Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

220 comments

VLC or MPlayer (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15256537)

Which does anyone prefer?

Re:VLC or MPlayer (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15256553)

Your mother.

Re:VLC or MPlayer (3, Interesting)

broeman (638571) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256646)

both.

I use VLC for my IPTV-provider, because RTSP sucks in mplayer (at least for me). For the rest, I am a mplayer-fan, with support for as many codecs as possible.

Eventhough, I don't think this mainly is about VLC vs. MPlayer. Both applications uses many of the same libraries, but with different implementation. MPlayer also gets its "hands dirty" with DeCSS and WMV "support" in *nix.

Re:VLC or MPlayer (1)

Realistic_Dragon (655151) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256766)

Eventhough, I don't think this mainly is about VLC vs. MPlayer. Both applications uses many of the same libraries, but with different implementation. MPlayer also gets its "hands dirty" with DeCSS and WMV "support" in *nix.

And, importantly for some, provides plugin support for a whole crapload of stuff - especially on amd64 where realplayer seems not to want to go. With no mplayer I coudn't listen to BBC raido unless I wanted to muck around with the 32 bit bin version of firefox.

Re:VLC or MPlayer (1)

dionoea (833823) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256810)

Eventhough, I don't think this mainly is about VLC vs. MPlayer. Both applications uses many of the same libraries, but with different implementation. MPlayer also gets its "hands dirty" with DeCSS and WMV "support" in *nix.


VLC also uses DeCSS. It is also able to use dmo windows codecs on unix (which makes WMV3 readable).

Xine can be used as a library (4, Insightful)

billybob2 (755512) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256858)

Unfortunately, neither VLC nor MPlayer can be included as libraries in other multimedia applications. Having to work with an embedded instance of VLC and MPlayer is a pain and not conducive to extending functionality in object-oriented fashion.

Xine [xinehq.de] and its corresponding library Xine-lib [xinehq.de] , on the other hand, can be used as libraries inside other frontend applications such as Kaffeine [sourceforge.net] and AmaroK [kde.org] . This allows the frontend apps to focus on what they do best: GUI, usability and eyecandy, while the multimedia-intensive parts can be neatly accessed through an API.

Re:Xine can be used as a library (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257091)

Unfortunately, neither VLC nor MPlayer can be included as libraries in other multimedia applications.

You either don't know what you're talking about, or you're trolling.

No, mplayer can't be used as a library, but most of it's functionality comes directly from ffmpeg/libavcodec, which CAN be used as a library, and IS used by a HUGE number of projects.

Re:Xine can be used as a library (1)

rg3 (858575) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257377)

Being an MPlayer user, it's fair to say that xine-lib is the "good side" of Xine. I've only used it once in a program, and it made trivial for me to play a sound (and it accepted WAV, MP3...). ffmpeg is a much more low-level library. You can use it in your project, but it does not provide the same level of convenience or abstraction as xine-lib. That's why Amarok uses xine-lib, for example.

Re:VLC or MPlayer (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257264)

I use VLC for my IPTV-provider, because RTSP sucks in mplayer (at least for me).

MPlayer uses the live555.com library for RTSP support, which is exactly the same thing VLC uses. Your problems are likely local issues (perhaps a binary package without live555 support?), and not actually problems with MPlayer.

MPlayer also gets its "hands dirty" with DeCSS and WMV "support" in *nix.

DeCSS was a Windows program. The Unix version was css-auth. Shortly after, libdvdcss was reverse-engineered to give legal DVD playback, and that is what has been used by every player (since about 2001, IIRC).

The ironic thing is, not only does VLC support libdvdcss, but libdvdcss was in fact written and maintained BY the VLC team, as you could tell from the fact that the official libdvdcss URL is on their server: http://developers.videolan.org/libdvdcss/ [videolan.org]

Re:VLC or MPlayer (3, Informative)

Yold (473518) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256825)

VLC seems to be the fastest client between quicktime and mplayer on OSX. Both VLC and MPlayer were native builds too (no xdarwin). I have a slow, old 600mhz ibook, and I am able to surf the web, open apps, etc, and really never see choppy video. Especially with large video files MPlayer and Quicktime seem to bog down, I was unable to watch a 70 mb episode of Aqua Teen Hunger Force without horrible framerates on either QT or MPlayer, but VLC worked perfectly.

