Microsoft Ends Windows Media Player on the Mac 470
alphasubzero949 writes "According to News.com, Microsoft has had no plans to update or improve Windows Media Player and has instead thrown its weight behind a third party plugin to fill the void. Adam Anderson, Microsoft public relations manager, told News.com, 'It's basically a business decision for Microsoft. Like any other company, we have business priorities. Our focus really is in delivering the best experience to Windows customers.'"
Oh dear! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh dear! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Oh dear! (Score:4, Interesting)
Cheers
Re:Oh dear! (Score:3, Interesting)
To verify what "a lot" means, it does not mean most. "Most" WMV files play just great in VLC, the vast majority in fact. The only ones that will not play are ones using WMV3. For those I use Windows Media Player for Mac. So, the only ones that will not play on the Mac are the WMV 10/DRM'd videos (as far as I can tell, and I use this stuff daily). Big freakin' deal. If MS wants to shoot themselves in the foot by not paying a dev a weeks pay to
Re:Oh dear! (Score:3, Insightful)
The real problem in my mind is why people are encoding their content with such a stupid format, given the vast number of better alternatives. I pretty much delete anything that gets sent t
Re:Oh dear! (Score:4, Informative)
Oh, I'm not actually using the format since it is so bad. Doesn't mean that I don't want to. Unfortunately Windows Media is the only format MLB [mlb.com] offers their archives in. Fortunately Real is a working alternative for live broadcasts (and it works surprisingly well) but in the off-season I am pretty much hosed with my mac. The first time I heard of this third-party plugin I was quite enthusiastic, but it didn't work. I just tried again and it still doesn't work for the one thing I need it.
It's a shame, really, since it's such a nice service in theory, but what can you do? Now that WMP on mac is dead I can hope that baseball gets its act together and starts offering the archived games in an alternative format. Real would be enough, but of course I'd be happy with quicktime too.
Re:Oh dear! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Oh dear! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Oh dear! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Oh dear! (Score:2, Funny)
But you have colorful skins to choose from when it starts and runs!
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Oh dear! (Score:3, Informative)
The free client also doesn't support file conversion and export...barbaric, I know, but that's just the method Apple use to encourage some to pay for it.
You could of course try one of the free alternative players that do give you full screen:
Echidna Movie Viewer (296KB) http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/6068 [macupdate.com]
Fullscreen Movie Player (926KB) http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/11670 [macupdate.com]
LittleView (208KB) http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/2023 [macupdate.com]
Symbiotic relationship? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Symbiotic relationship? (Score:2, Insightful)
One word... antitrust.
Re:Symbiotic relationship? (Score:3, Interesting)
Is the rest of the Mactopia line going to be on the chopping block next? Is Microsoft gearing up for an all-out "platform-warm" with Apple and planning to remove their presences from OS X completely?
Seriously
Re:Symbiotic relationship? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Symbiotic relationship? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Symbiotic relationship? (Score:4, Funny)
You mean, like the feeling you get when you dress up in women's clothes?
**ducks**
Entourage (Score:4, Informative)
There might be a small niche of users who haven't discovered the joy that is Adium (I'm now a total convert since they built in Address Book integration and encryption) and are still using the standalone MSN client, but I think they'll find that they're better off once they make the switch to another product.
The real MS product that it would be detrimental to the Mac platform to lose is Entourage. Without that, I can't think of an easy way to interact with an Exchange Server (Apple Mail will do the email part, but it won't do the calendaring or PIM functions). Granted I think Exchange is stupid, but it's popular.
Re:Symbiotic relationship? (Score:3, Insightful)
A media company going with real, quicktime or WMPs is making a big investment. One of the concerns actualy was "could everyone wanting to view our content actualy do so". Quicktime, the answer was yes becuase it run on apple and windows. Microsoft needed to show some of the same for thier product. Now that most comercial grade media encoders/ editers can produce in more then one format, it isn't as important. Actua
Re:Symbiotic relationship? (Score:4, Insightful)
Apparently, so would most Windows users.
Competition regulations? (Score:5, Interesting)
While Apple appears to provide a competing product Microsoft can always maintain that they don't have a complete monopoly and so are less likely to be the subject of calls to split them up.
This made business sence at Microsoft because Apple wasn't really a competitor... however, I believe Microsoft sees Apple to be an increasing risk (not "risc" ?!) and so is cutting back on Mac products which don't have a revenue stream.
