Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Ends Windows Media Player on the Mac

alphasubzero949 writes "According to News.com, Microsoft has had no plans to update or improve Windows Media Player and has instead thrown its weight behind a third party plugin to fill the void. Adam Anderson, Microsoft public relations manager, told News.com, 'It's basically a business decision for Microsoft. Like any other company, we have business priorities. Our focus really is in delivering the best experience to Windows customers.'"

28 of 470 comments (clear)

  1. Oh dear! by nano2nd · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've had a mac for two years and I didn't know Windows Media Player for mac even existed!

    1. Re:Oh dear! by TTimo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Windows Media player for Mac was a joke anyway. Very buggy, playback would stop/hang randomly. It's been there, and broken for years .. if only the format was open enough for others to implement working codecs.

  2. Symbiotic relationship? by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The whole relationship between Apple and Microsoft has been weird to me. I figure its a symbiotic relationship like a dead tree with a fungus. Why Microsoft was supporting a competitor at all is up for discussion. Seeing as how WMP wasn't really a money maker in the first place, it makes sense that they drop development.

    1. Re:Symbiotic relationship? by anticypher · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Doesn't anyone remember when Apple was doing really badly at the end of 1997, when Steve Jobs came back as "not the CEO, just a consultant"? Apple was doing very poorly because they, like every other OS manufacturer at the time, were locked out of every distribution channel by M$'s aggressive (and later, ruled illegal) control of >95% of the retail market place.

      The MacWorld of 1998 had Jobs introducing Gates on stage, and they announced that M$ would make a US$150 million investment in Apple, buying US$75M of non-voting stock at twice the price (IIRC, AAPL was at $11/share, M$ paid $22/share). The deal also included a patent portfolio swap, where each has unlimited access to the other's patents royalty free. M$ agreed to support a fully functional version of office on the mac for at least 10 years. Apple agreed to drop its support of the anti-trust case. There were a bunch of other details in the deal which made the business rather unsavory, but both companies desperately needed each other at that moment in time.

      Since then, it was obvious who really got the better end of that deal. Apple has unlimited access to every patent M$ owns or licenses from other companies. Apple can out-innovate M$ at every step, and never has to worry about a patent challenge in the courts. Jobs learned his lessons when dealing with Gates, and certainly made sure Apple couldn't be too screwed over by M$ later on. Now, with Apple rising on a whole raft of good, trendy, high-margin products and a completely independant distribution chain, and M$ floundering in a sea of troubles, it looks like Jobs is getting his revenge.

      the AC

      --
      Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
    2. Re:Symbiotic relationship? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 4, Informative

      QuickTime plays avi's just fine.

      Er, no it doesn't.

      It's not really Quicktime's fault, but has something to do with either how AVI deals with MP3 audio tracks, or how people put MP3 audio into them. I've never been entirely clear.

      But the great majority of Divx AVIs that you download (theoretically, or so I'm told, by some guy down at the 7-11 who knows such things) will not play in Quicktime "off the shelf." You'll get a black screen and no audio, or sometimes you'll get video and no audio, or desynced audio and video.

      The fix is to run them through a little program called "Divx Doctor," which takes the AVI as an input and produces a Quicktime MOV file, either standalone or as a pointer to the content of the AVI, that you can play with. They work just fine.

      Or you can just play the AVIs as-is in VLC, which also has the benefit of supporting playlists and some WMV codecs.

      Quicktime technically has the ability to play AVIs, but it's a useless feature because of the way that 90% of the ones you'll find online are put together (Divx video with MP3 audio).

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
  3. Huh? by NoMoreNicksLeft · · Score: 5, Funny

    Our focus really is in delivering the best experience to Windows customers.

    So now they're going to buy all windows users a free mac?

  4. They shoot themselves in the foot by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Actually, it's a bad decision for Microsoft. Since they won't be able to claim that their evil DRM works for everyone (they silently ignore Unices), judges/govt monkeys will be more likely to see that DRM as something wrong. Also, the unwashed masses are more likely to trip into it as well, thus increasing the public awareness.

    Ahh, good. Anything bad for WM* and friends is great news for us.

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    1. Re:They shoot themselves in the foot by toddbu · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Actually, it's a bad decision for Microsoft.