Re:VLC or MPlayer (2, Informative)

pklinken (773410) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257144)

I have a 400 mhz G4 Powerbook and MPlayer plays everything smoothly (usually even in reduced CPU mode).
However, if I have the Preview function in Finder turned on, and it tries to preview a 700 mb DivX, I end up killing Finder because it takes all CPU resources until it's done previewing (seemingly forever).

Re:VLC or MPlayer (1)

hunterkll (949515) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257158)

70MB? You using quicktime? :D

Re:VLC or MPlayer (1)

esocid (946821) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256888)

MPlayer...the command line...in linux

Re:VLC or MPlayer (-1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257112)

VLC or MPlayer

I use Windows Media Player with the pink Britney Spears skin!

Oh shit that's a Linux geeks gathering isn't it... please have mercy on my poor soul, it was a mistake!

*runs away*

MISTERIOUS (1, Funny)

dhakbar (783117) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256545)

Wow. The world is full of mistery.

This whole thing is a mystery.

Re:MISTERIOUS (-1, Redundant)

Avyakata (825132) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256573)

lyke omgZ!11!11111!!!!! i di'dnt notice that or n e thing! lolz! [I'm sorry, I think I'm in a bad mood and therefore am starting to sympathize with others...]

Misterious (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15256554)

Seems to be mistspelled

For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (3, Informative)

NeMon'ess (160583) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256559)

I tried MPlayer a year or two ago for Windows. I'm sure it's much improved since then. I've been sticking with BSplayer [bsplayer.com] though since it has so much functionality and usable skins. It has easy aspect ratio correction, low CPU usage, and key re-mapping, among it's many useful features. The key controls is what converted me from the other players I tried.

Anyone tried both more recently?

usable skins? (-1, Troll)

Vyvyan Basterd (972007) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256627)

Is that like fucking for virginity?

Re:usable skins? (0, Redundant)

dorkygeek (898295) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256706)

Well, have you ever asked yourself what the BS in BSPlayer stands for?

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (2, Informative)

NutscrapeSucks (446616) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256634)

The programs don't really compare. BSPlayer is a front-end to Windows Media (see also MPC and ZoomPlayer). MPlayer is a reimplementation of a bunch of codecs and therefore independant of the WM infrastructure.

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (4, Informative)

ADRA (37398) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257799)

On my Windows based TV computer:
Choice: Media Player Classic (MPC)
Reasoning:

1. I've never had CPU issues playing video, so I can't say that program X or program Y are more efficient.

2. Feature for feature, I've never seen any players with as many abilities as MPC. If you're leet and wanna dabble with the decoders, they let you do all kinds of thing with DirectShow. They accelerate output on DX9, The inbound codecs can be anyones. I use ffdshow, MPC, or even the official vendor codecs for things like format decoding/splitting/etc. I have the control to rewire them at my leasure if I like one over another. My experience with DVD playback is flawless.

3. Configuration is easy and straight forward for those that know how to use it. For those that don't, the default installation (with 3rd party directshow codecs installed) requires no config.

The only reservation I have with it is that sometimes I notice a cleaner picture with the powerdvd filters and I hate mapping the powerdvd filters into MPC to play it just to switch back later.

Say what you will about hating windows based technologies, but once I've tuned to my likes, it works amazingly well and I can't think of any platform media player / tech that I like more than MPC / DirectShow.

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (1)

NeMon'ess (160583) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257851)

Can you elaborate? I've had files that Windows Media Player 9 and Classic (version 6.4) could not open, but BSplayer could. Some files WMP9 could not seek through the files because of a damaged keyframe index, but BSplayer could. Currently, some filetypes are rendered with ffdshow, and other with divx 6 or xvid. BSplayer is how I control the playback though and resize, or swap audio streams.

