Slashdot Mirror
Windows Media Player 9
captainclever writes "The Register has an interesting article about the posibilities for WMP Clients for Linux.
Would anyone want to use MS WMP in Linux?" See also a news.com story.
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
Sounds like a double edged sword to me.. On one hand, we get support for all of Microsoft's formats, in a native client. On the other, it furthers Microsoft's reach with thier DRM technologies.
RaGe
We're all just noise on the wires..
If Microsoft's DRM makes more headway, those of us who enjoy media will be begging for them to make a linux client. Of course, that is not exactly likely.
Recursive (adj.): see 'Recursive'
mplayer actually supports more video formats that mediaplayer; I see no reason for me to use anything else. If only mplayer could get a definitive release and become a bit easier to install...
Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
For playing media there are already many solutions for all intersting platforms, and the only reason for using WMP would be for the DRM stuff...which no-one honestly likes.
I think it's a Good Thing regardless of whether people use WMP simply because it demonstrates MSFT's acceptance of a widening world where they are currently looked down on.
I use Intervideo's stuff mostly and only use alternatives eitehr by accidental association or when I'm forced into it.
Personally, I'd avoid anything that restricted my use of media I own. I don't care who produces it.
...it's the fact that these are controlled standards. The internet is a free place, and standards should be as free as possible. MS may be releasing WMP 9 such that we'll see a client on Linux, but that doesn't mean that this is a good thing.
What we'll see is a proliferation of WMP DRM through our systems, as well as Real and QuickTime. What we really need is a single open standard that can be played back on anything without proprietary software. If it's secure, so much the better for the content creators - but I don't see why they can't settle for a simple copyright at the end, like they do for their web pages.
Like car accidents, most hardware problems are due to driver error.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
unless you are using linux on a different platform ...
than x86, why don't you try www.mplayerhq.hu ?
this player has support for every format imaginable.
including MS and QuickTime stuff
and they also like to have Windows-ish desktops, ala GNOME and KDE)
I'd switch to any system that had a truly usable GUI, not a Windows-like one. None is perfect as it stands.
Problem is, Apple patented the whole menu-bar-at-the-top-of-the-screen thing; the Windows taskbar is flawed in that the bottom pixel of the screen doesn't represent the task a pixel above it, so you have to aim your mouse carefully; there are never sufficient keyboard shortcuts in any GUI, and don't even get me started on focusing windows and raising and lowering them!
Yep, NIMBY. Not In My Back Yard. The whole reason I use Linux at all is to get away from The Machine. I don't want M$ branded crap bundled in with the next distro I pick up.
I'm gonna venture a guess here, and I'll probably get modded down to the 10th level of hell for it, but here goes. My guess is that, since M$ knows it can't directly attack Linux and the GPL, it figures it'll go along with it, then tear it apart from within. Get inside the game, then start picking it apart. Since they'll more than likely want the source of their apps closed, we won't really know what's going on with it while it's running.
If the current Media Player is any suggestion, it won't be good. Media Player theives all file associations, making you go back in and change them back to the way you had them before you installed it. And who knows to what extent this DRM crap will get to. Would they go so far as to disable anything they don't find "trustworthy" in the Palladium model? Knocking out XMMS, MPTV, and locating and disabling the open OGG format's plugins?
The real problem lies in the obvious. Noone but M$ knows. And you know what they say, Knowledge is Power. Right now, M$ is holding alot (but not all) of the cards. Honsestly, if this gets any worse, I'm more than willing to move outside of the country I love, just to get away from Micro$oft. Extreme, yes. But I enjoy my personal rights and freedoms too much to have them yanked away by the likes of M$, the RIAA and the MPAA...
Blog Prophyts - Right On, Man
Do a little simple thinking. Wine is GOOD because there are some apps that are indispensible to people that ONLY come in windoze versions (games, tax software, etc). They can avoid the lockin and overbearing control demanded by Gates while still using their software. As for look-alike GUIs...duh. First, there are only so many ways to make a GUI system on present systems. It would be quite hard to come up with a great new way of doing things when this aspect of computing is sooo mature. More importantly, people are used to a certain windowing environment. Radical change from that makes it less likely that people would switch - they don't want to have to learn whole new ways of doing things, they just want to get on and get going on "important" stuff right ASAP.