      There's another reason as well. If Microsoft's actions limit the number of people who can view the files, there will be more of a push by consumers to get web sites like CNN.com that use Windows Media exclusively to support more formats. I think that Microsoft's hope is that this will keep people from migrating away from Windows, but I think it will have the opposite effect.

      --
      If you don't want crime to pay, let the government run it.
    2. Re:They shoot themselves in the foot by rolfwind · · Score: 4, Interesting
      There's another reason as well. If Microsoft's actions limit the number of people who can view the files, there will be more of a push by consumers to get web sites like CNN.com that use Windows Media exclusively to support more formats. I think that Microsoft's hope is that this will keep people from migrating away from Windows, but I think it will have the opposite effect.


      I never understood why so many sites have their video on a dumbass proprietary format. Do the PHBs mandate this, or are the webmasters/otherTechiesinvolved so clueless not to use a free/open format? Not everybody has windows or wants the hell that is real-player.

      Is it bandwidth savings? Are the proprietary formats superior?
  5. WMP never part of MacBU by Henriok · · Score: 4, Informative

    Windows Media Player was not a product that MacBU made, it was sorely lacking in almost every respect and laughing stock of the entire Mac community. It won't be missed. The QuickTime plugin Flip4Mac is better in almost every respect and enabled transcoding to the plethora of formats that QuickTime offers. However.. the free plugin does not enable a Mac user to encode WMV. You'll have to pay for that.

    One interessting thing here is that Flip4Mac licenses technology from MS that MS now are paying to get back :)

    --

    - Henrik

    - when the Shadows descend -
  6. Re:Closed Formats by Moridineas · · Score: 4, Informative

    Lucky you! http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/play er/flip4mac.mspx. They've provided a way to keep watching.

  7. This is actually good for users by Dark_Nova · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Provided that Microsoft keeps licensing this plugin and giving it away for free, this is good news for Mac users. The plugin is a much better option than Windows Media Player, allowing you to play Windows Media files in a nicer GUI.

    Microsoft probably didn't want to update Media Player to be a universal binary, so decided upon this option. They are distributing the plugin on their website for free, so this is a win-win situation.

    1. Re:This is actually good for users by Conanymous+Award · · Score: 5, Funny

      They are distributing the plugin on their website for free, so this is a win-win situation.

      What? I thought this is a Win-Mac situation!

  8. Re:More to follow by aussie_a · · Score: 4, Funny

    You will see microsoft pulling all support for Apple out in the near future

    Apple fans have taken to the street to celebrate this development.

  9. Cute Microsoft Joke by gbobeck · · Score: 5, Funny
    "Our focus really is in delivering the best experience to Windows customers."


    I never knew what the sound of hot coffee comming out of my nose and splattering all over my monitor and keyboard sounded like until I saw that quote.
    --
    Navicula hydraulica plena anguilarum est. Omnes castelli tuus nostri sunt. Ed elli avea del cul fatto trombetta.
  10. Quicktime is no better by nighty5 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I own a PowerBook, and for me to have basic functionality in video support, you have to pay for it.

    Basic functionality like Full Screen support, what the?!?

    I just paid $AUS4,000 for a system and now I have to pay another $AUS45 to watch something in full screen?

    Apple might be all funky and groovey, but they really bleed every cent out of you for any added features.

    This stuff should be stock standard.

    On my god, mod me down - I've just flamed Apple!

    1. Re:Quicktime is no better by dangitman · · Score: 5, Informative
      I just paid $AUS4,000 for a system and now I have to pay another $AUS45 to watch something in full screen?

      No, you definitely do not have to pay $45. Just play the video in iTunes, or mplayer, or VLC. Who told you that Quicktime was the only was to play videos?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  11. Re:Closed Formats by aberkvam · · Score: 4, Informative
    The Flip4Mac components not only provide a way for Mac users to "keep watching", they actually allow Mac users to watch Microsoft Video formats that the Microsoft Product never did. The most obvious example is that there was no good way for Mac users to watch Windows Media 9 Standard videos (WMV3) before the Flip4Mac components came out. (Windows Media Player, VLC, and MPlayer OSX would all choke on them.) Now Mac users can watch them, preview them in the Finder, import and export them, etc.

    This is actually a huge upgrade and great news for Mac users.

  12. When is an upgrade not an upgrade? by maggard · · Score: 4, Insightful
    First off the player GUI isn't the important thing, it's the underlying architecture.