If Apple's move to Intel has the effect of increasing Apple's market share expect Microsoft to withdraw Microsoft Office. Indeed, I expect Microsoft will be painfully slow to release an x86 native MacOffice at all.
We'll see.
Re:Competition regulations? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why? Microsoft makes money on Office for Mac.
Everyone who buys a Mac is a lost sale of Windows for Microsoft. But Microsoft still has a chance to make a profit by selling Office to that Mac user. Why would they want to lose a Windows sale AND an Office sale? The profit to Microsoft for a Mac user buying Office retail is probably greater than the profit from an OEM copy of Windows anyway.
Re:Symbiotic relationship? (Score:5, Insightful)
The MacWorld of 1998 had Jobs introducing Gates on stage, and they announced that M$ would make a US$150 million investment in Apple, buying US$75M of non-voting stock at twice the price (IIRC, AAPL was at $11/share, M$ paid $22/share). The deal also included a patent portfolio swap, where each has unlimited access to the other's patents royalty free. M$ agreed to support a fully functional version of office on the mac for at least 10 years. Apple agreed to drop its support of the anti-trust case. There were a bunch of other details in the deal which made the business rather unsavory, but both companies desperately needed each other at that moment in time.
Since then, it was obvious who really got the better end of that deal. Apple has unlimited access to every patent M$ owns or licenses from other companies. Apple can out-innovate M$ at every step, and never has to worry about a patent challenge in the courts. Jobs learned his lessons when dealing with Gates, and certainly made sure Apple couldn't be too screwed over by M$ later on. Now, with Apple rising on a whole raft of good, trendy, high-margin products and a completely independant distribution chain, and M$ floundering in a sea of troubles, it looks like Jobs is getting his revenge.
the AC
Corrections... (Score:5, Insightful)
The only concession Apple really made for Microsoft was to bundle IE as the default browser on the Mac for 5 years. Later in the DOJ's anti-trust case, Apple's Avi Tevanian testified that Microsoft had tried to get Apple to step out of the QuickTime for Windows business and focus only on video editing and playback on the Macintosh. Apple refused. Google for "quicktime knife the baby" for details.
it looks like Jobs is getting his revenge.
I think the only revenge Jobs ever wanted was for being kicked out of his own company. Not so much revenge even, it's more like vindication. He came back and led Apple out of the woods and back to greatness. The Mac/PC holy war was a lot like the Apple II/Mac holy war. Jobs invented it to serve his own purposes. He had no real emotional investment in it himself. That was made quite clear through his actions 8 1/2 years ago. I continued to allow folks like John Dvorak over at PC mag to goad me for a while after, but when the press no longer tagged Apple with the beleaguered moniker, I got over the whole thing myself. A computer is a tool. I prefer a Mac, but I can see where Windows PCs and various *nixes fit into the equation.
Bill Gates really doesn't figure into the picture here. He's always wanted to be the 'rockstar' that Jobs is, but no matter how much money he's made, he's never achieved that in his own mind. Jobs isn't concerned with Gates or money. After $100,000,000 he had more money than he could ever spend... to paraphrase Jobs. Jobs wants Apple to succeed out of personal pride. Beginning January 1, 1998 APPL has been a stock market superstar. Nobody can touch that track record. Given that they are still at 3% marketshare in their core market, they really have nowhere to go but up. Intel based Macs may very well be what turns the tables on Dell/HP/Lenovo dominance. And it won't have a thing to do with getting revenge on Gates. The technology deal with Microsoft announced at this MacWorld probably has a lot to do with that. Jobs wants Gates to support Windows on Apple hardware. Not as a replacement for OS X, but as a compliment to it. That way he can stand in front of a crowd at the next Macworld and say, "It slices, it dices, it runs Windows and Mac!" Jobs' "revenge" has nothing to do with Gates and everything to do with Jobs being escorted away from Apple campus in 1985. It's personal.
But that's just MHO :-)
Re:Symbiotic relationship? (Score:2)
The only thing that "Windows Media Player" for the Mac can play is unprotected WMV.
QuickTime plays avi's just fine.
Re:Symbiotic relationship? (Score:5, Informative)
Er, no it doesn't.
