Slashdot Mirror
XBOX Media Player 2.0
smashr writes "If you can't afford the new Windows XP Media Center edition, why not grab yourself a modded XBOX, and check out the XBOX Media Player 2.0. The official site has some screen shots and previews. I am sure Gates will be real upset about this one. Somehow $300 for an x-box setup is cheaper than the $2000 XP boxes."
I am sure Gates will be real upset about this one.
I understand that because this is Slashdot, we all feel a need to assume the worst about Bill. However, this program has been out for over six months, and not a single word has come from Microsoft.
For an article about an earlier release of XBMP, check here.
They are the ones that used some of ffmpeg's and mplayer's code a couple of month ago and refused to open their source code(as required by gpl). They only opened it after two weeks of fighting. If you're curious, the details are on the mplayer homepage(just scroll down a bit).
So I wouldn't support them if I had an Xbox.
Join the elite! Post at score:2! Ghostwheel is online.
I can't speak for sure about before, but I know that at least now XBMP is being written with CXBE, the first legal Xbox development kit.
I was thinking about buying hardware from, you know, non-Microsoft companies, but this idea is much better...
--sdem
Uh, explain to me why this causes a huge fuss on /., but articles about Qcast for the PS2 (which is four months old and cool as shit) never see the light of day? Qcast just added Ogg support as well. Supports everything The xbox MP does, plus xvid. Has supported AC3 for a few months.
This isn't a grouse, just wondering why a Media Center for 30 million+ installed PS2s holds little interest, but an unavailable hack of xbox that does the same thing is big news.
Anyone?
"The pie shall be cut in half and each man shall receive.....death. I'll eat the pie."
There were some GPL violation issues recently with XBox Media Player but they have apparently now been resolved
Still not resolved with the old source code that was violating GPL from ffmpeg and xvid. If you read the mplayer website:
Their reasoning: the Win32 version that is/was available for download at http://xboxmediaplayer.com was an older version which didn't contain ffmpeg or xvid, and has non-GPL license, equipped with a DivX3 decoder which was 20-30% faster (!) than ffmpeg. Well that's what they say. Unfortunately, the source of that version was lost (??!!).
They also insist on us providing an apology. For what? They nuked any topic on their forum which was discussing GPL. The homepage did not contain enough information about licenses - only the success story of porting ffmpeg and xvid..
And the "losing" of the old source.. Either way, let's hope they are more tolerant to (L)GPL licenses now.
They took the code, distributed it violating both GPL and copyright, came up with lame excuses, conveniently "lost" the source code, and now demand an apology? Gimme a break! The only apology they get is "I'm sorry I won't go near your products for quite a while because I don't trust you!"
Folks, there's gotta be a point here where you stop villifying Mr. Gates and realize that Microsoft is a company, not one person.
I doubt Gates got up this morning, checked slashdot and decided that Windows Media Player ported to one of his products is a bad thing.
Microsoft will probably sell a few more XBOX machines because there are people out there that like to tinker, and then they'll scream foul when some new kick butt feature of the XBOX comes out that immediately disables their XBOX or doesn't allow it to work a la live.
I'm always surprised at the number of geeks or opensource types that purchase a Microsoft product just to hack it to make it do something in the linux world. You're supporting Microsoft still whether you like it or not.
Come on, buy a Gamecube. Make it run linux. Or buy the PS2 and their Linux kit and port something to it! Forget Microsoft's XBOX and let it fade away into obscurity like the 3GO, the NEC Turbographx, the NeoGeo and all the other failed (marketing wise) game systems.
As a rock-in-roll Physicist once said, No matter where you go, there you are.
Except for the fact that they probably put a good deal of work into modifying Windows XP for HP and whoever else is going to sell them. With that logic, Gates could care less if PC sales took a huge nosedive because he's not the one selling them.
There is a book by Ira Levin called 'this perfect day', it has a nice little bit in it where rebellious people are given a fake rebellion to reduce the chance of them actually pulling off a real one.
Slashdot is a little like that, imagine if all these people venting their frustration at the big bad MS would take it out on them instead of having this convenient safety valve right here.
MP3 Search Engine
not true.
Look at it this way. The GPL is not *forced* upon you. You do not have to accept it; you don't click through, you don't sign anything, and it's not an EULA.
What it IS is a set of terms under which you can do things other than what standard copyright allows. If you don't accept the GPL, you are bound by standard copyright law; no more, no less.
If I use code available under the GPL in my softeware, the GPL is ONE option I can choose to accept to allow me to distribute/modify the code in my own work. I can also choose to contact the authors and negotiate another license. Or I can choose to NOT use any license, and hope I don't get sued by the copyright holders for copyright violation.
My point is that the GPL is not something you are forced into; it's something you can choose to use in order to avoid legal problems.
If you distribute some work that happens to be available under the GPL without accepting the terms of the GPL, you are guilty of copyright violation; you cannot be forced to release source, though you can be forced to stop distributing, and punitive damages, and releasing source will probably be one legal remedy for you (comply with a license that was offered so you don't get sued)