    MacOS pioneered a ubiquitous universal media layer with QT and making the MS codecs part of that is just plain shu-weet. Most real users aren't all that concerned about how pretty or not the default player is, the big concern is getting the material in and out of any/all applications.

    Now everything, from Pages to Word to whatever, will be able to embed, play, link almost every format.

    Yeah, almost. Nope, not talking Real (is anyone?), rather the latest codecs from MS. I'm told by my video geekin' buddies that Flip4Mac, nifty as it is, is last year's code and can't handle the latest 'n greatest WMP 10 codes from MS. Anyone know the truth on this, done any testing?

    However, more importantly, in spite of MS's promise at MacWorld last week of another 5 years of Mac Office (all of which is good profit) word is the black spot is on Mac projects and folks are being reassigned, contractors not being extended, the MacBU folks off in Sili Valley are finding their req's from the Redmond mothership are taking longer and loonggeerrrr to fill.

    If so then there really is a sea change and the gentleman's agreement between MS & Apple seems to be coming to an end. Sure MS is gonna keep the Office stuff, heck most of it started on the Mac, makes money, and is a check-off item on procurement sheets requiring cross-platform.

    But media, where Apple has traditionally been strong, where the iPod reigns, where his Steveness rules both a computer company and a production studio, where cross-platform for everyone has always been the rule, may be where the real break starts to happen. Apple has always been lazy about QT under Windows (heck QT Player still doesn't make use of Overlay, making it often a pain to work with) is MS now returning the favor and poisoning their own well?

    Will next year the response to "I can't get this to play on my Mac" be "Install Windows Vista on it"?

    --
    I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
  13. Re:Safari crashes by diamondsw · · Score: 4, Informative

    Try upgrading to 2.0.1, just released. There was a crashing problem in 2.0 and Quicktime 7.0.4 when you leave the video (navigate away, quit Quicktime, etc).

    --
    I don't know what kind of crack I was on, but I suspect it was decaf.
  14. Three Letters by AoT · · Score: 4, Informative

    VLC.

    I love it to death. It does everything quicktime should do.

    videolan.org

  15. Re:Excellent... by greg1104 · · Score: 4, Funny

    > During my entire Mac using experience (3 or 4 years now), Windows Media Player on my mac would work for about a week. Then it would suddenly stop working. The only thing that would get it working again was a fresh install

    Remarkable. I had no idea the Mac port was such a faithful translation of the Windows version.

  16. Competition regulations? by TangoCharlie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've always suspected that Microsoft has kept some support for Apple going to counter-act any potential monopoly claims.

    While Apple appears to provide a competing product Microsoft can always maintain that they don't have a complete monopoly and so are less likely to be the subject of calls to split them up.

    This made business sence at Microsoft because Apple wasn't really a competitor... however, I believe Microsoft sees Apple to be an increasing risk (not "risc" ?!) and so is cutting back on Mac products which don't have a revenue stream.

    If Apple's move to Intel has the effect of increasing Apple's market share expect Microsoft to withdraw Microsoft Office. Indeed, I expect Microsoft will be painfully slow to release an x86 native MacOffice at all.

    We'll see.

    --
    return 0; }
    1. Re:Competition regulations? by WiggyWack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If Apple's move to Intel has the effect of increasing Apple's market share expect Microsoft to withdraw Microsoft Office.

      Why? Microsoft makes money on Office for Mac.

      Everyone who buys a Mac is a lost sale of Windows for Microsoft. But Microsoft still has a chance to make a profit by selling Office to that Mac user. Why would they want to lose a Windows sale AND an Office sale? The profit to Microsoft for a Mac user buying Office retail is probably greater than the profit from an OEM copy of Windows anyway.

      --
      Macintosh humor! MacComedy.com
  17. That's a feature, not a bug by commodoresloat · · Score: 5, Insightful
    However.. the free plugin does not enable a Mac user to encode WMV. You'll have to pay for that.

    "Decode" is the only thing anyone in their right mind should be doing with WMV.

  18. Re:Point for discussion by JackAxe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    First of all, I speak with experience, since I have 2 PCs in my office and 3 Macs and video work is part of my income.