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (1)

epiphani (254981) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256653)

I'm big on Media Player Classic on windows. Small, lightweight, and generally handles just about everything. There are a few codec packs out there that are required to do some things, but its generally ok.

BSplayer annoyed me when I first tried it, but then again it also kinda struck me as spyware the first time around. My mistake.

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (1)

NeMon'ess (160583) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257063)

Dang it. The free version does come with adware now, but only since February 16th. I haven't upgraded since November (version 1.36) so I was unaware.

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (1)

pavon (30274) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256725)

I love VLC. I use it mainly on my Mac, but have also run it in Linux and Windows. The interface is very clean and straight forward, and it has played every file I have thrown at it. The only problem I have had with it is reading DVDs from the drive (if I copy the files to disk it seem to work fine). Don't know if this is specific to the Mac.

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15257369)

Won't play WMV3 or the latest Real codecs, though.

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (1)

zakezuke (229119) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256729)

It (BSplayer) has easy aspect ratio correction, low CPU usage, and key re-mapping, among it's many useful features. The key controls is what converted me from the other players I tried.

While mplayer does have the ability for key remaping, one thing it lacks over winamp is that nice 3rd mouse scroll feature. Default scroll wheel is volume, 3rd button and scroll is jump forward and back. Mplayer is nice but i've not managed to figure out how to define anything beyond mouse buttons. While I do have a wireless keyboard, I find the wireless trackball infaninatly more handy. I "could" buy a wireless numeric keypad, but i'm cheap and prefer to use what I got.

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (1)

Shark (78448) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256972)

Well, both mplayer and VLC support keymapping. You'll find VLC's interface to mapping keys a tad easier though.

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (1)

Low2000 (606536) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256985)

I'm a bit wary of BSplayer since it contains WhenU spyware.

Is there a version without I can try?

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257054)

It has easy aspect ratio correction, low CPU usage, and key re-mapping, among it's many useful features.

MPlayer has lower CPU usage than any other video player I've ever tried on Windows. It really uses around half the CPU time to play videos as something like MPC does. Frankly, I really don't understand how Windows can be so terrible at multimedia, and why people aren't more upset about something like DVD playback using 50% of their multi-GHz CPU.

As for usability, there are several 3rd party MPlayer GUIs for Windows which make it rather easy to operate.

MPlayer supports arbitrary key remaping beyond any other player out there. You can bind any key to any of ~100 functions the player can perform. You can arbitrarily define how far you want it to seek forward/backward with each key, etc. You can bind a key to change the aspect on-the-fly if you want.

Re:For Windows at least- BSplayer instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15257763)

From bsplayer.com:

This version has an client-side software application Whenu Save! that deliver a limited number of behaviorally targeted and contextually relevant coupons, ads and comparative shopping results directly to consumers desktops - without compromising the privacy, security or smooth functioning of peoples computers!
No URL hijacking or redirects!


Yeah, right. Think I'll pass on that "behaviorally targeted" junkware, thanks.

"misterious"? (2, Insightful)

gik (256327) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256577)

I don't even know what to say to that one.

Guys, If you want to be taken seriously, take the time to correct stupid mistakes such as this.

*Rubs eyes in disbelief*

Re:"misterious"? (1)

Chris Pimlott (16212) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256851)

From the number of mispellings and awkward phrasings, I'm guessing this article was written by a non-native English speaker.

Re:"misterious"? (1)

Golias (176380) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257339)

I'm guessing this article was written by a non-native English speaker.

And edited by somebody with a third-grade education and no access to basic spell-check software.

Re:"misterious"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15257815)

Idiot. They are Hungarian, just how well do you speak that language? When you develop the de-facto media player for Linux, that will also run on OS X, BSD and windows, which is also embedded in hardware DVD machines, come back and do a Hungarian interview for us all.

Spell Check? (1, Redundant)

metaomni (667105) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256590)

I mean, that one is just terrible. It's "mysterious".

Re:Spell Check? (1)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257084)

What are you on about, I think its Brillant!

