MPlayer Developers Interviewed
cruocitae writes "Three of the MPlayer developers just gave an interview, talking about the "mysterious" versioning system of their software and shared a few secrets about the upcoming releases, for example some words about the long-awaited Windows GUI, and of course, DVD menus. Project integrity also was a subject.."
Is that when its so misterious that they're is actual myst around it? You minus well knot even reed articles that our written by peeple with such bad speeling.
Unfortunately, neither VLC nor MPlayer can be included as libraries in other multimedia applications. Having to work with an embedded instance of VLC and MPlayer is a pain and not conducive to extending functionality in object-oriented fashion.
Xine and its corresponding library Xine-lib, on the other hand, can be used as libraries inside other frontend applications such as Kaffeine and AmaroK. This allows the frontend apps to focus on what they do best: GUI, usability and eyecandy, while the multimedia-intensive parts can be neatly accessed through an API.
Segfaults are very, very rare. If you are seeing one, you should report it: http://www.mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/HTML/en/bugreports.h
Major problems like that, always get fixed quickly.
As I said, segfaults are very rare these days. Most of the time segfaults are reported, it's buggy hardware (hot CPU, RAM, videocard, etc.) or a known-buggy version of GCC (2.96, 3.3, etc).
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Why not just use mplayer and be done with it? From what I've seen, mplayer does everything that xine does, and more, so why bother.
Or am I missing something?
Real life is overrated.
Xine is much slower, has a terrible interface, supports fewer audio/video codecs, takes longer to get support for newer codecs, doesn't do ANY encoding at all, doesn't support a fraction as many output audio/video devices. Doesn't have a fraction of the great video/audio filters that MPlayer does. Uses far, far more CPU-time than MPlayer. Has a god-awful interface, and no simple command-line version. Murders puppies. Doesn't include options like allowing you to output JPEGs out of every 100ths frame. Doesn't allow you to process the video, then output to yuv4mpeg for encoding with other programs. etc.
The difference between XINE and MPlayer are really the difference between Windows and Unix... Do you want a monolithic program, which can't be scripted, and has many, many restrictions imposed on it, or a small, simple tool that you can script to manipulate and modify data any way you choose?
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
On my Windows based TV computer:
Choice: Media Player Classic (MPC)
Reasoning:
1. I've never had CPU issues playing video, so I can't say that program X or program Y are more efficient.
2. Feature for feature, I've never seen any players with as many abilities as MPC. If you're leet and wanna dabble with the decoders, they let you do all kinds of thing with DirectShow. They accelerate output on DX9, The inbound codecs can be anyones. I use ffdshow, MPC, or even the official vendor codecs for things like format decoding/splitting/etc. I have the control to rewire them at my leasure if I like one over another. My experience with DVD playback is flawless.
3. Configuration is easy and straight forward for those that know how to use it. For those that don't, the default installation (with 3rd party directshow codecs installed) requires no config.
The only reservation I have with it is that sometimes I notice a cleaner picture with the powerdvd filters and I hate mapping the powerdvd filters into MPC to play it just to switch back later.
Say what you will about hating windows based technologies, but once I've tuned to my likes, it works amazingly well and I can't think of any platform media player / tech that I like more than MPC / DirectShow.
Bye!
Yeah, cryptic, three character variable names like "osd_show_percentage", "stream_dump_type", "too_fast_frame_cnt" and "frame_time_remaining". How cryptic! Whatever could those mean?!?
Bullshit. I just checked. mplayer.c has 3 pointers to void, and one pointer to pointer of void. A quick search through some other files found zero void pointers. The code in the loader section does have a few, but it's hardly the most common datatype.
The only part of your post that's even remotely true is "All that said, the program is fantastic." On that we agree. mplayer kicks ass.
Maybe not