    Quicktime on the Mac is absolutely great mainly because it's so tightly integrated into the system and has sooo many years of development under its belt. The only drawback, is that if you want to save a video directly, go full screen, play back MPeg2s in it, or use it to export to other formats, you'll need to pay Apple $30 for the pro license. Earlier versins of QT did all of this for free. I own the pro license for both my Macs and PCs, so I'm not bothered by those deliberate shortcomings.

    QT pro is quite uesfull for me on both platforms and for what it can do, at only $30, if you need these features, is a much better bargain than any other similar app I could find. Just to give you an example, there are some codecs that I still can not convert on my Mac, mainly the old Indeo formats. When it comes to my PC software, I'm cheap, so I didn't want to spend that much on an app that could convert these videos into a format I could edit, so I spent days looking for preferably a free convertor for Windows and checked out demos of apps that could do it for under $200. I finally found a convertor that actually worked, at just over double the price of QT Pro and its final result wasn't that great, with a noticable loss of quality from the original no matter how I tweaked its limited settings. I always export to a raw format if possible, so that I can keep any loss of quality to a minimum, since I'll be recompressing later on. Anyways, I ended up buying QT Pro, since it can export these f*ed up codecs and at only $30 it did exacatly what I needed it to do with the desired and predictable results. My only other option(s), would've been to spend $400 on Cleaner XL for the PC, or some other similar app. And from experience, PCs now days can be quite slow when compared to Macs for video work in general, mainly because of Windows, so the last thing I'd want to do is spend that much money on a comp that's much better suited for other tasks. (I'm probably going to tick of some ignorant Anonymous Coward with that comment.) I also own Cleaner 6 for the Mac, which is a complete POS!!! So I defintely didn't want to give Discreet at the time more money.

    QT on the PC is good now days IMO, but just like iTunes it's a step down from its Mac counterpart. I personally haven't had any issues in the past couple of years, but I do recall when QT was complete crap on a PC and on older configurations and in some cases with newer comps, it still is.

    Here's another case where QT Pro is actualy better than MP, at least version 10 and that's in Mpeg2 playback speed. This was the case last year, so if MS has released a fix, I haven't updated my PC in over 5 months. MP9 on the PC has never had an issue and it's what one of my clients used to view the mpeg2s I created for his company, before putting it on their propietory boxes for further testing. After the techs upgraded his system to WMP 10, I got a call asking why my latest video wasn't palying smoothly. Anyways, I hadn't changed my settings before compressing and had a set standard I had to encode each video to. I ended up bringing my Powerbook down, showed him it played fine, where as his 3.4 GHz was now chocking, and it wasn't until we finally tested it on another PC in his office that still was using WM9, that it was not longer my problem. To finish my ramblings, his company purchased QT Pro for his PC and sure enough it played just as smoothly as it had with WM9.

    WMV on the Mac has never improved. It suffers from poor play back speed, where a VLC and MPlayer will hand the same WMVs perfectly. I own Flip4Mac, so that I can convert WMVs into friendly format for my video apps, but every other month or so, I'm running into new videos that it can't play. Then they update it, it works, then once again, I run into more WMVs that will not play on it.

    IMO, WMV definitely sucks worse in this case, because even though QT is

  19. WMV exporting on Mac by bushwahd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First, I agree with all above who have extolled the utter worthlessness of WMP (on either platform). I use this as an exemplar of evil UI design. What maroon decided that dragging the time cursor should NOT update the image in real time, as it does in QT Player? Who decided that hiding the config menu in some elaborately hokey frame was good design? And on and on... Piece 'o crap. Glad to see the back of it (though I only briefly ever used in on Mac and usually deleted it soon after). Still have to live with it on Windoze unless M$ caves completely and lets Flip4Mac do a QT codec for Windoze also. Ha!

    Anyway, I write to mention experiences with the 2 contenda's for outputting WMVs from Mac, which are PopWire Technology and Flip4Mac. I've used PopWire's $30 (only!) WMV9 Export Component for QuickTime (a plug-in to QT) for about a year with great satisfaction. As much as I hate to create WMV's for anyone, the job and benighted clients sometimes require them. I've found that WMV is the all around best format to give someone a movie to embed into Windoze PowerPoint presentations.

    The PopWire QT plug-in means that any and all QT apps (Final Cut, QT Pro, etc.) can directly output WMV as an exported file. Very handy. And, so far, no complaints: the quality is excellent as is the speed of conversion. I've used some of the (many) built-in presets, and diddled up a few of my own. The options dialog even lets you insert copyright and title and author metadata. Highly recommended.