It's not really Quicktime's fault, but has something to do with either how AVI deals with MP3 audio tracks, or how people put MP3 audio into them. I've never been entirely clear.
But the great majority of Divx AVIs that you download (theoretically, or so I'm told, by some guy down at the 7-11 who knows such things) will not play in Quicktime "off the shelf." You'll get a black screen and no audio, or sometimes you'll get video and no audio, or desynced audio and video.
The fix is to run them through a little program called "Divx Doctor," which takes the AVI as an input and produces a Quicktime MOV file, either standalone or as a pointer to the content of the AVI, that you can play with. They work just fine.
Or you can just play the AVIs as-is in VLC, which also has the benefit of supporting playlists and some WMV codecs.
Quicktime technically has the ability to play AVIs, but it's a useless feature because of the way that 90% of the ones you'll find online are put together (Divx video with MP3 audio).
Huh? (Score:5, Funny)
So now they're going to buy all windows users a free mac?
Re:A joke, I know, but... (Score:3, Informative)
If you want to be very sure, you could always ask Apple directly, via their Quicktime Software Licensing page [apple.com] (which is relat
Closed Formats (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Closed Formats (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Closed Formats (Score:5, Informative)
This is actually a huge upgrade and great news for Mac users.
Re:Closed Formats (Score:3, Funny)
The latest WiMP for Mac would play WMV3 video just fine... as long as they were in a supported container type like a .wmv file. What it couldn't do was play WMV3 video in a .AVI wrapper, because .AVI was "too old" according to the error message. If you've had problems playing WMV3 it's because you've been downloading videos off the internet, where pe
Closed Formats : Linux (Score:3, Insightful)
If Microsoft is not prepared to support their products on competitor's operating systems, they should not be allowed to develop closed formats, APIs or interfaces.
What about the iTunes stuff for Linux - when is Apple going to support that?
They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:5, Interesting)
Ahh, good. Anything bad for WM* and friends is great news for us.
Re:They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:5, Insightful)
There's another reason as well. If Microsoft's actions limit the number of people who can view the files, there will be more of a push by consumers to get web sites like CNN.com that use Windows Media exclusively to support more formats. I think that Microsoft's hope is that this will keep people from migrating away from Windows, but I think it will have the opposite effect.
Re:They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:5, Interesting)
I never understood why so many sites have their video on a dumbass proprietary format. Do the PHBs mandate this, or are the webmasters/otherTechiesinvolved so clueless not to use a free/open format? Not everybody has windows or wants the hell that is real-player.
Is it bandwidth savings? Are the proprietary formats superior?
Marketshare BS (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:4, Insightful)
Streaming is technically very demanding from server software, so actually it is quite understandable that CNN or BBC uses Real and Windows Media to stream - because these formats are which have popular and usable players and their server parts.
Re:because Windows Media Player is aviable (Score:3, Insightful)
For example, I have seen much radios embrase Ogg Vorbis streaming, including quite famious Virgin R
Re:They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, however, Quicktime is getting a lot more popular. Everyone with iTunes has Quicktime, and every Mac user as well. It's not popular enough that it
Re:They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:3, Informative)
Re:They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:3, Insightful)
Neither should you have to. What's preventing you from simply offering both? Also, the OGG, Vorbis, Theora and Speex codecs are all available as DirectShow filters with a Windows installer from Xiph.org [xiph.org], so users don't have to leave WMP just to view content.
Re:They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:2, Interesting)
Next season, they announced they had improved their Mac support - and while still WMP, whatever they had done works fine in the OSX player
Re:They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:2)
Microsoft's DRM stuff never worked in Windows Media Palyer for Mac.. so this fact has been a reality for several years.
Re:They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:2)
That's wishful thinking, I'm afraid. The content industry is pushing very hard for DRM, and something as trivial as only being viewable on ~95% of home desktop computers won't worry them and therefore it won't worry the judges.
Besides, as long as MS don't make it impossible for competing DRM solutions to exist and work under Window
Re:They shoot themselves in the foot (Score:2)
Although, I totally understand the need to stick-it to the competition, they've just cut official support for the second largest consumer desktop OS, and an OS that is heavily used by those of us who work in new / digital media.
Unless they really reach out to this 3rd party, this is an incredibly dumb move. Annoying the new media designers is not the best way to get your file formats and codecs recommended as a potential solution to a project
I've been using the Mac non-stop-- (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I've been using the Mac non-stop-- (Score:2, Funny)
Not all, but why limit your porn choices?
