Slashdot Mirror
Windows Media Format Could Hit Linux-Based Devices
An anonymous reader writes "LinuxDevices.com reports that Microsoft has licensed InterVideo Inc. to supply Windows Media Technology to makers of Linux-based consumer devices. Under the agreement, InterVideo is licensed to take the components of the Windows Media Format, port them to Linux, and provide them to manufacturers who are interested in running Windows Media Technology on Linux-based consumer devices such as set-top boxes, personal video recorders, and other hybrid multimedia devices."
so now will the movie theaters run linux?
moo.
I can finally view porn site movies in linux!
Better get a few boxes of tissues handy....
We don't want it. Continue sticking to something that isn't DRM-tastic and doesn't suck, device manufacturers.
Can they even do that?
I think that getting a (hopefully) well made and complete version of Windows Media working on Linux devices could be a good thing, but if it is not open-sourced (and it likely would not be) it will have few benefits on other open OSes. It is all in the implementation.
More software with real-world uses is a good thing, when it is good. More crapware floating around makes the world that much worse.
April 1st was 6 days ago.
Damn, almost fristed.
Pro: Linux gets Windoze proprietary formats.
Con: Probably NOT going to be open-source.
I'm torn.
-uso.
Dreams, dreams, don't doubt dreams, dreaming children's dreaming dreams. Sailor Moon SS
I thought this was already possible?
void*x=(*((void*(*)())&(x=(void*)0xfdeb58)))();
Boy this is puzzling. Is everybody going to be happy that the Windows Media stuff will make it's way to Linux, or will they complain that MS is trying to extend it's monopoly? So far it's for Linux based devices, as opposed to the desktop machines. Ah nice ugly mix.
I, for one, think ya'll should be happy about it. It means:
a.) Linux will probably one day support WM formats. Thus no more bitching that you don't have the right OS to watch the cool vids that fly around here sometimes.
b.) MS recognizes that they just can't get everybody to use CE for embedded stuff. Might as well join the crowd, right?
Either way, Linux users win. Put your pitchforks down.
Most interesting since it was Intervideo that made LinDVD over 3 years ago. To date, only IBM has every shipped it (pre-packaged on some stinkpads). Their site still (3 years later) says it's released to OEMs and developers only. I've emailed them, but they didn't want me as a developer I guess. :) Funny that the first legal DVD player for Linux never made it to the public arena, yet MS could now bring it there...
Windoze media.... I'm sure I've heard of it somewhere...
Don't take life too seriously; it isn't permanent.
If not, it will make it difficult (impossible) for the different distros to include it if it is not GPL'd.
I realize that this is isn's a strict requirement for all Linux software, but it would be nice to have it included as part of the distro. I guess that in the end, it will be nice to not have to boot back over to windows every time I download something from website where the idiot who made it thinks windows is the only OS.
You can rightly accuse Microsoft of many things but being dumb isn't one of them. Due to their lack of headway in the embedded systems market and the extreme popularity of Linux in this same market Microsoft is smart enough not to mortgage the Windows Media farm on the success of their embedded OSes.
The cynical among us might think that by porting Windows Media to Linux and then "enhancing" the Windows versions faster than the Linux version you could lure Linux-committed companies to make an "easy port" to CE. Personally I think it should be watched-for but unlikely as embedded-Windows is decent, companies are abandoning it not for functionality issues, but cost and choice -- things much more important in the embedded space.
Did Microsoft just blink?
boy-o, that's the safest way of:
1. being able to say "Yea, veryly we embrace linux", and
2. not doing it at all.
Wasn't it intervideo that still hasn't delivered a product that they already showed at a cebit ages ago?
wasn't that product their windvd player ported to linux?
bye,
[L]
manufacturers who are interested in running Windows Media Technology on Linux-based consumer devices
Wow.. they must have a huge* target audience with this one...
