> Under absolutely ALL circumstances. MPlayer has been heavily optimized for speed, while XINE hasn't. I've never before seen ANYONE claim Xine was EVER faster.
It's my experience, since many versions during the last three years of MPlayer and Xine.
> If you're actually seeing something like that, and not just trolling, either you got a poorly made binary package, or you were doing something like using the wrong output method for your system.
Output method was always XV for both (and ALSA for both as well). I compiled the releases always myself, on the same Linux system, Xine without any configure options, and MPlayer always with "--enable-gui --enable-largefiles --disable-lirc --disable-lircc --enable-menu --disable-arts --disable-esd --disable-dvb --disable-dvbhead".
I just used some 720x480 VOB on my system: MPlayer averages at 80%, Xine at 55%. Maybe me system is strange, but I doubt it.
But nevermind. The only reason I wrote this is to point out that for some, Xine is not so bad as you say.
Informative? For Mplayer fans perhaps, sorry. But for those still enjoying movies with Xine, you may want to know:
> Xine is much slower
Under what circumstances? On my PIII-500 (which I regularily use since 3 years to watch DVDs over a beamer), Xine is the only player which stays below 75% load for VOBs. MPlayer hits 100% on scenes with lots of motion, and skips (and corresponding "your system sucks" messages are displayed).
> has a terrible interface
That's your opinion/taste. IMHO, it's OK with the right skin.
> , supports fewer audio/video codecs > , takes longer to get support for newer codecs,
Some defective AVIs and VOBs I played on Xine, but made MPlayer hang. I always use MPlayer first to look at a movie I come across (because it starts faster, which is an advantage for MPlayer), but when MPlayer hangs, Xine normally plays it.
So MPlayer surely is more cutting edge, but less forgiving with common file types.
> doesn't do ANY encoding at all,
Why should it? It's a player. Comparing Xine with MPlayer makes sense, but not comparing it with MEncoder. MEncoder is great, though. I encode with MEncoder, I watch with Xine.
> doesn't support a fraction as many output audio/video devices.
XVideo and ALSA is all you need.;-) No seriously, for most users, this should not be an issue.
> Doesn't have a fraction of the great video/audio filters that MPlayer does.
see MEncoder comment.
> Uses far, far more CPU-time than MPlayer.
You said that before, but still is not true (see above).
> Has a god-awful interface,
You said that before, but is still only your opinion/taste.
> and no simple command-line version.
No, the xine command line options are few and simple. MPlayer instead has hundreds of options, and is complex and as complete as possible.
As a summary: Xine is perfect for watching common video files and DVDs (from disc or ripped). MPlayer comes in when you need to tinker with video/audio processing, or if you have strange formats and/or output hardware.
Your observations definitely make sense when considering the heritage of the kernels: Windows optimized for the desktop ("free RAM early so new apps/media/stuff loads fast when clicked"), and Linux/BSD/Unix optimized for server operation ("keep as much as possible in RAM so things get served fast"). So I would not say it's a question of intelligence.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, and it seems vice versa it's the same. At least I did not manage to display google.cn . Or is there a trick?
> Under absolutely ALL circumstances. MPlayer has been heavily optimized for speed, while XINE hasn't. I've never before seen ANYONE claim Xine was EVER faster.
It's my experience, since many versions during the last three years of MPlayer and Xine.
> If you're actually seeing something like that, and not just trolling, either you got a poorly made binary package, or you were doing something like using the wrong output method for your system.
Output method was always XV for both (and ALSA for both as well). I compiled the releases always myself, on the same Linux system, Xine without any configure options, and MPlayer always with "--enable-gui --enable-largefiles --disable-lirc --disable-lircc --enable-menu --disable-arts --disable-esd --disable-dvb --disable-dvbhead".
I just used some 720x480 VOB on my system: MPlayer averages at 80%, Xine at 55%.
Maybe me system is strange, but I doubt it.
But nevermind. The only reason I wrote this is to point out that for some, Xine is not so bad as you say.
Informative? For Mplayer fans perhaps, sorry. But for those still enjoying movies with Xine, you may want to know:
;-) No seriously, for most users, this should not be an issue.
> Xine is much slower
Under what circumstances? On my PIII-500 (which I regularily use since 3 years to watch DVDs over a beamer), Xine is the only player which stays below 75% load for VOBs. MPlayer hits 100% on scenes with lots of motion, and skips (and corresponding "your system sucks" messages are displayed).
> has a terrible interface
That's your opinion/taste. IMHO, it's OK with the right skin.
> , supports fewer audio/video codecs
> , takes longer to get support for newer codecs,
Some defective AVIs and VOBs I played on Xine, but made MPlayer hang. I always use MPlayer first to look at a movie I come across (because it starts faster, which is an advantage for MPlayer), but when MPlayer hangs, Xine normally plays it.
So MPlayer surely is more cutting edge, but less forgiving with common file types.
> doesn't do ANY encoding at all,
Why should it? It's a player. Comparing Xine with MPlayer makes sense, but not comparing it with MEncoder. MEncoder is great, though. I encode with MEncoder, I watch with Xine.
> doesn't support a fraction as many output audio/video devices.
XVideo and ALSA is all you need.
> Doesn't have a fraction of the great video/audio filters that MPlayer does.
see MEncoder comment.
> Uses far, far more CPU-time than MPlayer.
You said that before, but still is not true (see above).
> Has a god-awful interface,
You said that before, but is still only your opinion/taste.
> and no simple command-line version.
No, the xine command line options are few and simple. MPlayer instead has hundreds of options, and is complex and as complete as possible.
As a summary: Xine is perfect for watching common video files and DVDs (from disc or ripped). MPlayer comes in when you need to tinker with video/audio processing, or if you have strange formats and/or output hardware.
Your observations definitely make sense when considering the heritage of the kernels: Windows optimized for the desktop ("free RAM early so new apps/media/stuff loads fast when clicked"), and Linux/BSD/Unix optimized for server operation ("keep as much as possible in RAM so things get served fast"). So I would not say it's a question of intelligence.