WMP never part of MacBU (Score:5, Informative)
One interessting thing here is that Flip4Mac licenses technology from MS that MS now are paying to get back
Hold back the crowds! (Score:2)
And if you listen very closely, you can hear the hoards of Mac users who need this feature rushing out to pay for it!
Err, or maybe that is just the sound of paint drying...
But seriously, good on the developers of Flip4Mac! They have done an excellent job. There appear to be some stability issues, especially with QuickTime7.0.4, but otherwise, I think it does an excellent job and fo
That's a feature, not a bug (Score:5, Insightful)
"Decode" is the only thing anyone in their right mind should be doing with WMV.
Re:WMP never part of MacBU (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, the QuickTime platform has had very nice interactive capabilities for many, many years now. Where Apple has lagged has been in authoring tools, since the company that dominates the authoring tools market (MacroMedia) decided to promote their own format rather than QuickTime, tools from other companies were only "OK", and Apple never released a first-class QT interactive authoring tool of its own.
This is actually good for users (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft probably didn't want to update Media Player to be a universal binary, so decided upon this option. They are distributing the plugin [microsoft.com] on their website for free, so this is a win-win situation.
Re:This is actually good for users (Score:2)
Re:This is actually good for users (Score:5, Funny)
What? I thought this is a Win-Mac situation!
Flip4Mac offered from Microsoft (Score:3, Informative)
Check out the page. It lets Quicktime play wmv. I don't believe it's originally made by MS (not sure) but they are distributing a basic playback version for free. There's a more advanced version that lets one edit video streams as well. This is very cool, and better than dealing with the WMV player for Mac... Almost as annoying as Quicktime client for windows. Any way--mac, windows, linux/*bsd...I use mplayer or vlc. The odd wmv is the only thing I use wmv for, and this appears to solve that need.
It's not MS, and phones home to parent company (Score:3, Interesting)
Anyway, it wasn't created by MS, but actually licensed from Telestream, Inc. [flipcenter.com]. This can be verified by the press release from them [flipcenter.com], but also because the plugin actually phones home to FlipCenter.com when it is used -- probably for update checks.
Obviously, it's a little half-baked.
Excellent... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Excellent... (Score:5, Funny)
Remarkable. I had no idea the Mac port was such a faithful translation of the Windows version.
WMP, I'd rather eat glass (Score:2, Funny)
MS hasn't *improved* WMP since version 2
No big deal (Score:3, Interesting)
So why is Microsoft behaving more or less reasonably as of late? Are they losing their guerilla edge in middle age? Lord knows it hasn't been (US) government pressure.
Cute Microsoft Joke (Score:5, Funny)
I never knew what the sound of hot coffee comming out of my nose and splattering all over my monitor and keyboard sounded like until I saw that quote.
Quicktime is no better (Score:4, Interesting)
Basic functionality like Full Screen support, what the?!?
I just paid $AUS4,000 for a system and now I have to pay another $AUS45 to watch something in full screen?
Apple might be all funky and groovey, but they really bleed every cent out of you for any added features.
This stuff should be stock standard.
On my god, mod me down - I've just flamed Apple!
Three Letters (Score:5, Informative)
I love it to death. It does everything quicktime should do.
videolan.org
Re:Three Letters (Score:3, Informative)
Though, I have not tried to hard.
Re:Quicktime is no better (Score:2)
Re:Quicktime is no better (Score:3, Interesting)
Basic functionality like Full Screen support, what the?!? ''
I can play videos in full screen in my Macintosh without any problems, without having to pay any money for it.
Apple ships all Macs with a free video player. It is called iTunes.
Re:Quicktime is no better (Score:5, Informative)
No, you definitely do not have to pay $45. Just play the video in iTunes, or mplayer, or VLC. Who told you that Quicktime was the only was to play videos?
Corrected version of the editorial (Score:2)
Here is a corrected version of the editorial:
Adam Anderson told News.com, 'It's basically a business decision for Microsoft. Like any other company, we have business priorities. Yeah you see because and customer satisfaction and software features are clearly not #1.
Who cares? That's why we have MPlayer... (Score:2)
WMP for Mac couldn't play back the most recent WMV codec anyhow. Quite irritating.