Tell me, do you honestly think that the Apple interface (which is the ultimate originator for the Windoze copy/interface) is really different than that of windoze? Arethere ANY widely used GUIs that are substantially different than that used by windoze? They are ALL very similar to the extent that with a little futzing, many people could get things going on these "alien" wm/guis. They are not copying windoze, rather they are all (M$ including) following a generally accepted GUI paradigm (ultimately copied from Apple who based theirs on the ideas of Xerox). Come up with a better GUI yourself that doesn't require a massive learning curve and be a hero. Not up to it? Of course you aren't.
In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq as they increasingly merge the two in America.
Never say never.
Especially if hacks such as mplayer finally lead to 100% free solutions because while the proprietary codecs were used instead of unavailable ones, the public has given the developers enough bug reports to advance to a much better solution.
Even RMS himself began on computer using proprietary unices until he could switch to his platform.
Trolling using another account since 2005.
Well, the complaints are usually targetted at specific apps, usually Windows. Microsoft make some truly great software, especially in the games dept (though it's arguable whether this is Microsoft producing them or not). I never cared much for Media Player, but a few of my friends prefer it to Winamp.
Wine is a great thing, critical for desktop success even. There are just way too many apps for Windows that don't have any Linux equivalent. I was talking last night to a guy on IRC who needed CATIA, an engineering app. Needs Windows. Unfortunately, it doesn't work on raw WineHQ (it might have worked had he used CrossOver...), but it is a good example.
(and they also like to have Windows-ish desktops, ala GNOME and KDE)
Well, the GNOME configuration I have isn't all that much like Windows, but it does have similarities. Like I said, Microsoft make some good stuff. There are good ideas in the Windows GUI, which KDE and GNOME rightfully nicked.
Nothing good can come of this. I for one don't want to see a Microsoft product on Linux.
I'd be OK with that if they weren't trying to use it to leverage their own proprietary platforms. If Microsoft started releasing games for linux, I might buy them. I might not of course, you could say you shouldn't by any products from MS ever again because of principle. But, I wouldn't have anything against it. The problem is that they only rarely release something that isn't tied to, or doesn't try and tie the users to their own platforms, usually Windows.
I think you're mistaking "non-standard" with "proprietary."
While "proprietary" should imply "non-standard," it really can't. At the moment, Microsoft is the de-facto standard for desktop operating systems and office productivity software.
I should also point out that POSIX is a set of standards, and FreeBSD's ports system is a standard, and the Linux kernel supports the UNIX98 pty system. PDF is a decent standard, and I don't think TeX should be counted out.
What's this Submit thingy do?
Maybe because it's a nasty, semi-legal hack using MS/Apple binaries.
You forgot to add "that works extremely well". I think it's better than WMP. It's much much much more stable (in my experience, can't speak for everyone) and supports about as many formats (more?).
I will not install proprietary binaries on my computer.
Then no soup for you!
So I assume you're talking about the codecs, anyway. Well guess what, if you don't like the fact that mplayer uses binary non-opensource codecs, then write your own. mplayer itself is opensource and they don't need to re-write every fucking codec themselves. Why don't you volunteer your support?
And if your'e not talking about the codecs, then check this (from the mplayer website): MPlayer is GPL now. In the past it contained non-GPL code from the OpenDivX project, which did not allow binary redistribution. This has been removed.
Anyway, I hope you're not thinking that MS would release WMP opensource, cause... umm...
"Question with boldness even the existence of a god." - Thomas Jefferson
Let's see here: Redmond giant creates a native client for their media formats to run on a competing operating system. If they release a Linux client, Microsoft will be acknowledging the sizable (and growing) user base of Linux and would show by their actions that ignoring the Linux crowd would be harmful to their business. That would be the story, not that Linux users can get WMP9 audio/video (which, BTW, is already possible).
It's weird and kind of funny...
.ASF/.WMV/QT streaming support ?