    I discovered Flip4Mac about a month ago and dorked with the demos, then last week hit the Buy button for WMV Studio Pro. So far, I've had OK success. I first tried to export some pieces I had created with After Effects (Animation or in other cases 10-bit uncompressed BlackMagic codec), using the 2-pass VBR in WMV SP. Not good. Not good at all! Took a REALLY long time (dual 2Ghz G5) and looked absolutely awful. I was getting a little sweaty palmed about all those bucks I just fired off to these guys, plus the deadline looming...

    So I tried again with a 1-pass CBR preset, and while it took what seemed like a much longer time than PopWire would have, it did give a comparably respectable result. So I need to do some more tests to find out what works and what doesn't given different input material.

    I have had reasonable success viewing the odd WMV on the web using the Flip4Mac web QT plug-in that is installed as part of the free WMV Player (all this functionality is included in the higher end, pay-fer products like Studio Pro). However, I saw that someone else had trouble with the Comedy Channel movies. I did also: I don't care really, I was just looking for a sample WMV to try out the install of last night's 2.0.1 patch, but I don't have an answer for what CC does wrong that everyone else seems to do right. Maybe it is a streaming thing?

  20. Corrections... by MacDork · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The MacWorld of 1998 had Jobs introducing Gates on stage, and they announced that M$ would make a US$150 million investment in Apple, buying US$75M of non-voting stock at twice the price (IIRC, AAPL was at $11/share, M$ paid $22/share). The deal also included a patent portfolio swap, where each has unlimited access to the other's patents royalty free. M$ agreed to support a fully functional version of office on the mac for at least 10 years. Apple agreed to drop its support of the anti-trust case. There were a bunch of other details in the deal which made the business rather unsavory, but both companies desperately needed each other at that moment in time.

    • August, 1997. Look at the old stock charts. See that spike? That day.
    • The entire deal was for five years.
    • Apple agreed to settle its lawsuit with Microsoft for an undisclosed sum of money separate from the $150 million dollar investment.

    The only concession Apple really made for Microsoft was to bundle IE as the default browser on the Mac for 5 years. Later in the DOJ's anti-trust case, Apple's Avi Tevanian testified that Microsoft had tried to get Apple to step out of the QuickTime for Windows business and focus only on video editing and playback on the Macintosh. Apple refused. Google for "quicktime knife the baby" for details.

    it looks like Jobs is getting his revenge.

    I think the only revenge Jobs ever wanted was for being kicked out of his own company. Not so much revenge even, it's more like vindication. He came back and led Apple out of the woods and back to greatness. The Mac/PC holy war was a lot like the Apple II/Mac holy war. Jobs invented it to serve his own purposes. He had no real emotional investment in it himself. That was made quite clear through his actions 8 1/2 years ago. I continued to allow folks like John Dvorak over at PC mag to goad me for a while after, but when the press no longer tagged Apple with the beleaguered moniker, I got over the whole thing myself. A computer is a tool. I prefer a Mac, but I can see where Windows PCs and various *nixes fit into the equation.

    Bill Gates really doesn't figure into the picture here. He's always wanted to be the 'rockstar' that Jobs is, but no matter how much money he's made, he's never achieved that in his own mind. Jobs isn't concerned with Gates or money. After $100,000,000 he had more money than he could ever spend... to paraphrase Jobs. Jobs wants Apple to succeed out of personal pride. Beginning January 1, 1998 APPL has been a stock market superstar. Nobody can touch that track record. Given that they are still at 3% marketshare in their core market, they really have nowhere to go but up. Intel based Macs may very well be what turns the tables on Dell/HP/Lenovo dominance. And it won't have a thing to do with getting revenge on Gates. The technology deal with Microsoft announced at this MacWorld probably has a lot to do with that. Jobs wants Gates to support Windows on Apple hardware. Not as a replacement for OS X, but as a compliment to it. That way he can stand in front of a crowd at the next Macworld and say, "It slices, it dices, it runs Windows and Mac!" Jobs' "revenge" has nothing to do with Gates and everything to do with Jobs being escorted away from Apple campus in 1985. It's personal.

    But that's just MHO :-)