*Please excuse the incorrect use of the word "huge" in the above sentence. To read correctly, replace "huge" with "non existant"
Work sucked, until it became unemployment, when it became slightly more tolerable. -Tet
For you Linux nuts who are worrying about it not being open-source and therefore not being able to use it in your own distro, just use MPlayer .I use it, and it plays Windows Media files very well. There are plenty of other progs for *nix that can play Windows Media, so this isn't really that special.
Wasn't that the company which never sold LinDVD to end users. Thank god xine now runs circles around every windows DVD player.
I could play my backed up *.wma files under *BSD (if it's ported to linux, it'll eventually make it to BSD. :)
I'll be able to watch my snapstream tv shows on my linux box!
I remember the controversy that Realplayer introduced after it was reported that the player sent back the file paths/links to Real Networks.
:)
Is there the danger that Microsoft might try and do this with the components of the media player?
I guess they want to make sure that their DRM technology is universal.
Performing a hex dump of your multimedia files may become a violation of the RIAA
Could this be an excuse for users on the fence to jump over to Linux? Would microsoft want to promote this? If there are people out there that would like to use Linux, but do not because it does not have "x" and microsoft provides "x" for free, are they not taking paying customers away? Just a thought
Whats your Favorite song or artist? YourFavMusi
I think you missed it. This isn't for Linux. It is for consumer devices that are *based* on Linux. Someone else commented that the market for this is non-existant. They are wrong. The market for this is everyone that has a Windows PC who goes into Best Buy for a stereo system that can play their music files. They don't care one bit whether it is based on Windows CE or Linux because it doesn't matter. They can't play with the OS anyways.
-Brentmore p0rn for linux
I am reminded of an Arab proverb about not letting the camel's nose into the tent, as soon the rest of the camel will follow.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
Are they ethically obligated to set the evil bit on?
I know... It was funny a week ago...
does it run on windows? ;)
As in... performance hit?
there is no tarkin on the horizon. i want to get my tark on.
I know you are psychotic, but please make an effort.
I think it's pretty safe to say that anything involving a currently proprietary technology from MS will not be released as open source. Given the current battle (and one they're losing, according to many) Microsoft is engaged in with OSS, they're in no position to help Linux users out and give more people a reason to ditch their money-making OS.
I don't see how this could possibly hurt Linux or the OSS wordl; this will help Linux. One of the major problems with Linux is it's inability to work 100% properly with some proprietary technologies. This brings us one step closer.
It's simple. If this is not released under an open source licence then it is pointless. MPlayer can already play windows media files, although not licenced by Microsoft.
The point is that Mplayer although supporting multiple architectures only plays windows media files well if at all on Intel machines. For those of us running PC's this is fine, but those running PPC or SPARC machines will have a few more troubles with the win32 dll's.
Unless Intervideo plans on supporting all of these architectures or simply not even allowing this to be used in the desktop arena, and only in the handheld/embedded, then they need to make it some form of open source.
Hey even shared source (don't kill me) would be better than nothing for alternate architectures, as long as it supports them.
This is just sig!
Don't get me wrong I really hope they can't. You have to ask though where are they going get all the support code that isn't GPL. Theyre going to need lots of libraries to make their products actually display.
If they use GPL'd libraries the whole project will be open source. Even if they don't use GPL libraries they will have to provide the source code for everything they do.
It would be nice to have a usefull tech like windows media freed from those that would use it for coercive purposes. I somehow doubt with Intel rolling out the first Palladium hardwware that will happen though.
Hm...the only thing I can really think of, is to allow Linux users to view underpriveleged video content that hasn't realized windows media sucks.
-------
"In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."
-- George Orwell
Won't work quite right, people complain, MS says "Thats open source for you."
Linux Fans say "Its not linux, its the app"
Company says" You're right, but what choice do we have? our contract says to use the windows format, so will have to switch are machines to windows"
Bada-boom, bada bing.
Sure, you think I paranoid, or some conspiracy fanatic, but I am not. This is how MS has moved into most of its dominate fields.
in short:
1.extend
2.embrace
3.profit
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"It's evil! Don't touch it!"