People "wonder" why they would want to use a Microsoft-made video player and claim that MPlayer and Xine are the best thing since sliced bread. The truth is, they are not. They are just slowly becoming "OK" in my book, but nothing exceptional.
Where are the good GUIs for the video players (yes, GUIs, not skins) ?
Where is search-that-does-not-suck support for Real Media ?
Where is high quality Real Media playback ?
Where is high quality Quicktime playback ?
Where is
The list can go on and on...
And no, don't give me the standard "but they use evil proprietary codecs we have to re-engineer" crap, because Joe Average is not going to care. Joe Average wants stuff that "just works". And MPlayer and Xine, while making good progress, still don't.
> I would question this. I recently put a Win98
:-)
> user in front of my FreeBSD box, with KDE and
> Mozilla set up for them. They had no problems
> whatsoever.
I've had a bunch of different people run my Mandrake 9.0 KDE machine with no real problems....
And I'm in the process of building for a generally techinally deficient user. I'm sure that he will operate it with no problems...
My son is autistic and he teaches me a few things... "hey kid, how did you do that?"
I think the the biggest thing to notice, is that for the longest time M$ said that they would never have (or need) anything to do with Linux.
A recenthly as a few weeks ago when a group suggested that by 2004 M$ would come out with Linux support, they denied it...
Now a possibility of a small leak in the dam....
MarkP
Would anyone want to use MS WMP in Linux?
I certainly would not.
Years ago, I knew people who wanted very badly for Microsoft to release an IE for Linux, because at the time we had no decent browsers. At the time, even I considered IE to be superior.
But, on my Linux boxes, I gave it time, and sure enough we have several better-than-IE browsers (Mozilla, Konqueror, Opera, etc).
The same can be said about MS Office. We now have a few alternatives (though I *hate* that Open/StarOffice tries to mimic MS Office down to the last detail...)
Likewise, MPlayer for Linux is coming along quite nicely. Unlike WMP on my Windows box, MPlayer consistantly plays 98% of the video files I run across, where WMP likes to suddenly stop working for various reasons, or start refusing to play certain types of files (currently Divx 4 won't play, and MP3 audio is severely clipped).
Plus, I don't consider WMP to be a one-stop end-all solution even on Windows. For QuickTime I have to use Apple's player. Many Divx files need to be played in a Divx-specific application (I know WMP is *supposed* to work with various CODECS but in practice it gives meaningless error messages).
MPlayer on Linux, OTOH, is pretty good about playing the majority of file formats I wind up with. This is why my "media box" runs Linux/MPlayer (with no X; just using the vesa output gives nice results). At the moment, QuickTime with "compressed headers" won't play. All other files I have (300+ video files, various sources) play back nicely.
I personally don't want Microsoft invading my non-MS systems. I use Windows a lot, sure, but the oddities in IE/WMP/Office/etc are part of the reason I use Linux on other systems - the systems where I won't put up with odd, random behavior from software, like my media box.
And I won't even get started on the idea of having DRM on my Linux boxes...
NGWave - Fast Sound Editor for Windows
... and just when everyone and their dog has switched - the cock will probably not crow today until you have all denied three times to ever start using WMP - then Microsoft will suddenly dump WMP support for Linux - or even better, WMP will cost money, as "the free days are over and Linux users should know that software costs money". Embrace and extend this is called. Been there, done that.
my other sig is a 500 page novel
... are we that desperate for "world domination" that we want WMP ported to linux? If you care so much about Microsoft applications, why bother switching to linux in the first place? At least for me, the whole point behind using linux is the freedom that comes with the GPL/BSD licenses and that warm, friendly atmosphere between developers and users in the mailing lists. From that viewpoint, whatever Microsoft-related is just irrelevant.
Since the software would not be semi-embedded in the OS (like Windows), you still have choice.
Unlike Windows with its closed APIs, the Linux solution would not have strings attached to it.
Still, I think it is a good thing.
I have nothing to gain from them monitoring me, and they didn't even bother to ask for my permission, so as far as I am concerning there is no justification for it. Kind of puts thing in a different perspective now, doesn't it, Anonymous Coward?
