Lack of Manpower May Kill VLC For Mac
plasmacutter writes "The Video Lan dev team has recently come forward with a notice that the number of active developers for the project's MacOS X releases has dropped to zero, prompting a halt in the release schedule. There is now a disturbing possibility that support for Mac will be dropped as of 1.1.0. As the most versatile and user-friendly solution for bridging the video compatibility gap between OS X and windows, this will be a terrible loss for the Mac community. There is still hope, however, if the right volunteers come forward."
The DVD player that comes with Apple's computers is rather intolerant of scratches, etc., and will report "Skipping damaged area..." then skip ahead a ridiculous amount. VLC will play fine right through the supposedly damaged segment. Losing VLC for the Mac would be terrible. If I knew anything about programming, I'd think about joining this project.
Sad to see VLC struggling, but there's always Mplayer OSX Extended for the mac. Get the extra codec pack and it can play anything!
Moderation: +4. Modded 70% Funny and 30% Overrated. 100% Saturated.
Not exactly... Apple has been slowly squeezing the Carbon (std. C++ lib set) into non-existence, which means you get to do it in Cocoa (that is, Obj-C). IIRC, there's no 64-bit Carbon love in SL, though the 32-bit Carbon libs should still be happily intact.
There's also (IIRC) Grand Central to contend with when you're dinking around with video, and I doubt that you could find an easy parallel for that when porting in from *nix.
Been way the hell too long (something like 4 years) since I've had to do any serious OSX stuff though, so take all of this with a block of salt.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
I thought Handbrake uses FFMPEG. Anyway, if Handbrake uses some VLC code then the Handbrake developers will probably continue to maintain that code without necessarily having to maintain VLC as a whole.
I'm not at all a fan of iTunes, but your post is totally full of false information!
Hard to find something that would burn CDs--sounds like you're talking about an all-in-one program? because it's built into the operating system. It's built into iTunes. The most famous and longlived 3rd party program is Toast. Can install commandline tools as well.
The reason iTunes has a library interface is that...that's the entire point of itunes! If you just want to play a media file once, use Quicktime/vlc/mplayer/Audion/etc. Secondly on this note, iTunes by no means compels you to either consolidate your files under its library or rename your existing files. The directory names are hardly cryptic??
I do, however, agree that losing vlc would be too bad, because I fount it usually worked better than mplayer on the Mac.
So... you're saying next year will be the year of Mac?
That sounds oddly familiar.
Well, it has never been successfully tested.
Mac has Perian which is FOSS, so while it would be a shame to lose VLC on OS X it won't be the end of support for codecs Apple doesn't support.
Caveat Utilitor
But these wiseguys don't realise that I'd much rather deal with files that I can recognise by their filename, copy and move them with the well known 'cp' and 'mv' commands rather than having their craptastic software try to manage it all.
Step 1: Tell iTunes not to manage my library.
Step 2: Drag the 30GB "music" folder from the fileserver onto iTunes and wait for it to index everything.
Step 3: Have easy access to all my music, with not a file moved or renamed.
There are plenty of reasons why you might not like iTunes, but if you're 'leet enough not to like the way it handles your files, then you're 'leet enough to tell it not to.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Are you really joking? VLC is the most successful open source project on Mac, forever. It even beats Firefox.
Here is a top sw downloads listing from absolutely general user focused download site: http://www.macupdate.com/popular/
VLC has also become de-facto remote controlled Apple OS X software for iPhone/iPod users. Those are the true "walled garden" lovers/ignorers.
VLC should look at their community, IRC channel, developer public comments for why on earth their developer level dropped to zero with such amazing success. Imagine you are a multimedia developer, is there anything more visible and easy to contribute than VLC? Get a CVS pwd, start showing off with your coding capabilities... Really interesting... I suspect some bad treatment to Mac users/Developers going on. BTW, they should look at pure numbers, not some troll/idiot comments from some download sites or blogs. They are currently de facto standard multimedia player on OS X. They should figure this fact if not already.
PS: Not a big VLC fan really while it saves us all the time at TV. I personally use Coreplayer OS X which is really really unpopular and commercial application which does amazing things like playing 720P HD/H264 on G4 1.42 Ghz.
I wanted to respond directly to the person who put this post up, but I don't want to register for yet another forum.
I'll gladly help develop for the project. My knowledge in video and audio processing is very weak (I took a class on it, but I didn't really put too much work into it), but my skills in C and C++ are pretty good (but not expert). I'm also pretty well-versed in Java, though it's been a while since I needed to whip it out. Finally, I'm slowly, but surely, learning Objective-C.
Please e-mail me at the address listed here. I don't want to see this die! I just migrated over to OS X and find this app extremely helpful, especially from my use of it in Windows.
(This message may be seen as inflammatory, but I assure you that it is just my opinion and not particularly anybody else---I don't speak for the projects on which I participate).
Hi.
I am not a developer of VLC, but I am part of the LAME team (that MP3 encoder that a good amount of people use). I see similar problems regarding LAME as those described by the VLC team: lack of continuous power and resources.
Some users just magically think that "oh, this program won't exist anymore, so let's use this other one". The sad thing here is that they are shortsighted in the fact that they, by doing nothing (just receiving the programs), are not giving the incentive for the projects.