With apologies to those responsible for Time Bandits
Why should we trust Microsoft to do anything for us at this point? They've already stated that their goal is to eradicate Linux, and they've already started lobbying against the entire idea of the GPL. They'd make this kind of thing illegal in a heartbeat, if they could.
What we really need is someone on the inside, someone to release the specs for how their version is to be implemented, without releasing the exact implementation. This way, we can build workalikes and not have to deal with Microsoft directly.
IBM had PL/1, with syntax worse than JOSS,
And everywhere the language went, it was a total loss...
The only really good thing I can see coming from this might be apple reliquishing and allowing someone to port the quicktime libraries to linux. While the windows codecs play great on linux, the hacked up quicktime dll's are pretty hit or miss.
I do security
I think TiVo has the right idea with thier technology as far as MPEG encoding goes. I cannot see this as a real "break-through" for PVRs and the like especially considering the predicted performance and "stableness" of windows media running on linux. Granted, I'm sure this will be a neat thing to play with for the home user!
-Rob
There is one, and only one reason that there is a market for Windows Media Formats... They are based on MPEG-4, but Microsoft charges about half the licensing fees for it's use.
Even someone who has incredible disdain for Microsoft (like myself) would strongly consider using WMV rather than MPEG4 for license reasons alone.
Of course, it is possible to play Windows Media on Unix systems right now, but you don't get the great microsoft feature of DRM. No doubt Microsoft's player will have it. If I owned a theatre, I would NOT use the new digital projects because of the DRM. At least a reel doesn't explode after your 1-month subscription is over, or you have your computer's clock set incorrectly.
So why are they getting into the market now, after all this time? I'd bet it is almost completely due to On2's free licensing of VP3. Xiph.org's Theora is due for beta in a couple months, and from what I've seen of videos encoded using the VP3 plugin, it beats out MPEG4 in quality versus filesize, and to top it all off, it doesn't show signs of any of MPEG(1/2/4)'s artifacts, which really stand out, to my eyes. So, not only will there be completely free (BSD-licensed, patent-free) audio and video codecs, but they (ogg, vp3/theora) are far better than the dominant video and audio codecs available right now.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Mod parent up!! (So we can laugh!)
"Derp de derp."
and your argument, whilst inherently flawed, is why Steve Ballmer is justified in questioning GPL's virus-like licensing...
I understand supporting media types, but we know this is bad for open source. You have a licensed product, for which there is no control of the source or algorithms. Use in Linux based devices will serve to help make Microsoft's proprietary formats more ubiquitous. Eventually, when MS see that enough people are using their format, they will simply revoke the licenses they granted and/or sue whoever they did business with. This isn't fantasy -- it's historic. No open product should use anything from Microsoft. They are not to be trusted, ask any of the hundreds of businesses burned by them.
Why bother.
Finally, Linux gets a quality media platform. Media 9 Series blows EVERYTHING else out of the water:
s p
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/wm9series.a
Putting all of the upfront analysis aside for a second, what could Microsoft be up to here? Hmmm... what does Microsoft want? I think everybody can agree that it isn't to give linux a hand, right? They're always trying to dominate some market, so it's a safe bet without even reading into it that they're probably thinking a few moves ahead with that end in mind.
So then, reading into it, it looks to me like Microsoft is licensing some proprietary technology out to a market they can't compete well in. So whether you're running Microsoft embedded or linux embedded, you're still using Microsoft's format, right? And a few years from now, everybody's using Microsoft's proprietary format in their various devices. Microsoft would have the keys to the kingdom at that point.
It's really hard to ignore Microsoft's history when I look at stuff like this. They want to be in this market, and they see that linux has legs in this market. It's silly to think that they're knuckling under or doing this out of charity, or even doing it just for the licensing profits. They've never done business like that. They want the whole enchilada.
TiVo is a linux box that might reasonably be interested in doing so. There are a reasonable number of users of Linux in the embedded area that would might have reasons to be interested in this and aren't particularly philosophically anti-microsoft.
