Slashdot Mirror


Canonical Offers Sale of Proprietary Codecs for Ubuntu

ruphus13 writes "Playing DVDs on Linux that required proprietary codecs has been a source of much pain. Ubuntu (or anyone else, for that matter) is not legally allowed to redistribute these codecs. So, users were left with sub-optimal choices. Convert the multimedia to an open format, acquire new media, or use a codec 'found' on the web, which may be illegal. In its continued effort to have a seamless and slick user experience, Canonical made the hard choice to offer the sale and support for proprietary codecs that users had to actually purchase for Ubuntu. This is not a fight Canonical can fight alone, and they are sure to get some grief for the decision."

10 of 427 comments (clear)

  1. Finally! by clang_jangle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Every time I convert someone to Ubuntu, the first thing I always do is download and install the "illegal" mplayer codecs. Otherwise, the poor user will click on some multimedia file and get that god-awful "search for codecs" dialog, which is usually enough to freak them out. It makes them feel they are dealing with a lesser OS, because it doesn't "just work" like they've come to expect (of course, they usually didn't install Windows either or they'd know better).
    I hope Canonical will just sell the install media (and download) with the codecs already in it. That would work really well for a lot of people. A boxed Ubuntu with all codecs on the store shelves for about $30 - $45 right next to the Windows Vista boxes (on sale for JUST $199!) would probably do quite well. Plus the word would start getting out how much easier it is to install and live with than Windows.
    Yes, I wish we lived in a world where all formats, protocols, and standards were Free, but they never will be so long as capitalism remains our official state religion. Meanwhile, we still want to watch our movies and play our music.

    --
    Caveat Utilitor
    1. Re:Finally! by clang_jangle · · Score: 5, Informative

      I don't think so, but Kubuntu definitely does. They really should either make the kde net admin utility the standard for Ubuntu or upgrade the gnome version to be zero-conf as well.

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    2. Re:Finally! by schwinn8 · · Score: 5, Informative

      WICD works wonderfully for me, with zero issues...? http://wicd.sourceforge.net/

    3. Re:Finally! by Teun · · Score: 5, Informative
      The best network manager around is wicd.

      For many it's the only way to get a reliable WPA connection.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
  2. Re:Somebody had to do it... by Dr.+Manhattan · · Score: 5, Informative

    My only question is, how much will it cost?

    Streaming media and web stuff: USD$40. DVD playback: USD$50.00.

    --
    PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
  3. It's a good thing by steveha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whatever you may think about software patents, the fact is that Canonical only has three choices here:

    0) Not offer this software

    1) Include the software for free, and break the law in some countries

    2) Offer legal software, and pay the licensing fees

    Ubuntu is my favorite distribution, and I'm happy to see legal, supported DVD playback.

    I'm really tired of reading reviews that say "Great distribution, but it can't play back any of my media."

    Now let's get Dell, Gateway, etc. to start pre-installing Ubuntu with the extra media options. It will be a better out-of-box experience than Vista.

    steveha

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  4. Good on 'em! by LocutusMIT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the things I've always liked about Ubuntu is their decision to give the users the choice between running completely free and open source software or accepting proprietary [(though often still free (as in beer)] software on their computers.

    While I think it shameful that the DVD producers have decided that I need to pay extra to run a DVD that I already own, I applaud Canonical for giving me the option to do so easily.

  5. Re:Canonical == Microsoft by snl2587 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I know you're just trolling, but for those who actually feel this way, look at it like this:

    Canonical knows that a large proportion of Ubuntu users download and use the "illegal" codecs without paying the license fees (either directly, where it applies, or indirectly by using the programs that the codec can be legally used for). Canonical does not own these codecs and cannot legally provide or create free alternatives due to all of the craziness surrounding patent law. So they offer an option for their legally-conscious users and business users: fully-supported, license-fee-paid codecs that will not put their users in legal jeopardy.

    Please tell me what the evil in this is.

  6. ...You blinded her? by XanC · · Score: 5, Funny

    On purpose? Did you go to jail?

  7. Re:Not new, just streamlined. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here is the real win for Canonical... OEM pre-installs.

    Its doubtful that anyone who downloads Ubuntu for free will pay for these things... they will find the no-cost alternatives and use them.

    What this does do however is give OEMs who want to pre-install Canonical a legal way to include these encumbered bits of software and roll the cost into the sale price of the computer/device the customer is purchasing.

    So really this is a mechanism aimed at people buying computers with Ubuntu pre-installed, who won't be given a choice as to whether or not to spend the money on these things. The cost will be included in the price tag of the device.

    It's actually a pretty smart move, and makes Ubuntu more attractive to OEMs.

    OEMs and Ubuntu boxsets.