Great news (Score:2)
I have not tested Flip4Mac yet but if it basically lets us play WMV and behaves just like Quicktime, I'm a happy man.
I hope they stop support fo
Are you Sirius? (Score:2, Interesting)
Safari crashes (Score:3, Interesting)
I might try a reboot - can anyone remember how to reboot a PowerBook? It's been a while.
Re:Safari crashes (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Safari crashes (Score:2)
Flip4Mac for free works for me! (Score:2)
When is an upgrade not an upgrade? (Score:5, Insightful)
MacOS pioneered a ubiquitous universal media layer with QT and making the MS codecs part of that is just plain shu-weet. Most real users aren't all that concerned about how pretty or not the default player is, the big concern is getting the material in and out of any/all applications.
Now everything, from Pages to Word to whatever, will be able to embed, play, link almost every format.
Yeah, almost. Nope, not talking Real (is anyone?), rather the latest codecs from MS. I'm told by my video geekin' buddies that Flip4Mac, nifty as it is, is last year's code and can't handle the latest 'n greatest WMP 10 codes from MS. Anyone know the truth on this, done any testing?
However, more importantly, in spite of MS's promise at MacWorld last week of another 5 years of Mac Office (all of which is good profit) word is the black spot is on Mac projects and folks are being reassigned, contractors not being extended, the MacBU folks off in Sili Valley are finding their req's from the Redmond mothership are taking longer and loonggeerrrr to fill.
If so then there really is a sea change and the gentleman's agreement between MS & Apple seems to be coming to an end. Sure MS is gonna keep the Office stuff, heck most of it started on the Mac, makes money, and is a check-off item on procurement sheets requiring cross-platform.
But media, where Apple has traditionally been strong, where the iPod reigns, where his Steveness rules both a computer company and a production studio, where cross-platform for everyone has always been the rule, may be where the real break starts to happen. Apple has always been lazy about QT under Windows (heck QT Player still doesn't make use of Overlay, making it often a pain to work with) is MS now returning the favor and poisoning their own well?
Will next year the response to "I can't get this to play on my Mac" be "Install Windows Vista on it"?
Re:When is an upgrade not an upgrade? (Score:2)
If Comedycentral.com and cartoonnetwork.com are any indication, your friend is quite right.
business decision (Score:4, Insightful)
Windows Media Player has been really important for the Mac because there are a lot of media out there that are WMF only.
However, we can hope that this will accelerate the move to open formats.
Does it actually work? (Score:2)
Sadly no. WMP on Mac is a joke. It crashes or fails constantly. It simply did not work. So I stumbled across Flip4Mac before MS started distrbuting it and I thought my problems were all solved. Things seemed to begin loading...
But nothing ever plays. Not on ComedyCentral, not on Cartoon Netwo
No more Media Player? (Score:2, Interesting)
I stopped using WMP a LONG time ago and switched to using VLC for my movie playback needs - Windows, Mac, Linux, *BSD, and BeOS... At least with VLC on an unsecured box I know what is in the file or stream I am trying to play, and hell, the view messages feature is one of the best damn tools ever included - I use it all the time to help my ignorant-of-such-things-as-codecs to figure out what codec they need to download and install.
I don't think anyone
oh my! (Score:2)
flip4mac issues (Score:3, Informative)
1. if you right-click on a
2. playback is fine, but navigating within the file is problematic - trying to skip to the middle of a file usually results in the 'counter keeps ticking, but the video and audio freezes' problem.
3. opening files can (but doesn't always) take forever, and it has nothing to do with the size of the file.
4. it's a good stopgap, but it still chokes on the occasional file - one in ten or so.
Not saying it's not an interesting project, but it's not the holy grail either. I find that VLC is, if not as dependable (flip4mac opens files that VLC routinely chokes on) at least more flexible if it manages to open the file in the first place.
3rd Party Filling the void? (Score:4, Informative)
However, I'm not sure there is a void that needs filling.
MplayerOSX [sourceforge.net] has always worked great for playing anything on my Mac that Quicktime couldn't handle.