From the writeup, it's not at all clear that they COULD release it for the desktop even if they wanted to. Quite likely the microsoft agreement is specific to consumer devices. Note that these people aren't going to be AS worried about open-source(though they may demand that they can BUY use of the source and some guarantee of continued availability). They WILL however be worried about the legality of licensing, which I'm guess is probably rather iffy at best with MPlayer...
I don't like it.
This will NOT lead us to the Golden Path.
"I might have made a tactical error in not going to a physician for 20 years." -- Warren Zevon
Argument No
// in the voice of yoda
Question Yes
What you provide answer is not
Prepare yourself for five hundred posts linking to MPlayer in this thread.
--Drunk as in Beer
of course xine and all media players based on this nice multimedia engine (totem, gxine, kde's arts,...) play back windows media as well, mms/mmsh/http streaming included.
btw the technology behind this comes from ffmpeg and avifile/wine.
time is a funny concept
Sure you can: Microsoft is dumb!
Was that so hard...?
-Trillian
Gandhi
Yet Socrates himself is particularly missed.
A lovely little thinker but a bugger when he's pissed.
Surely, if enough people asked them, they'd see the demand?
You can ask InterVideo's customer support and see what they say...
The big question is "Why would M$ do anything to support Linux?" The answer is that it allows them to sell wmf as a cross platform format. This is probably a hurdle that they need to overcome to con the content world (or legislators) into embracing their evil plan. Don't worry they can alway screw the Linux community over in the future when their goals have been met.
They have stagnated their WinDVD product for months on end. Look! It's got SKINS now! Woo! How about adding some of those features end-users are begging for? Not useless crap like skins. I don't watch the damn player gui while I'm playing a 2 hour movie full screen!!
Well, they tried hitting MS-based devices but they always broke.
getting that shit to work with mozilla will be a pain in the ass. I still can't get realplayer to work at all. pice of shit
will the API's be public? (ie will WMP for Linux need something like DirectX?)
Noooo... Never buy PicMicro chips... They are horrible and information in their add's are false.
I really enjoy reading a fellow troller's past history. I'm gonna miss that.
There are open-source codecs that will give even better quality output on your devices!
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
What is this joke about? I've seen this before, can someone explain please?
Remind me never to buy any of these products.
manufacturers who are interested in running Windows Media Technology on Linux-based consumer devices such as set-top boxes, personal video recorders, and other hybrid multimedia devices.
That strikes me as kind of stupid... I mean 'manufacturers who wanted to run WMT on a linux consumer device' would need 'consumers who want to use WMT on a linux consumer device'... Who in his right mind would want content locked into WMT?!?! Who in his right mind would nowadays even want to do business with Microsoft for that matter now that we have vorbis and other codecs that really rock instead of the costly but inferior crap Microsoft tries to peddle... b
No proprietary formats. Some day, the big-wigs in the entertainment industry will wake up and realize they're paying tribute to a company that isn't doing anything for them, but who is doing a lot to them.
I would urge developers and systems builders and all people to avoide the Windows Media format like the plague. M$ are only licencing it to Linux developers to gain market penetration. When they get enough penetration, it will be every man for themselves. The licences will not be renewed, and we will have mandatory DRM following shortly after.
We need to promote open standards and boycott Windows Media format.
WHO NEEDS IT?
Not I
They will be using Windows XP Pro and a custom written media player. MS has an whitepaper out.
beware of microsurfs bearing gifts.
why help MS establish anymore "defacto" standards.
defacto standards suck.
we need real, open standards by choice not resignation.
Read the WIRED Nov issue on digital media and music industry. M$ is now pushing for their signature in music and video contents to the big labels. Now this really scares me 'coz it means M$ will be everywhere from game set-top boxes to desktop to your mobiles. Put this into the big picture that M$ is going to make handphones and .NET ...
In M$ case it will not just be a party that signs. Never has a vendor own a position of (content signature)-(content standards)-(OS/device platform)-(Network standards).
Why would a content provider choose to use Microsoft's implementation of MPEG4, when there are freely available royalty-free open-source implementations?
