Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Commercial DVD Software Comes to Linux

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the years-too-late dept.

timekillerj writes "Turbolinux launched a new version of it's Linux distribution today. The key feature is the first commercial DVD player, provided by Cyberlink. PowerDVD for Linux supports menu navigation, Dolby Digital sound, subtitles, and more."

19 of 416 comments (clear)

  1. commercial? by fodi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think I'd prefer non-commercial software, please...

    1. Re:commercial? by dollargonzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      both xine and mplayer already play DVDs (althought mplayer doesn't support dvd menus yet). i think the inclusion of powerDVD was to counter the claim by some linux using DeCSS defenders that "well, we don't have a single legal way to play DVDs..."

      --
      BSD is for people who love UNIX. Linux is for those who hate Microsoft.
    2. Re:commercial? by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why not have choice? Personally, I am happy to see this. Now, we will have to improve the non-proprietary to beat it (if that is not already the case).

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    3. Re:commercial? by Jubii · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I think I'd prefer non-commercial software, please...
      At the risk of offending some, I must say that this kind of setiment is one thing that's hurting Linux growth. How can we expect software developers to make software for Linux, when we can't assure them that they'll be able to make any money?? And you may ask.. "why do we need commercial software developers anyway?" Because we want more "Joe Sixpack" types to switch to Linux. If you're average user can't go to the store and buy a program for Linux, they're going to find an OS where they can. And right now, there is pretty much no commercial software market in Linux. I've also heard the chicken and egg problem.... to get brand name apps on Linux you need the users, but to get the users you need the brand name apps. Well here's a start, support the commercial software on Linux... even if you don't like commercial apps, do it because you hate Microsoft, and maybe then commercial developers will see that it's worth their time (and money) to port Brand X to Linux.
      --

      I planned on inserting something witty here but never got around to it.
    4. Re:commercial? by aristotle-dude · · Score: 3, Insightful
      *Whoosh* - the sound of what I said going over your head.

      I happen to be an inhouse developer. Please don't talk down to me. Many open source projects may claim to be meritocracies but there is a lot of ego driven decision making and brown nosing going around.

      I was not talking about Open source projects involving infrastructure such as Apache or mysql but rather application and utility development which I feel should remain in the hands of closed source developers who bother to hire usability experts to make user friendly interfaces and help to de-scope unneeded features which clutter up the interface. Most open source application software is a pain to use and quite uninspired as they try to emulate MS Office to closely.

      Open source has it's place in fighting entrenchment of proprietary infrastructure and closed standards but fighting against Microsoft's competitors on the application front only solidifies the position of MS on the desktop.

      You want to use Gimp or Open Office? Fine but don't discourage closed source developers from writing software for linux.

      PS. I'm quite proud of the fact that I work for a private company that receives no hand outs from other companies.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
  2. Good and bad news by teutonic_leech · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, judging from the first few comments, this is a good thing and a bad thing. A good thing because a commercial company is bothering to support Linux in the first place - forget about the quality of the player (e.g. lack of DeCSS, etc.) but focus on the statement this makes. But it's of course a bad thing as well because this might be the beginning of a trend of having commercial software being stuffed down our throats with each distro. But you know guys - you can't have it both ways: Either Linux remains a 'geek OS' or we'll have to deal with the Macromedia's and RealPlayer's of this world. Always be careful what you wish for ;-)

    1. Re:Good and bad news by Azureflare · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Last time I checked, Flash and realplayer didn't cost any money.... But I know what you mean, it's not free as in speech. (Don't forget the Helix community, they've got a very nice alternative to realplayer going).

      BTW you probably will be able to get linux from major distros that comes without commercial software. Mandrake has a normal version, and also a Powerpack version (and others as well), and the main difference is that the powerpack comes with commercial software, and the normal version doesn't. If you don't want the commercial software, then buy the normal one (or download the free download edition).

      I'm not sure how other distros handle this, because I've never used another distro. Yeah, I know, I'm not an official geek unless I've tried at least 5 distros... But I got mandrake working, ok? I don't have much free time. If it's not broken, don't fix it, right?

      At any rate, I don't think that we will lose the possibility of having a geek OS; we'll just have choices for what type of linux we want.

      That's what's so great about linux, IMO. You can pay more to get an easy to use linux, or pay less if you don't have much money and can figure it out, or like to have the challenge.

  3. Re:What? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    69.00 dollars? No source code?

    Plonk!

  4. Re:eh? by JeffTL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In plain English, that's Samba.

  5. Ask and you shall receive? by goldspider · · Score: 5, Insightful
    A few weeks ago, the head of the (evil, of course) MPAA learned that there was no legal way for Linux users to watch movies on their computers. Now we have one.

    So are Slashdotters going to thank the MPAA for addressing one of the Linux community's concerns? Nope, they're going to piss and moan about what's wrong with this particular piece of software.

    I'd submit that this is a big reason why software companies don't want to embrace the Linux market. No matter how good the software they produce is, Linux users aren't going to be happy unless it's free (speech) and free (beer).

    --
    "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
    1. Re:Ask and you shall receive? by dont_think_twice · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Two things you will never hear a company executive say:

      1. Well, we could make a ton of money if we sold programX for linux, but the people on slashdot will complain, so lets not bother.

      2. Well, there is no way we can make money by selling programX for linux, but the people on slashdot will be happy, so lets go ahead and do it

      Software companies will embrace the market when it is in their financial interests to do so. That is what companies do. No amount of complaining either way by gnu/linux users is going to change that.