WMV exporting on Mac (Score:4, Interesting)
First, I agree with all above who have extolled the utter worthlessness of WMP (on either platform). I use this as an exemplar of evil UI design. What maroon decided that dragging the time cursor should NOT update the image in real time, as it does in QT Player? Who decided that hiding the config menu in some elaborately hokey frame was good design? And on and on... Piece 'o crap. Glad to see the back of it (though I only briefly ever used in on Mac and usually deleted it soon after). Still have to live with it on Windoze unless M$ caves completely and lets Flip4Mac do a QT codec for Windoze also. Ha!
Anyway, I write to mention experiences with the 2 contenda's for outputting WMVs from Mac, which are PopWire Technology and Flip4Mac. I've used PopWire's $30 (only!) WMV9 Export Component for QuickTime (a plug-in to QT) for about a year with great satisfaction. As much as I hate to create WMV's for anyone, the job and benighted clients sometimes require them. I've found that WMV is the all around best format to give someone a movie to embed into Windoze PowerPoint presentations.
The PopWire QT plug-in means that any and all QT apps (Final Cut, QT Pro, etc.) can directly output WMV as an exported file. Very handy. And, so far, no complaints: the quality is excellent as is the speed of conversion. I've used some of the (many) built-in presets, and diddled up a few of my own. The options dialog even lets you insert copyright and title and author metadata. Highly recommended.
I discovered Flip4Mac about a month ago and dorked with the demos, then last week hit the Buy button for WMV Studio Pro. So far, I've had OK success. I first tried to export some pieces I had created with After Effects (Animation or in other cases 10-bit uncompressed BlackMagic codec), using the 2-pass VBR in WMV SP. Not good. Not good at all! Took a REALLY long time (dual 2Ghz G5) and looked absolutely awful. I was getting a little sweaty palmed about all those bucks I just fired off to these guys, plus the deadline looming...
So I tried again with a 1-pass CBR preset, and while it took what seemed like a much longer time than PopWire would have, it did give a comparably respectable result. So I need to do some more tests to find out what works and what doesn't given different input material.
I have had reasonable success viewing the odd WMV on the web using the Flip4Mac web QT plug-in that is installed as part of the free WMV Player (all this functionality is included in the higher end, pay-fer products like Studio Pro). However, I saw that someone else had trouble with the Comedy Channel movies. I did also: I don't care really, I was just looking for a sample WMV to try out the install of last night's 2.0.1 patch, but I don't have an answer for what CC does wrong that everyone else seems to do right. Maybe it is a streaming thing?
Fair enough (Score:3, Insightful)
Quicktime is a great player -- but there's still several file formats it can't play by default. Mostly MS formats (like their various non-standard MPG4 versions). The plugins require all sorts of gymnastics to get them working on Quicktime. If MS gets someone to make a good, easy to install plugin for Quicktime, that covers all their WMP formats, that would be a good thing.
Cheers.
Its free (Score:2, Insightful)
But to import the files into other programs, rather than just watch them, you need to purchase flip4mac.
Uh Huh (Score:2)
Well, perhaps after the five years are up that they agreed to develop Office for...
I do think Microsoft perceives Apple as a serious threat in online video and that's why they are dropping all support there. However it may not matter if ITMS and Google are the central source to go for most video content (well, whenever Google gets aorund to
Re:Uh Huh (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:More to follow (Score:5, Funny)
Apple fans have taken to the street to celebrate this development.
Re:yes but... (Score:2)
Microsoft would do better to collapse their product lines back to the stuff that actually makes a profit. If they want to make a better experience for Windows users (or whatever their wanky statement was) they should focus on a small, tight, modular, fast Windows without all the bloat. As I type this I don't think I have a single Microsoft program open
Re:yes but... (Score:2)
Re:yes but... (Score:2)
Re:Wasn't WM for Mac a result of a lawsuit? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not saying this is his motivation, the publicity seems to have really payed off. =P I predict we start seeing more of this. (i.e. no more full-blown office-on-mac - just converter software)
Re:Point for discussion (Score:5, Interesting)
Quicktime on the Mac is absolutely great mainly because it's so tightly integrated into the system and has sooo many years of development under its belt. The only drawback, is that if you want to save a video directly, go full screen, play back MPeg2s in it, or use it to export to other formats, you'll need to pay Apple $30 for the pro license. Earlier versins of QT did all of this for free. I own the pro license for both my Macs and PCs, so I'm not bothered by those deliberate shortcomings.