Scenario: I make a web site, I want to distribute media. Why not use DIVX? Or XVid? Those codecs are as easily available as any others, and I don't have to pay a fee to encode using them. Further, I make a movie I want to show in one of these new "digital" theaters -- same question. Why? OR screw that and use MPEG2. Is the performance difference worth the cost?
Mplayer already does this...whats the big deal? ;)
AAWWWWWWW!!!!!
how sweet of you!!!!
you really shouldnt have, we would have done it any way....
The lunatic is in my head
I didn't hear about hell freezing over?
He who owns the format owns the binaries
He who owns the binaries owns the OS
He who owns the OS owns the hardware
Decide on a format out of your own control, and you will have your computer out of control.
If you recall, Intervideo were also the first ones to launch an authorised (non-deCSS) DVD player for Linux .. although licensing it only allowed its use on Linux Embedded Devices, not everyday machines.
... you just can't have your cake and eat it too (yet).
The same will happen with this Windows Media crap. What does it mean to your average Linux user? Zip. Nada.
What really pisses me off is that the new NEC 3G UMTS phones don't do mp3, only wma. WTF is the point of that? The current competition, a motorola phone, does MP3 but doesn't even do video calls (a potential killer app of 3G!)
Once the critical market share is reached, then client support for non-DRM/Palladium encumbered platforms can then be dropped.
A further indication is that Office 2003 won't be available for systems prior to Windows 2000 SP3 and Windows XP, plus the failure to join all other industry members and participate in creating open formats for productivity software. Any doubts that DRM+Subscription is not the near term goal can be put to rest by comparing the EULAs for those with earlier EULAs. Or see the sudden departure from the Web services group.
Perhaps we should also extend our attention to Microsoft's other desperate lobbying efforts. Or even to their financial crisis.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
...that Linux embedded devices providing WMA uses Wine and WineX (for DirectSound output emulation), and also a vmWare system.
Woot!!
Do a Google search on ZapMedia and Linux and you will see that there are already Linux boxes shipping supporting Windows Media. Microsoft even ported their DRM to Linux.
MacOSX is not exactly getting killed by Microsoft Office, Internet Explorer and Media Player. It's one reason people can switch without getting locked out of their documents, web sites and recorded TV programs. In fact, there is a healthy competition for each product. I suspect more people use Camino, Safari and Quicktime than the Microsoft counterparts.
/etc/rc.d or .xinitrc) available for both regular and embedded Linux.
I can't see as having another option available is a bad thing for open source, especially Linux itself. Before it's "if I want to watch this video, I need to boot windows". Now its "if I want to watch this video, I can run one Microsoft app under Linux, without having to boot/buy windows. This also got to create some pressure to make official, up-to-date versions of Quicktime and RealOne (hopefully without sneaky changes to
Window Media is so closed, patented and user inconvenient as a medie format can be. The only advantage it has is a rather small file size (With too often crap quality).
This format should be killed and replaced with one that is Libre, and you don't do that by adding support for it. You do that by ignoring it, and instead encourage something like DivX/Xvid/mpeg untill something more free comes along.
How much would you bet that you will be able to watch a movie compressed with the beta version of VP3 in 10 years? That is, without spending weeks programming? Compared, to let's say a VCD? For me, this makes it a better format to record my TV episode, artifacts and all. Because I don't want to worry about which OS my next PC, or my friend's PC is going to run.
.class files that use regular Java APIs to render the movie. Then it's possible to make a software or hardware player that is compatible with many standards, including future ones.
Of course, the reason is that so many people already have VCD movies that someone will come up with a way to watch them in future. Obviously open source is better than a single company that might just go belly up or drop the product without releasing the data format. But let's say only a few people start using VP3 before Xiph developers discover the "next big thing" and stop maintaining the old format. Are you really up to taking over?
Now look at it this way. Media files are getting bigger and bigger and VMs are getting faster and faster. Why not just put the decoder into every file? Say, each video starts with
Ok, maybe it's not practical for high-resolution video yet. But definitely, this aproach can be used today for high-end, AC-powered audio players. Or for streaming video - I bet you can use Java for anything you get over a 56K modem. Finally, high-resolution video can be archived using this approach. Today, you will still native code to play it, or you will be able to uncompress it overnight first and re-compress to your platform's native format. Then in a couple of years real-time decompression using the same Java code will be possible.
