VLC Finally Launches App For Windows 8

SmartAboutThings writes "After a long journey of more than one year, which included even a successfully ended Kickstarter campaign, the VLC app for Windows 8 is officially here. VLC for Windows 8 is currently in beta, and it lacks some important features, such as the ability to open music files or support for Windows RT devices. On the good side, VLC for Windows 8 supports the same codecs as the VLC application for desktop, from MPEG-1 to H.265, through WMV3 and VC-1; it also supports multiple-audio tracks selection, embedded subtitles, background audio playback, Live Tiles, removable storage and DLNA servers."

Comments

Apps

[Tmackiller]

Does anyone NOT using a touchscreen device use apps on windows 8? I've been running VLC for Windows since I got Win8, just after it came out and had no problems with it as a traditional program, in fact it's the only media player I use for video. Isn't this a waste of developer's time? Why won't microsoft give up on apps and tiles? 8 isn't THAT bad without them...

Re:Apps

[SuricouRaven]

Because apps and tiles are a vital part of their strategy. They are putting out these features everyone hates right now,because doing so establishes them as something in Microsoft's long-term interest. They've seen how profitable an app store can be, and how it can be used to promote other services like media sales. They want in on that game, and a consistant cross-platform interface may be a vital advantage in their desperate but unsuccessful struggle to become a serious player in the mobile space.

Re:Apps

[Tmackiller]

They may want to take a market share in mobile devices, but do you see MacOSX putting Tiles and Apps on their desktop devices? No. Marketing Department sshould be fired.

Re:Apps

[vux984]

Does anyone NOT using a touchscreen device use apps on windows 8?

Yes. It is pretty good on a home theatre PC. The start screen is infinitely better from the couch then the old start menu, and the apps (like netflix, and the video player are easier to operate as well - both to see the controls, and to operate)

I've been looking forward to VLC for a while. As the included video player app displays ads in some circumstances and I find it offensive.

I'd also really like a good free open source file browser app.

Overall, I agree there's few apps I'd want on a desktop laptop, but media playback / management for photos, video, music, etc... apps tend to work very well. Basically for situations where you generally want to single task full screen something anyway, the apps are great.

Re:Apps

[MightyMartian]

No one said Microsoft actually knew how to gain market share. The old tools of threatening OEMs with a fate worse than death don't work any more, so Redmond is a bit of a fish out of water.

Re:Apps

[luther349]

yea i just serviced a windows 8 box that was infected. i go to the control panel wtf no real settings. i go to metro can find a setting tiles or even a app tile there hidden in the next window but ok. i finely figure out i had to hover the left side to get the settings

Re:Apps

[Mashiki]

but do you see MacOSX putting Tiles and Apps on their desktop devices?

That's because the marketing dept., hasn't figured out how to spin it as the next new hot thing. Like round corners.

Re:Apps

[vux984]

Get an internet TV

Yuck. Do not want. I do have one, but i refuse to connect it to the network.

Using an entire computer for a media centre is sacrileg

Did I say that's all I do with it? It acts as a fileserver for the house, and has steam on it, (big picture mode also works pretty well from the couch)

if you love the tiles and apps so much, get an xbox and use that,

What microsofts pay-to-use-internet ad-ridden version of not-really-windows? No thanks. I don't have or want an xbox.

XboxOne's kinect voice controls actually work quite well.

No thanks.

The point I was trying to make was that metro is ergonomically retarded for a desktop or laptop.

Its fine for single tasking full screen apps - even on a desktop or laptop, but I agree that's a distinct minority of what *I* do with either of those, while its nearly all I do with the HTPC.

Fuck your metro Fanboyishness (sp),

Get real. I'm not Metro fanboi. I like it for what its good at.

you're making excuses by saying it's good at something it was never made to do,

No, I'm just saying it IS actually quite good at something that quite a few people do, even if that wasn't really what it was designed for. Its also decent as a phone OS. I certainly don't see it taking over the desktop, but being -able- to run it there isn't a bad thing.

but agreeing with the fact that it's awful at what it is supposed to do.

I'm honestly not sure what Microsoft thought it was supposed to do on the desktop. Did they really expect to see accountants running their accounting program, email, and excel sheets as full screen apps and swiping between them? Surely they aren't that dense... they could have just looked over an accountants shoulder...after all.

Re:Apps

[SuricouRaven]

That method still works. That's how they managed to get Secure Boot widely deployed practically overnight. They just had to decree that only computers with SB capability enabled may be sold with the cheap OEM edition of Windows, and OEMs start falling over each other in their rush to meet the demand.

Re:great news.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're using Windows 8 you have a missing tool in your decision making kit.

I wish they chose a different name

[s.petry]

Shows my age, but every time I see this acronym I see "VCL". and not VLC.

No V-Sync

[aybiss]

Just like the Windows 7/Vista version, VLC will again prove itself the most useless media player available by still not having V-Sync.