QT pro is quite uesfull for me on both platforms and for what it can do, at only $30, if you need these features, is a much better bargain than any other similar app I could find. Just to give you an example, there are some codecs that I still can not convert on my Mac, mainly the old Indeo formats. When it comes to my PC software, I'm cheap, so I didn't want to spend that much on an app that could convert these videos into a format I could edit, so I spent days looking for preferably a free convertor for Windows and checked out demos of apps that could do it for under $200. I finally found a convertor that actually worked, at just over double the price of QT Pro and its final result wasn't that great, with a noticable loss of quality from the original no matter how I tweaked its limited settings. I always export to a raw format if possible, so that I can keep any loss of quality to a minimum, since I'll be recompressing later on. Anyways, I ended up buying QT Pro, since it can export these f*ed up codecs and at only $30 it did exacatly what I needed it to do with the desired and predictable results. My only other option(s), would've been to spend $400 on Cleaner XL for the PC, or some other similar app. And from experience, PCs now days can be quite slow when compared to Macs for video work in general, mainly because of Windows, so the last thing I'd want to do is spend that much money on a comp that's much better suited for other tasks. (I'm probably going to tick of some ignorant Anonymous Coward with that comment.) I also own Cleaner 6 for the Mac, which is a complete POS!!! So I defintely didn't want to give Discreet at the time more money.
QT on the PC is good now days IMO, but just like iTunes it's a step down from its Mac counterpart. I personally haven't had any issues in the past couple of years, but I do recall when QT was complete crap on a PC and on older configurations and in some cases with newer comps, it still is.
Here's another case where QT Pro is actualy better than MP, at least version 10 and that's in Mpeg2 playback speed. This was the case last year, so if MS has released a fix, I haven't updated my PC in over 5 months. MP9 on the PC has never had an issue and it's what one of my clients used to view the mpeg2s I created for his company, before putting it on their propietory boxes for further testing. After the techs upgraded his system to WMP 10, I got a call asking why my latest video wasn't palying smoothly. Anyways, I hadn't changed my settings before compressing and had a set standard I had to encode each video to. I ended up bringing my Powerbook down, showed him it played fine, where as his 3.4 GHz was now chocking, and it wasn't until we finally tested it on another PC in his office that still was using WM9, that it was not longer my problem. To finish my ramblings, his company purchased QT Pro for his PC and sure enough it played just as smoothly as it had with WM9.
WMV on the Mac has never improved. It suffers from poor play back speed, where a VLC and MPlayer will hand the same WMVs perfectly. I own Flip4Mac, so that I can convert WMVs into friendly format for my video apps, but every other month or so, I'm running into new videos that it can't play. Then they update it, it works, then once again, I run into more WMVs that will not play on it.
IMO, WMV definitely sucks worse in this case, because even though QT is
Re:Point for discussion (Score:3, Interesting)
Apple integration of qt into OS = good
MS integration of browser into OS = bad
Huh?
Mac users, don't shed a tear. WMP, IMO is bad for a number of reasons when you look at the competition. I gave WMP 10 an honest try on my work computer to keep a list of whatever MP3s I had on my system at the time. For some strange reason I get duplicates of the same song, in consecutive order. No way to easily cle
Re:It's not Office.....yet (Score:4, Insightful)
Basically, the Mac provides something that Linux currently cannot provide. It is a platform that software vendors recognize enough to willingly support as an end-user platform. Also, in the laptop world, it has 100% compatability and support with *all* the hardware features of the laptops on which it runs.
Even if I did eventually switch to a PC laptop, and tried to run Linux on it, I'd pretty much have to pay for something like CrossOver Office just to be able to use the darn thing.
If only MS (and everyone else) would realize that MS Office is an even more difficult monopoly on the buisness world than Windows itself... If somehow pigs flew and MS decided to make MS Office for Linux, two things would happen: 1. We'd all flame it while praising OpenOffice. 2. Those of us trying to use Linux as a work desktop would actually try to buy it in droves.
Re:I wonder what would happen if..... (Score:3, Interesting)
Why can't we all just use MPEGS and AVIs, and forget about movs and wmvs. there's no point to proprietary video codecs when there are so many open alternatives that are free and oftentimes superior (MPEG4 H.264 comes to mind)
Come on, it's not like Linux where when you switch to it it's really hard for n00bs, they are just video files!
And of course on that note, VLC rocks.