Another way to look at it is imagine someone walking into your house and just sitting next to our computer and writing down everything you watch on your media player program. Still don't see my point? Reread the first paragraph and think about it.
On the same side of the coin, I don't see a reason to switch to a invasive media player application when there are non-invasive open source solutions that do MORE that Microsoft's application already out available. No, M$ can keep their crappy spyware on their own OS, IMHO.
I can't afford a sig!
We've got MPlayer, after all.
Besides, when I installed WiMP 9, it broke some of my codecs, so I can't play some DVD-compliant MPG files I was arranging for an upcoming DVD burn. Since I can't even uninstall WiMP 9, I find that very tacky, indeed, because now I need to reinstall the OS on that machine.
(but wait! I can't, yet!)
Get off my launchpad!
is not whether you will use WM9, but whether or not the content providers use will it? And that answer, unfortunately, is yes, the content providers will be swayed by the monopoly and use the largest installed base media player. In fact, they already are.
Just to see where these things were going, last weekend I watched a few movies from movielink and cinema(something) and they had a 'few' requirements:
1. Windows
2. Either Real or WM
Regardless if we choose to use either of those, the content providers definitely will not, so we'll all be relegated to watching Quicktime trailers and definitely not DRM stuff, which both Movielink and the Cinema(something) site had.
Personally, I'd much rather log onto a site and watch a movie that way instead of going to the video store. And either of the sites will let you download the movie and watch it. I think they both last for 24hrs.
One thing about the 'service' tho that I thought sucked was that I paid $10 for a month of 'premium' access, but all the new movies were 'pay-per-view' which has an additional $3.95. That was pretty inconvenient. Actually kinda pissed me off. In that case, I'm better off going to the video store and freeing up my bandwidth.
Anyway, back to the players; remember they're just the client and are the keys to the really bigger things: the content on the back end. Unfortunately, 95% of the computing world runs Windoze and their path of least resistance, monopoly pushed apps. These are always gonna be the people that the content providers will cater to. So I don't know what there is to do about that since it won't matter to the providers one bit if the Linux folks can't watch their movies.
Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing the Real Helix stuff or even Quicktime pick up some steam. Apple has stated that they think that DRM as it exists for content now is not the way to go. So maybe they can use our support too.
One other note, the only way I see the content providers backing away from WM9 is if it is found as insecure as IE. This could persuade them to go for something else. But then again, once you have a big catalog of digital flix that you have to re-encode for another platform, that decision to just ship, even in the wake of security concerns, seems highly unlikely. Or maybe not..
DRM or not, any application has to talk to the hardware at some level. Unless microsoft ship binary only sound/video drivers that can't be hacked to write video/audio data out through network or unix domain sockets, or /proc devices, then anyone can access protected content digitally, before it gets to the output device.
We already know that the SB Audigy turns off it's digital outputs when playing DRM-enabled content under windows. I doubt very much that open source drivers would bother to implement such a feature.
If Microsoft do ship binary only sound/video drivers, they won't work for long, as the kernel interfaces will probably change, again. Besides, there are just too many cards out there. By careful manipulation of the VM subsystem, all driver I/O can be redirected in interesting ways anyway.
Question is then, does this make the linux kernel a 'circumvention device' in the context of the DMCA? Perhaps this is the goal?
Notice how everyone "copied" from Apple but Apple "based their ideas on" Xerox.
Well, the last news I saw said that Linux on the desktop was growing.
It should be for the content providers to reach their audience, not for the consumers to 'fit into' whatever niche the content providers want.
If Linux gets say 5% of the desktop then that's quite a big market, especially if that market is in developing economies.
The content should come to us, we shouldn't come to the content. That's the battle I'm fighting, what's yours.
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
I wouldn't want to use WMP in Linux. The whole point of using Linux in my opinion is to extricate myself from proprietary systems. Anyone who makes media in only WMP format obviously is not sympathetic to that goal. Perhaps I'm too weak to resist it once in a while, and I'll have to boot into Windows to view a trailer or to play a game, but I want to make that explicit. This is a compromise. I'm willing to do it but I'm trying to fix it.