Misterious? (4, Funny)

teshuvah (831969) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256628)

Is that when its so misterious that they're is actual myst around it? You minus well knot even reed articles that our written by peeple with such bad speeling.

Re:Misterious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15256812)

I believe they meant to say that MPlayer has a MSterious versioning system. Mmm'kay?

Re:Misterious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15256891)

To borrow from ATHF:

Meatwad with a spray bottle: "I'm Mr. Mister -- I get pissed, you get mist!"

Re:Misterious? (0)

Pedrito (94783) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257349)

I'm curious how well you'd be doing posting reviews in say, Urdu or Hungarian. I strongly suspect the interviewer's native language isn't English. I don't know where the different guys on the team are from, but I know for sure that English isn't Oded's native tongue either. And with names like Diego Biurrun and Alex Beregszaszi, it's a good guess they're not native speakers of your precious language either. So, you might want to take your provincial attitude to your private little world where everyone speaks English fluently, or you could just cut them a break. At least they speak more than one language.

Re:Misterious? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15257713)

here here!

Is mplayer relevant? (1, Troll)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256642)

Why not just use xine and be done with it? From what I've seen, xine does everything that mplayer does, and more, so why bother.

Or am I missing something?

Re:Is mplayer relevant? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15256707)

  1. I don't want to use a GUI.
  2. xine doesn't play many files I try, and I don't want to figure out how to fix it.
  3. mplayer plays video files on slow machines smoother than xine.

Re:Is mplayer relevant? (2, Informative)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256754)

I don't want to use a GUI.

Neither do I. I have xine called from my myth box, which doesn't have a keyboard.

xine doesn't play many files I try, and I don't want to figure out how to fix it.

I haven't had any problems with VOBs, MPGs, AVIs, ISOs.

mplayer plays video files on slow machines smoother than xine.

Subjective. I've had smooth dvd playback on a pIII 550 ( coppermine ).

Re:Is mplayer relevant? (2, Interesting)

chrismcdirty (677039) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256814)

But I have had problems with WMVs, ASFs, and other proprietary formats.

Re:Is mplayer relevant? (2, Informative)

Cinder6 (894572) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256770)

In my experience, mplayer runs faster (and has mencoder). Xine always seems to desync audio and video when fast forwarding in large files, on every system I have tried it on. Also, I've never had a problem opening a file in mplayer, but I have in xine.

I'll agree that xine is better for DVDs, though!

you troll... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15256941)

Xine basically takes all of MPlayer's hard codec work and puts a nice face on it. Without MPlayer, Xine would languish.

Is xine relevant? (4, Funny)

dabadab (126782) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256953)

Why not just use mplayer and be done with it? From what I've seen, mplayer does everything that xine does, and more, so why bother.

Or am I missing something?

Re:Is xine relevant? (1)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257482)

dvd menus

Re:Is xine relevant? (3, Funny)

dabadab (126782) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257607)

"[MPlayer is missing] dvd menus"

Oh, I thought that was a feature.

Re:Is mplayer relevant? (5, Informative)

evilviper (135110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257003)

From what I've seen, xine does everything that mplayer does, and more, so why bother.

Xine is much slower, has a terrible interface, supports fewer audio/video codecs, takes longer to get support for newer codecs, doesn't do ANY encoding at all, doesn't support a fraction as many output audio/video devices. Doesn't have a fraction of the great video/audio filters that MPlayer does. Uses far, far more CPU-time than MPlayer. Has a god-awful interface, and no simple command-line version. Murders puppies. Doesn't include options like allowing you to output JPEGs out of every 100ths frame. Doesn't allow you to process the video, then output to yuv4mpeg for encoding with other programs. etc.

The difference between XINE and MPlayer are really the difference between Windows and Unix... Do you want a monolithic program, which can't be scripted, and has many, many restrictions imposed on it, or a small, simple tool that you can script to manipulate and modify data any way you choose?

OH! OH OH! ME ME ME! (1)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257312)

Do you want a monolithic program, which can't be scripted, and has many, many restrictions imposed on it, or a small, simple tool that you can script to manipulate and modify data any way you choose?
Number One!