Re:No V-Sync

[ichthus]

And yet, somehow, it still works great for millions of users.

Re:No V-Sync

[shutdown -p now]

The point of vsync is to prevent tearing because rendering framerate does not match the monitor refresh rate. It doesn't matter how slow or fast something goes, it's the disparity that gives tearing, and makes vsync useful.

Costs money

[Neo-Rio-101]

So let me get this straight.

On my Windows 8.1 desktop, I can get VLC for free
In the world of Metro, I can get the same app for $3.99
Same device and everything.

I understand the need to recoup some funds for developing this, but..... why bother when the desktop version is free?
What does the metro version really get you?
Do RT users really matter?

Re:Costs money

[QuasiSteve]

I understand the need to recoup some funds for developing this, but..

To add to your but, I give you:

But...
https://www.kickstarter.com/pr...

why bother when the desktop version is free?
What does the metro version really get you?

I asked that question elsewhere, and the response I got was - after I explicitly said people shouldn't start talking about 'touch interface', considering you can slap a touch interface on a desktop app just fine and you would never be able to tell - 'touch interface'.

Aside from that, though.. Windows RT devices - since you can only install out of the app store on those, and that means you have to develop for that.

Do RT users really matter?

Maybe. Apparently there are some people enthusiastic about the Surface that wouldn't consider just getting a Surface Pro. Of course, an RT version is exactly what hasn't happened. Maybe developing the app for x86 first is easier and then porting to RT should be a breeze - I don't know. But there's certainly no good reason whatsoever to be using the Metro ('modern', whatever they want to call it) version of VLC on a desktop/laptop, with or without a touchscreen, especially when you keep in mind that this version is quite buggy and incomplete.

Re:Costs money

[ichthus]

Do RT users really matter?

I'm sure both of them would say, "Yes!"

Re:Costs money

[Neo-Rio-101]

STOP THE PRESSES.

I was looking at some scam app in the Windows Store on my Windows 8.1 machine.
It's getting preference over the real VLC and they're using the same VLC icon.

*SIGH*

Re:Costs money

[ljw1004]

??? VLC on win8 is free! At least, it was free when I downloaded it an hour ago.

There were a load of FALSE vlc apps on the store for $3.49 and $3.99, with similar branding, trying to scam money. Did you get suckered by one of these?

Re:Costs money

[cbhacking]

"WinRT" != "Windows RT". This is even discussed in the linked article (yeah, yeah).

Microsoft's branding people should be lined up along a wall, beaten with baseball bats, shot, and then pitched out a fifth-story window onto rusted spikes. OK, maybe that's excessive. There's no need to waste the bullets.

WinRT is an API set, intended for use with "Windows Store apps" (a.k.a. "Metro" or "Modern" apps). It is intended to be sandbox-friendly (for example, having functions to let the user pick a file via a trusted, out-of-process component), battery-friendly (apps are notified when no longer in the foreground, and by default suspend themselves), touch-friendly (you can do the UI in a number of ways, but the standard ways use the "Metro" paradigm with big, swipe-able screens), and responsive (the default behavior is for anything which is likely to block for a while - such as accessing network resources - to be moved of the UI thread). WinRT is usable on x86, x64, and ARM. You can code for it in C++, .NET, or JavaScript.

Windows RT is an operating system, an edition of Windows 8 (or now of Windows 8.1) compiled for ARM processors. Aside from the target architecture and a feature set somewhere between the normal and Pro x86 editions (it includes some stuff like BitLocker that the normal edition didn't have at least in 8.0, but is otherwise not very Pro-ish), and the removal of a bunch of legacy compatibility stuff, it's very much a straightforward port. The main difference from a user's perspective is that in RT, Windows enforces signature validation on all binaries loaded outside of an app sandbox, preventing third-party "desktop" programs from running. RT 8.0 was "jailbroken" to remove this restriction; it's just a kernel-mode flag that if changed, reverts the OS to basically just another Win8 platform. Windows RT can run Windows Store apps just fine, so long as they're written in an architecture-independent language (JS, or anything on the .NET framework) or are compiled for the THUMB-2 instruction set that Microsoft uses on ARM.

VLC is being ported to Windows RT as we speak. The port to the WinRT platform means they just need to re-compile it for RT (ARM). Unfortunately, while this should be simple, VLC doesn't currently compile under MSVC and GCC doesn't know how to target Windows RT. The VLC team is tackling both of these problems; fixing either one will let them proceed with the port. (Personally, I hope they fix the latter one; there's a lot of open-source software we could port to jailbroken RT except that it only compiles under GCC and GCC doesn't know how to target Win32/THUMB-2 yet.)

Re:Costs money

[Neo-Rio-101]

...or rather how Windows Store gave the greenlight to a scam app, and put it first on the list of apps above the real one.

Re:Only useful for tablets

[cbhacking]

The "Metro" version is also free. The non-free apps are scams.