Slashdot Mirror


MS Releases New Media Player Firefox Plugin

SilentChris writes "Microsoft today released a new Media Player plugin for Firefox that resolves the problems users of the older version were experiencing. According to the company's Port 25 blog, it's backwards compatible with Windows Media Player 6.4. The plugin is for Windows XP and Vista only, but if you have to watch WMV video at least it's less likely to crash your browser."

8 of 191 comments (clear)

  1. Who needs Media Player? by Seumas · · Score: 3, Informative

    Thanks Microsoft, but I've already got VLC.

  2. Or the better (free, as in choice) option by VE3OGG · · Score: 5, Informative

    Use VLC. Short of protected media (and really, I don't know too many people who use protected WMV), it seems to work wonderfully, and isn't dependent on a only two operating systems. If you want something more integrated, there is of course M-Player as well...

    1. Re:Or the better (free, as in choice) option by denis-The-menace · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't know too many people who use protected WMV
      That's easy: Trojan writers.
      There's this "feature" to install licenses for WMA/WMV files that permit the covert installation of Trojans, backdoors and other malware.

      Stay away from .WMA/.MWV files like the plague they are!!!

      --
      Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
    2. Re:Or the better (free, as in choice) option by Kalriath · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, if Microsoft catches people installing trojans via the Licensing system, they revoke their license server. In case you weren't aware of what goes into getting the software to create protected WM* content:

      1. Obtain Code Signing certificate from Certification Authority (Verisign, Thawte, or Geotrust only), which entails;
          a. Providing CA with registered company name, phone number and physical address
          b. Providing CA with copy of phone bill to allow them to call technical owner of said registered company
          c. Paying through the arse (about $500 USD) for certificate to be generated
      2. Submit application to Microsoft. This is reviewed, then...
      3. Microsoft sends a blank OCX file, which you then sign with your code signing certficate and return
      4. Post back two copies of a signed contract which has your real name, registered company name, phone number, and physical address
          a. This contract says that you're dead meat if you distribute the software to ANYONE
      5. Wait for MS legal to verify details and countersign agreement
      6. Software is delivered to you via special extranet site which you probably didn't know existed
      7. Software requires certificate to issue licenses which is generated by visiting a certain URL on WindowsMedia.com
      8. Software can have its ability to issue licenses revoked at any time by revoking this certificate

      As you can see, there's an assload of safeguards against what you say happens all the time, and Microsoft do revoke WMRM certificates for using them to install spyware or trojans. The contract then allows them to sue the person misusing the license manager SDK into oblivion as well, but I don't know whether they ever have or not.

      If you're going to make a statement, make sure to back it up with real experiences or knowledge. Yes, I do happen to know how this process works. A company I work with had to go through it recently.

      --
      For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
    3. Re:Or the better (free, as in choice) option by Breakfast+Pants · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'll just chime in with 'it happened to me'.

      --

      --

      WHO ATE MY BREAKFAST PANTS?
  3. Why now? by MadJo · · Score: 4, Informative
    Why would you need this plugin, when you have all sorts of different extensions dealing with this situation.
    Like for instance: mediaplayerconnectivity.
    Look you can use any player you like, and you don't need to have the browser open anymore, while playing the video.

    I'm sorry Microsoft, but you are too little too late.

  4. Re:Don't waste your time on the plugin like I did by michrech · · Score: 4, Informative

    I downloaded the plugin just to give it a try. Never had any problems with embedded video except at cnn.com I thought maybe the plugin would fix that problem. After installing and giving firefox a restart, it still won't work with the cnn.com and nothing else appears to be different. Not sure what the point of the plugin was, but don't waste your time with it like I did. It solved nothing from what it appears to me. Using Firefox 2.0.0.3 on Windows XP Pro SP2

    Worked perfectly for me in Vista Enterprise. I didn't even have to restart Firefox (2.0.0.3). I'll be testing an XP machine I just put together shortly.

    For those wishing not to use this update, for whatever your reasons, you can take three .dll files from an XP/WMP10 install and have working embedded video in Firefox under Vista.

    Those three files are : npdsplay.dll, npdrmv2.dll, and npwmsdrm.dll

    The last two are most likely optional, but I copied them anyway. The only drawback (if you can really call it that) is that the lower part of the embedded window are cut off by a few pixels, but it works perfectly fine.

    Luckily for me, I'm surrounded by roughly 1800-ish XP machines, so I had no problems finding the files. I'm sure you all have someone you know with an XP machine that you could grab a copy of these files from.

    This information is also available at various web pages if you look in Google.

    --
    bork bork bork!
  5. Re:Don't waste your time on the plugin like I did by Sam+Ramji · · Score: 5, Informative

    The reason the new plugin is better than just installing the three older files (which are the NPAPI compatibility libraries shipped with WMP 6.4 and previous) is that it expands the programmatic access to the WMP component - it's now fully scriptable from Firefox, with forward/back/pause features etc.

    So use whichever one you like, but I am personally a Firefox user and prefer the experience with the new WMP 11 plugin. YMMV.

    Also, in case you were wondering why it's a .exe instead of a .xpi, after talking with the guys at Mozilla we realized that the user experience for installing a .exe was better and additionally fit the Firefox model better. It's a plugin, not an extension; if you review the Adobe plugins they are also delivered as .exes.

    Sam Ramji
    Director, Open Source Software Lab
    Microsoft Corporation