No, wait ... Number Two!

Wait wait wait ... oh, damn, I was sure I had it right. Can't I have both?

I can? Oh, well that's fine then.

Re:Is mplayer relevant? (1, Informative)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257557)

"monolithic" is what makes mplayer feel to me. It's just me? Lots of options, yes, really versatile, but....

Don't get me wrong. I've zero idea about mplayer internals, but I wonder why ej: mplayer is a big binary monolith instead of something more modular which can be used by other people.

Xine may not be perfect, but I've seen people reusing xine in other places: enlightenment 17, for one. Or totem-xine which has, BTW, a firefox plugin to allow people see videos with a gui to handle videos, something that linux desktop has been missing for years (and don't even mention the useful but ugly hack that mozplugger is, please). Not to mention that it's used by nautilus to do things like ej: generate thumbnails. Mplayer may be a good video player, but xine is a *useful* video player.

Re:Is mplayer relevant? (1)

Orrin Bloquy (898571) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257762)

Murders puppies.

Now if that isn't a Frist Post, I don't know what is.

Re:Is mplayer relevant? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15257257)

For Windows, mplayer is great. It plays -everything- without messy codecs installed all over the place.

It's also a pretty damn clean interface, that I prefer to Xine (and MS Media Player).

Re:Is mplayer relevant? (1)

caseih (160668) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257512)

Maybe things have changed recently, but I always found mplayer to quickly lose video/audio syncing and often segfaults, although I disovered that the segfaulting is because of the video output device somehow. Using gmplayer works fine. But xine just works better for me. I run it from the command line (Gui hidden) and it plays everything I throw at it.

When will it stop segfaulting? (2, Insightful)

ajs (35943) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256652)

I'm constantly running into segfaults in mplayer. I don't know if it's just a whacky codec or what, but no matter what the input, no player should ever segfault on any media. If it does, that means that memory is being handled poorly, and that's a potential opportunity for an attack vector.

Re:When will it stop segfaulting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15256683)

Or how about the infamous YOUR COMPUTER IS TOO SLOW TO PLAY THIS FILE!!!!!! message?

My computer is NOT too damned slow. If I can play Quake IV, I should be able to play some grainy AVI file I got off eMule.

Re:When will it stop segfaulting? (2, Informative)

Solra Bizna (716281) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256850)

MPlayer is very sensitive to compiler version and optimization flags. Try a different compiler, or a different version of the same compiler.

-:sigma.SB

MOD PARENT UP (1)

molarmass192 (608071) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257043)

That's the cause in 99% of MPlayer segfaults. If all else fails, use i586 to build it or find an i586 binary. MPlayer gets very cranky when an i686 build is used on a non-pentiumpro CPU. However, MPlayer does very much rule, when DVD menus are added, it will be the best all around media solution for Linux. DVD playing on MPlayer right now is a bit tricky, you need to know the chapter you're looking for.

Re:When will it stop segfaulting? (1)

Jerf (17166) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256852)

I'm constantly running into segfaults in mplayer. I don't know if it's just a whacky codec or what, but no matter what the input, no player should ever segfault on any media.

While that is certainly literally true, it's worth pointing out that codecs are bits of code that are pushed hardest to extract every bit of performance out of them. Such hyper-optimization tends to result in other qualities of the code taking longer to catch up when compared to a more normal type of program, such as "stability" and "readability".

Is that bad? Yeah, sure, whynot. Is there a way around it? Probably not; because of the desire for performance the codecs are often flying without a net, including significant chunks of assembler. Changing a codec to, say, Python would cut out the segfaults, but would cost a lot of performance; I'll pull a number out of my ass and call it at least 1000x slower.

You can't have it all.

Re:When will it stop segfaulting? (4, Informative)

evilviper (135110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256931)

I'm constantly running into segfaults in mplayer.

Segfaults are very, very rare. If you are seeing one, you should report it: http://www.mplayerhq.hu/DOCS/HTML/en/bugreports.ht ml [mplayerhq.hu]

Major problems like that, always get fixed quickly.

