[MPlayer-users] Windows binary availability?

[Arpi]

Hi,

> > Btw I personally (and some other developers too) really worry about windows:
> > Just remember what happened to virtualdub's asf support!
> 
> Sorry, I am not familiar with that case but I can imagine...

They forced vdub author to immediately remove all asf-related code from his
program.

> > And mplayer supports lots of closed and patented stuff. Companies aren't
> > interested in it until we leave their windows market alone.
>                    ^^^^^
> Of course you mean while.
yes

until and while has the same meaning in hungarian :(

> > But as soon as we provide mplayer for windows, m$ and others will force
> > us to stop and remove asf support etc.
> 
> Can they, if you just support the use of thier own lib?  Are you
no.

> really violating any patents?  It's still their own implemenation,
> code, algorithms, etc.  You are just giving the user an alternate
> framework to use the patent approved implementation.
you're talking about codecs. i'm talking about demuxers.
i'm talking about mov, asf, mpeg demuxers. afaik we should buy the mpeg
specs to legally distribute any mpeg-manipulating program.

asf and mov formats are patented, and at least asf, shouldn't be
implemented by non-m$ company/group without their permission.

btw there is libavcodec too which based on reverse engineered DLLs.

> Although I don't really want to get into a patent discussion here.
> :-)
neither me, but it is the reality.
i don't think that making a windows port does worth the licensing probs.

> Heck, I don't even really care to run asf and other MS proprietary
> files on MS anyway.  MPEG 1,2,4(in it's DIVX forms even) work fine for
> me.
but asf and mov and other supports are in the program, and it's too much
work to make all them optional. and why to do it? who needs it? why?

> > For example, m$ provides media
> > encoder and other tools. they can be simply replaced by mencoder and
> > mplayer.
> 
> Yeah!!  Far superior implementations IMHO.
> 
> > Do you really think they will allow it???
> 
> Well if you definately steered clear of their patent covered
> proprietary crap they can't stop you.
but i can't remove all of them. if i remove everything what left?

> > And yet another thing, it's more technical:
> > mplayer has lots of gcc asm stuff. it isn't compilable under windows.
> > and what about unix-specific things, like tty i/o, fork() and such things.
> > They were all disabled in win version, making it very useless.
> 
> This is a fair enough reason then.  I assumed the port was more
> complete that I guess it is.
no. it was a few hour hack, with no asm code and no user control and no
proper audio/video output (directx etc) just a hack to get it run...

> > And who do need mplayer in the "userfriendly" windows world?
> 
> Sure.
> 
> > Who want to start a command prompt to type long command line to get their
> > avi played, instead of double click on it?
> 
> Someone who thought that Mpalyer was a far superior way of watching
> video than WMP.  You would not necessarily have to start a cmdline
> window either.  I frequently launch Mplayer from the Nautilus file
> browser by double-clicking on media files.  A Windows port of Mplayer
> can be as guiless as it was historically on Linux.

i simply see no sense of making a windowd port, along tha technical and
legal problems.


A'rpi / Astral & ESP-team

--
mailto:arpi at thot.banki.hu
http://esp-team.scene.hu