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)
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.
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
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).
... 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
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..