As I said, segfaults are very rare these days. Most of the time segfaults are reported, it's buggy hardware (hot CPU, RAM, videocard, etc.) or a known-buggy version of GCC (2.96, 3.3, etc).

Re:When will it stop segfaulting? (1)

IgLou (732042) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256974)

Well from what they say in the article it must be a problem with your system because...

"our releases are not even beta, they are perfectly stable"

Someone get these guys in marketing, that's where they should really be! Either that or it might remotely be possible that they have a different understanding of the term stable compared to others.

Re:When will it stop segfaulting? (2, Interesting)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257411)

I'm constantly running into segfaults in mplayer.

I'm not surprised. I hacked mplayer once. And I do mean hacked, not programmed.

For starters, mplayer.c is 4000 lines long. Apparently only one man really knows what's going on in there, and he's not taking a look at it. Making sense of it was beyond what my cursory overview of the code could muster. Near as I could tell most of it was written to deal with bugs.

The main developers are from eastern europe, I think. They have a pechant for three letter variables, and not a character over. Terse and unreadable code is also preferred. I remember being asked why I dond't compress a three line, readable piece of code into a once liner, line noise version. Comments have long since passed into myth. I sometimes wondered if their compilers supported them.

The mplayer system is based on plugins. Written in c code that is hacked to the limit to introduce, insofar as it is possible, object orientation into c. Void pointers abound, and are probably the most common datatype in the respository.

The main mplayer "filter chain", works backwards, with each filter pointing to the previous one in the chain. It's method completely escaped me, but it did support adding filters on the fly... sort of.

All that said, the program is fantastic. I've rarely encountered many bugs, and its abilites are amazing. I've yet to encounter a video, audio or subtitle stream it cannot handle, and mencoder can write to a multitude of formats. Once you grok the command line syntax, there is no better tool for video manipulation, period. Just don't expect to be able to make custom modifications at a moments notice.

Re:When will it stop segfaulting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15257827)

But, apart from that, it's OK? ;-)

Re:When will it stop segfaulting? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15257475)

I never have any problems. You must just suck.

Re:When will it stop segfaulting? (2, Interesting)

drooling-dog (189103) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257803)

I've seen this happen often when attempting to view WMV files, which requires the use of a Windows DLL. I think I read somewhere that the problem is specific to RedHat/Fedora, and has to do with how the DLL is loaded at runtime. Unfortunately, I can't put my hands on the source of that info at the moment (and I'm too lazy to google it; try searching "mplayer", "WMV", and "DLL").

Also, mplayer can get ornery when it can't grab as much memory as it wants. Closing an app or two usually does the trick...

DVD Menus & XMBC (3, Insightful)

Chris Pimlott (16212) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256660)

Hmm... just two months ago, Xbox Media Center [xboxmediacenter.com] came out with their new DVD-player core, including menus. XBMC is built around MPlayer, I wonder if they sent some code back to the MPlayer guys for that (or perhaps vice versa)?

Re:DVD Menus & XMBC (2, Interesting)

evilviper (135110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256832)

I wonder if they sent some code back to the MPlayer guys for that

No, definately not. MPlayer dvdnav was wholely written by Ötvös Attila (http://dcxx.fw.hu/)

(or perhaps vice versa)?

The dvdnav patch has been publicly available (in it's unstable form) for quite a while now. It's almost certain that the XBMC guys just grabbed the patch and applied it to their sources.

Re:DVD Menus & XMBC (1)

Chris Pimlott (16212) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257214)

I found some technical information about XMBC's DVD player core [xboxmediaplayer.de] . They do appear to be using libDVDnav, but there's no mention if they're using Ötvös Attila patch. They might have done it on their own; they were apparently were trying that approach previously in XMBP.

Regardless, I'm sure they've had to make some additional changes and modifications to fit XMBC's architecure and the Xbox's contraints. Hopefully they have pushed some of those back upstream when applicable.