      Now, a question: how many people have actually bought DVD software for Windows? I would guess approximately 10. For everyone else, it came bundled with either a computer, or a DVD drive they bought. There fact that there is a commercial DVD player for gnu/linux now is great news for those who want to sell gnu/linux computers. Now they can just bundle the PowerDVD, pay the company that makes it 5 bucks, and not have to worrry about making sure mplayer or xine is properly set up to play DVD's (which can be a pain).

  6. Do I have to buy TurboLinux? by nwbvt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can I just get the DVD software from CyberLink? I can't find a thing on their site on Linux PowerDVD. I don't really want a new OS, though I wouldn't mind having the legal DVD player.

    --
    Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
  7. I bought my DVDs, they weren't free by Morgaine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Linux users aren't going to be happy unless it's free (speech) and free (beer).

    You're making no sense. Linux users don't want everything free, they just don't want to pay twice over.

    I bought my DVDs, with hard-earned cash, and they most definitely weren't free. I'll be blowed if I'm going to pay again, just to be "allowed" to play them on my own computer.

    --
    "The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
  8. This is a Good Thing by m1a1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most people don't buy their DVD software anyways, well, not directly at least. They get it from the OEM when they order a PC or DVD drive.

    Cyberlink is (IMO) trying to position itself as the only choice for legitimate dvd software for those OEMs now offering Linux PCs. If they find this move profitable it could encourage other companies to produce linux software as well.

  9. Way Too Late. by CherniyVolk · · Score: 5, Insightful


    Once upon a time, a gallant InterVideo boasted a proposition to release LinDVD. LinDVD, being a port of their WinDVD software for Linux, during a time when the legalities were clouded and MPAA stomped through the land.

    If there was a time, to justify a commerical DVD player for the OpenSource community, InterVideo dropped the ball years ago. Why buy PowerDVD? Some might take this and use it as an example, right or wrong, to prove a point of how inefficient, slow, backwards and ignorant todays management techniques are. I firmly believe Xine is just as good as any of the highest priced DVD players for Windows/Mac. Why isn't it? It navigates DVD menus, it plays the movies well. For such a software package, that's it everything else will just sit infront of the movie and be annoying, like some child in the back seat asking "are we there yet?" over and over again.

    All the money companies spend. It's a waste, they spend billions trying to keep up with social trends, billions trying to predict market progress, all down the toilet.

  10. Re:Commercial Linux Software by sloanster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you really think it's such a bad thing to have to pay for a commercial dvd player.

    No, you're totally missing the point here. All the linux users I know can and do pay, gladly, for good stuff. What we aren't eager to is to pay for a closed source program that's not as good as the open source ones we already have...

    I haven't seen this DVD software yet, and I'll reserve judgment about it until I see it in action - but, as I'd have to switch to turbo linux in order to use it, the chances are slim that I'll see it in action any time soon.

  11. Paying for software isn't THAT bad by raistphrk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The wide availability of free open source software has spoiled a lot of us. I mean...when it comes down to it, I don't LIKE to pay for software, because I don't have a lot of money. However, if I see a product that I like, and also works well, I don't mind paying for it.

    Case in point: I use FreeBSD, and I have a SBLive 5.1 sound card, with a SPDIF output. If I were in Windows, Creative's drivers allow me to use the SPDIF output without any trouble. However, FreeBSD's stock pcm driver, while adequate, doesn't support SPDIF output on the 4-STABLE kernel tree. I routinely had to switch between analog and digital output for sound.

    I'd used oss in Linux a while back, so I downloaded the FreeBSD build and gave it a whirl. The trial copy worked great, so I bought a license.

    Granted, I didn't want to spend any money, but it did exactly what I wanted it to do, and some. So I consider that a worthwhile investment.

    I think it's understandable to have reservations about paying money for software owned by Big Evil Corporations(tm), because you don't want to feed the beast. However, when it comes to development on open source and free open source platforms, if the developers aren't getting paid, new features aren't going to be appearing magically. Having software that's free (in terms of beer and speech) may mean that you don't have to pay MONEY for it, but you still should be contributing something.

    For my part, I can't write code for crap. I've made several attempts to learn C, but they generally result in disaster. Since I can't contribute patches back to developers, I don't mind buying boxed copies of the software, or books, to help pay for development.

  12. OS Requirements by phalse+phace · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anyone else notice the OS requirements? Seems like bloated software to me.

    Operating System hardware requirements:

    PC/AT Compatible hardware
    CPU: Pentium III, 1.0Ghz or greater recommended
    Memory: 512MB recommended
    Hard Drive: IDE / SCSI HDD (5GB available space (recommended)
    Video Card: VGA or greater
    Mouse: USB, PS/2 mouse
    Misc: 3.5" floppy drive, CD-ROM drive (IDE ATAPI/SCSI), Ethernet card

    Looks like my old PIII @ 500 Mhz and 512MB RAM might not be able to run this.

  13. Re:What? by nmk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think its a good thing that more commercial software is starting to become availible on Linux. Who cares if it doesn't have source code. I think one of the reasons companies are reluctant to release applications on Linux is that perception that all Linux apps have to be free and have source code included. Linux may be open source, but that doesn't mean all Linux apps have to be. If Linux users actually start paying for software, and stop bitching about source code, you might actually see some major titles being ported.