs to be a bridge in the meantime. I am sure Codeweavers does not see this as a long term source of revenue. I am sure they long for the day these products are not needed. In the meantime, however, there needs be a crossover, or migration procedure.

    --
    My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
  136. You should read by Shadowlore · · Score: 1

    You should read the article. This is not about flash. It is about using the x-over plugin to run _multiple_ kinds of netscape-style plugins built for Windows on Linux.

    --
    My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
  137. Re:For every action, there is an equal and opposit by jchristopher · · Score: 1
    Not true. All it would take is the number of people running Linux desktops to exceed the number number of macs in the same use.

    Yes, and that would be a dramatic increase. Which is exactly what I said.

  138. stop whining by panic911 · · Score: 1

    Everybody needs to stop whining and flaming these guys. This is a huge accomplishment for the Linux community, and these are the only people who attempted this. Just because these guys need to put food on their tables (ie, charge for this product), doesn't make them evil. If you have a problem with these guys's accomplishments, why doesn't somebody go redo their work, and make it GPLed?

  139. Actually... by patrikr · · Score: 1

    ...Sorenson doesn't have to release source, they just have to give the xanim coder permission to write a closed source implementation, but they're refusing to even do that.

    (See this page.)

    --
    All Glory To The Hypnotoad!