Cool, a new word (0)

gwhenning (693443) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256667)

misterious:

Of or pertaining to the mists.

as in, "The fresh dew on the grass was misterious."

Seriously? Mysterious? Why did you have it in quotes? Were you trying to draw attention to it?

GUI? Windows? Mplayer? (1)

caluml (551744) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256698)

No!!! No GUI! Remember to stick to the path of Commandlinze, disciples!




GMPlayer doesn't count for this example. Don't ask me why.

I love MPlayer but... (2, Insightful)

DeathPenguin (449875) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256804)

I must admit to having skimmed over the interview. For the most part, my opinion of MPlayer as a functional piece of software has remained very high, but interest in the project has been waning. This article [sys-con.com] entitled "MPlayer: The project from hell" outlines some of the frustrations I had before I found a distro with a good package manager that could compensate for my newbie-ness. Back then, MPlayer really was superior to everything else (As far as I knew), and I've just stuck with it since. Maybe the attitude has changed by now, but MPlayer still got a black eye because manually trying to install it an exercise in frustration. Here's an example:

"Don't get me wrong. There is documentation. It is scattered, and often incomplete, and carries the same attitude I had seen elsewhere, but it is there. An example of that attitude, taken verbatim from the FAQ:

Q: I compiled MPlayer with libdvdcss/libdivxdecore support, but when I try to start it, it says: error while loading shared libraries: lib*.so.0: cannot load shared object file: No such file or directory

I checked the file and it is there in /usr/local/lib.

A: What are you doing on Linux? Can't you install a library? Why do we get these questions? It's not MPlayer specific at all! Add /usr/local/lib to /etc/ld.so.conf and run ldconfig. Or install it to /usr/lib, because if you can't solve the /usr/local problem, you are careless enough to do such things.

Perhaps instead of taking the time to flame the person asking the question, the smart aleck could have simply answered the question graciously, then spent the time saved by skipping the flames fixing bugs in the installation script."

Re:I love MPlayer but... (1)

shudde (915065) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256906)

Maybe the attitude has changed by now, but MPlayer still got a black eye because manually trying to install it an exercise in frustration.

I remember trying to build MPlayer (and it's deps) from source a few years ago, it certainly wasn't an easy experience. That being said, in recent years I've been building it on LFS/BLFS systems following their instructions and found it works perfectly. I've also used those instructions (with some modifications) to build it on distros where I wasn't happy with the packaged MPlayer.

http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/mult imedia/mplayer.html [linuxfromscratch.org]

Re:I love MPlayer but... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15256925)

Well maybe the person who wrote that answer was being an ass, but if you've ever developed any OSS software you know how frustrating it is when people don't even have the common sense to do something as simple as add directories to ld.so.conf and ldconfig yet still insist on compiling it themselves.

It isn't the repsonsibility of the developers to walk each and every user through the compilation process, they wouldn't get anything else done.

Re:I love MPlayer but... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15257526)

It is called the learning curve, and it wouldn't hurt you to remember that you had been there once. (not even necesarily computer related)

Re:I love MPlayer but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15256932)

the article is from Joe Barr and is dated Dec. 17, 2001

LOTs had happened, not to mention the fact there were some issues between the reporter and the former core team.

I now the documentation is quite complete and the attitude is less unpolite even with certain kind of "I deserve support even if I don't read the faq" user.

Re:I love MPlayer but... (3, Interesting)

Otter (3800) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256969)

I can't find so maybe it's gone now, but MPlayer used to have a "joke FAQ" with entries like "Q: Why do I get audio but no video? A: You're blind". Unfortunately, a lot of people (myself included) mistook it for the real FAQ because a) in a Google search on "MPlayer FAQ" it came up first and b) honestly, it wasn't significantly more obnoxious or less helpful than the people in #mplayer.