Don't forget that MS Media player connects to MS to download codecs.
If MS don't want you to have the codec then you don't get the codec! (Well easily anyway - which is 99% of users in trouble)
________________________
Scenario: I make a web site, I want to distribute media. Why not use DIVX? Or XVid? Those codecs are as easily available as any others, and I don't have to pay a fee to encode using them.
And unless you pay the MPEG4 patent licencing fees, you get sued by the following companies for violating the following patents:
Canon, Inc.
US 4,982,270
Curitel Communications, Inc.
US 6,215,905 - KR 303,685 - KR 211,917
France Télécom, société anonyme
US 4,796,087 - FR 2,599,577 - DE 3767919 - GB 248,711 - IT 248,711 - SE 248,711 - US 4,933,762
Fujitsu Limited
US 5,235,618
GE Technology Development, Inc.
US 4,706,260 - US 4,813,056 - DE 3855203 - FR 395,709 - GB 395,709
General Instrument Corporation
US 5,068,724
Hitachi, Ltd.
JP 2,998,741 - JP 3,092,610 - US 6,295,376
KDDI Corporation
JP 1,835,550
Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.
US 4,901,075
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.
US Re. 35,910 - US 5,223,949 - US 5,937,095 - US 6,148,109 - JP 3,118,237 - JP 3,149,417 - JP 3,149,418 - JP 3,157,144 - JP 3,135,061 - JP 3,135,062 - JP 3,186,775 - JP 3,197,264
Microsoft Corporation
US 5,748,789
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
US 5,072,295 - US 6,097,759 - US 6,301,301 - JP 1,869,940
Oki Electric Industry Co.
JP 2,898,212
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
US 5,654,706 - US 6,002,812 - KR 252,010 - US 6,016,111 - KR 132,895
SANYO Electric Co., Ltd.
JP 2,812,446
Sharp Kabushiki Kaisha
US 5,815,601 - US 5,963,257 - US 5,978,515 - US 6,023,299
Sony Corporation
US Re. 37,222 - DE 69031107 - FR 424,026 - GB 424,026 - JP 2,712,645 - US 5,191,436 - DE 69127224 - FR 456,433 - GB 456,433 - JP 2,874,745 - JP 2,877,225 - JP 2,969,782 - KR 221,889 - US 5,298,991 - DE 69229153 - FR 527,011 - GB 527,011 - US 5,428,396 - US 5,481,553 - AT 185663 - BE 638,218 - CH/LI 638,218 - DE 69421135 - DK 638,218 - ES 2,137,358 - FR 638,218 - GB 638,218 - GR 3,032,133 - IE 638,218 - IT 638,218 - LU 638,218 - MC 638,218 - NL 638,218 - PT 638,218 - SE 638,218
Telenor Communication II AS
US 5,579,413
Toshiba Corporation
US 5,852,469 - US 5,930,395 - US 6,025,881 - US 6,052,150
Victor Company of Japan, Ltd.
US Re. 34,965 - JP 2,072,546 - US Re. 35,158 - JP 2,137,325
In case you didn't feel that 2x4" cluestick, the copyright may be free (Xvid is "educational only", don't think the DivX licence lets you do commercial encoding) but the patents aren't. The only reason they wouldn't be going after you is because you don't have enough money to be worth suing.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Comment removed based on user account deletion
On rechecking my sources, I discovered my original My post is wrong. I was confusing several DVD/ video software companies -- there's more than one nowadays. My bad. Please disregard any brand names or company names in my post.
Does anybody else remember the "good ole days" when people could actually talk about technology and one didn't have to rely on guesswork and hearsay? I hate the way NDAs are killing Silicon Valley. At least part of my post was correct: NDAs are a bad thing. God Bless Open Source.
"one treats others with courtesy not because they are gentlemen or gentlewomen, but because you are" --G. Henrichs