What about if the proposed alternative dies a few days from now? The amount of alternatives is finite.
Not only that, but the major players out there all share the same codebase: there are "incestuous" (in a good sene of the word) relations with VLC, xine, and mplayer: the all use, to some extent or another (well, in some cases, to the full extent) some common libraries: ffmpeg, libmp3lame, theora, vorbis, dirac, x264 and so on.
Usually, also, the players also send some feedback to the people writing the libraries and, without them, the libraries would not be as good as they are. And the feedback that developers provide is, not infrequently, in form of patches, or constructive suggestions. Some users, like the one above, just cares less and, honestly, where would you just "grab the extra codec" if they all, come, essentially, from the first place?
If you didn't know, perhaps it is a good reminder to put here that people from the VLC project developed the nice libdvdcss library, which benefited xine and mplayer, while people in the other projects have directly or indirectly benefited the others.
I would not like to have the "Linux desktop" mainstream with a "community" with a person that doesn't want a community. For people that are more altruistic (and that show it, instead of just playing in slashdot all day), I am open to a more open talk.
[Gee, from what I wrote the above, it seems like if I only saw Linux---I actually value the other Unix-like operating systems as much].
I guess that what I meant to say here is: "Talk is cheap. Show me the code. Don't wish the death of what you may proudly use and not even know".
Regards, Rogério Brito.
Whoever takes the job, please remove the stupid "anything I want to play gets added to a stupid playlist" thing. When I open a video with QuickTime, it plays that video. If I open another video at the same time, it opens up another QuickTime window.
VLC is more like QuickTime (video player) but it currently acts more like iTunes (media library player).
Have you even bothered to open the preferences? It right there in the Interface pane (simple settings view):
Allow only one instance [x]
Enqueue files when in one instance mode[x]
Just uncheck "Allow only one instance".
There are very few Open Source developers for OSX. Unfortunately we, AbiWord, have exactly the same issue. We *almost* had version 2.8 ready for OSX but we lost our lead OSX developer and there is no one to replace him. Rather than delay 2.8, we simply went ahead with 2.8 for Linux and Windows.
FYI:
Quicktime is more than a player. It is a massive video library (with a larger code base than windows 95) used to power video editing etc. Its OLD and used to be the basis of nearly all video editing software. It has gotten stale and others have replaced it but it was the foundation for digital video for many years and its still around being used for this.
The quicktime file format is the basis of the mp4 file format as well.
It is a solid library with a lot of extendability for its size, age, and complexity - its in C and I've coded for it a little bit... like 10 years ago.
What I see now is alternatives usually built around a single format library with an import/export system added on. This makes those easier to implement while quicktime has been open ended and not tied to any 1 format (other than its own container format) the timecode in quicktime is confusing because its not a video time code but an abstraction.
Basically apple dropped the ball when they didn't open source the library years ago (and they did ask for public input for a short period without much attention given to it) now we have MKV containers and the zombee avi containers and many specialized libraries.
Not much out there as far as I've seen that competes with the power of quicktime. It could have been the framework but it looks like mkv will be the open container and somebody will tie together enough libraries and codecs into a generalized framework--- or we'll just have to jam it all together ourselves. (which may not be any more difficult than trying to understand the old quicktime C API...)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Depends on what he means by "owns", and ignoring the hyperbole (the "serious work" part is especially egregious, just like when "business" or gamers make the same claim in reverse), he's got a point. The programming one is a bit confusing, but the others are pretty accurate.
No, they aren't. High-performance computing most certainly isn't a strong area for Apple, with Linux being probably the most used platform and other Unix systems and Windows coming somewhere behind. While Macs are certainly used for some scientific modeling and visualisation tasks, I'm not aware of a particularly market share, definitely not to the point of "owning" the market.
In the end, the only item on his list that stands is "design", with a lot of programmers also using Macs nowadays but I wouldn't say they dominate at that either.
Not exactly... Apple has been slowly squeezing the Carbon (std. C++ lib set) into non-existence, which means you get to do it in Cocoa (that is, Obj-C).
Objective C / C++ is only required for doing the UI. 99% of your project can remain in C or C++ with only a very thin shim in Obj-C for the UI layer. There is no requirement to move your code base to except for the Mac-specific UI layer.
IIRC, there's no 64-bit Carbon love in SL, though the 32-bit Carbon libs should still be happily intact.
There is no 64 bit Carbon, because it's a relic. Cocoa easily mixes with C code (Obj-C is just C with extra stuff). Unless you're Adobe and you have a huge amount of UI code in Carbon, there is no reason to keep hanging on to it.
There's also (IIRC) Grand Central to contend with when you're dinking around with video, and I doubt that you could find an easy parallel for that when porting in from *nix.
Grand Central Dispatch is not required for video at all. Mac OS X supports the standard POSIX pthreads interface for threading.
> Open Source toys like VLC really cannot compete at a professional level with stuff
> like Quicktime because it has an order of magnitude superior design, usability,
> security and testing behind it.
Is that why people install VLC on MacOS so that they can deal with the formats and
codecs that Apple has chosen to ignore for one bullsh*t reason or another?
Without VLC and ffmpeg, it would be Mac users that are "left out in the cold".
The idea that Quicktime is something that the users of other platforms should covet
is a big fat joke.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.