A tremendous amount of MPEG4 variants has been in use for quite some time now (MS MPEG4, [Open]DivX, 3ivX,...), and they all have been supported by mplayer as well as xine. Literally for years now...
I'm sure the mplayer guys will adapt the decoder to their needs, though it will take some time.
Meanwhile, you can just run xine on FreeBSD (hey, it even runs on IRIX!)
I wonder if mplayer (a "Movie Player for LINUX", according to their homepage) really runs on other architectures, as it even failed to compile on linux/powerpc for me...
xine is a library that is used by quite a few player frontends. You might want to give sinek, or gnome-xine which is available on xine's download page, or even the KDE frontend ("kxine"), which is available via xine's CVS.
I have also been told that the KDE project is integrating xine as their standard video player component...
Hmmm, maybe it helps if you have a peek at the pages delivered by slashdot before claiming they cooperate with doubleclick:
Slashdot banners are solely served via images.slashdot.org, so if you redirect *.doubleclick.net, that doesn't make any difference for slashdot, or anybydy else wo has their own advertising system.
This simply shows that there are lots of different opinions about what "free" means in terms of Software:
The GPL has kind of a virulent character. Any software based on GPLed code must be GPLed again.
This way, the FSF use their GPL to enforce the "freedom" of derived works.
However, there are no restrictions at all in what you can do with the software.
The APSL seems to enforce central availability of the software, which is quite a good thing to have, but restricts freedom, as developers are forced to publish modified versions and notify Apple.
Other licenses like the Artistic license or even plain old "Public Domain" don't enforce anything.
But they endager freedom of the software, as they allow it to be commercialized.
So it all seems to depend on priorities. What's the important point about "free" software? Freedom to do anything with it? Making sure the software stays free? Getting it for free?
I Guess, everybody has different preferences here...
xine has been reported to work on Linux/PPC, at least if you invest some time in porting. There's a message in xine's Bugtracking system explaining the procedure. We want to include the PPC port ASAP, but currently, there's much work to be done to get our new architecure working...
Slashdot Mirror
A tremendous amount of MPEG4 variants has been in use for quite some time now (MS MPEG4, [Open]DivX, 3ivX, ...), and they all have been supported by mplayer as well as xine. Literally for years now...
I'm sure the mplayer guys will adapt the decoder to their needs, though it will take some time.
Meanwhile, you can just run xine on FreeBSD (hey, it even runs on IRIX!)
I wonder if mplayer (a "Movie Player for LINUX", according to their homepage) really runs on other architectures, as it even failed to compile on linux/powerpc for me...
I have also been told that the KDE project is integrating xine as their standard video player component...
Hmmm, maybe it helps if you have a peek at the pages delivered by slashdot before claiming they cooperate with doubleclick:
Slashdot banners are solely served via images.slashdot.org, so if you redirect *.doubleclick.net, that doesn't make any difference for slashdot, or anybydy else wo has their own advertising system.
And they might be capable to reproduce themselves one day...
I really hope I won't ever be invaded by millions of micro-robots.
The GPL has kind of a virulent character. Any software based on GPLed code must be GPLed again. This way, the FSF use their GPL to enforce the "freedom" of derived works. However, there are no restrictions at all in what you can do with the software.
The APSL seems to enforce central availability of the software, which is quite a good thing to have, but restricts freedom, as developers are forced to publish modified versions and notify Apple.
Other licenses like the Artistic license or even plain old "Public Domain" don't enforce anything. But they endager freedom of the software, as they allow it to be commercialized.
So it all seems to depend on priorities. What's the important point about "free" software? Freedom to do anything with it? Making sure the software stays free? Getting it for free?
I Guess, everybody has different preferences here...
Any help is welcome (hint, hint)