Project integrity was a subject? Which MPlayer? (-1, Flamebait)

NRAdude (166969) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256811)

The article isn't strictly saying which MPLAYER developers are being intervied: the MPLAYERC from GulliverWIKI tools or the ones from the *nix origin "mplayer". MPLAYERC was a brilliant project that APpeArEd to be the pre-7 version of Microsoft Windows MediaPlayer, but it isn't; it's smaller, faster, offers more controlls, and is just a classic media environment more than the Windows MediaPlayer from MS Windows 3 days and MS Windows XP days. It's limited only be the available librarires, it appears.

The other one appears to be what the interview is about: mplayer

Considering project integrity discussion on the fact, that to actually get IMMEDIATE industry-wide availability for the majority of media formats, someone had to secretly slip outside of the Project tree to modify de jure win32 libraries and then anonymously post a news bit that support for those win32 libraries is supported and specifically NOW PART OF THE MPLAYER project. Despite this, that same package is what has kept mplayer from surviving all this time and allowing it to co-exist and compete to media players of all platforms; "win32codecs-full" and "win32codecs-essential", in addition to the RealPlayer support "rp7" and "rp8", and then there is the Quicktime 6 and 7 support packages. The mplayer Project was nearly closed-down by a cease and desist for hosting thos packages, if I remember correctly. If the DMCA or RIAA wanted to close down MPLAYER, then all they had to do was assassinate everyone hosting those packages, then any Joe User without a clue would abandon the quasi-native mplayer for a solution within Wine and GulliverWIKI's MPLAYERC.

But, this has not happened to the fine developers presiding over "mplayer". There is none of this in the interview, and mainly discusses adding DVD Menu suppport, developing a great GUI (trivial crap), and their ardent associations with only "FFmpeg". Despite all the slithering: Way to go, craftsment of guerilla video!

SQL Server 2005 and .NET (-1, Offtopic)

CagedBear (902435) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256830)

I agree that Vista isn't too exciting and that MS is making a huge mistake not accepting open source in some way. However, I have a couple problems with the "MS is sinking" theory.

First, the article doesn't mention SQL 2005. I've been using this for a couple months now and just finished load testing on it. Based on my experience, I feel companies will upgrade to it from SQL 2000 at lightning speed.

Second, I keep hearing that .NET is bombing, but where is the evidence? I see no shortage of job openings for VB and C#.

mplayer on windows brings smiles to me (0, Offtopic)

mmmiiikkkeee (930217) | more than 8 years ago | (#15256984)

if there is another successful open source project like firefox that spreads over to the win platform and hits it big this could mean more respect for opensource projects and possably more people willing to switch over. i know firefox was a big part of what let me feel comfertable switching over to linux. just imagain if some one has a windows system with firefixed for there internet browsing.. mplayer for there meltimedia and open ofice for there fancy text editor.... at that point it would not take much to move then over to a new OS since there forminlar with most of the software they use. ps: i noticed in reviewing what i wrote that i acidently typed 'firefixed' instead of firefox but i liked how it sounded so i kept it... gues my subconsus is working overtime

Video on Linux (2, Informative)

Ponga (934481) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257101)

Here is how I attack trying to play a video file or DVD on Linux:

First choice: VLC
Second Choice: Mplayer
Third Choice: Xine
Fourth Choice: Boot into Windoze :-(

Re:Video on Linux (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257168)

If your video doesn't play in VLC, Mplayer and Xine, it's probably not a video.

Simpler? (1)

Derosian (943622) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257133)

Am I the only one who would rather my media player have functionality but in the end be simpler. I use Media Player Classic. Nothing else needed, it plays videos...

Re:Simpler? (1)

PhakeDC (932887) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257390)

I hear thou.. MPlayer Classic is decently simple and I recommend it to everyone I know (as part of the K-Lite Codec Pack). It even makes use of your 3D card if you want it to, so that $500+ card can actually be utilised outside the gaming environment.

MEncoder is fantastic (2, Informative)

Pedrito (94783) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257201)

I don't use MPlayer, largely because the built-in UI (or lack thereof) makes it a pain to deal with. There are front-ends for it, but it's just not worth the trouble.

MEncoder, on the other hand is amazingly powerful. It's also a pain in the butt to use. I also have to say, the support, at least on the MEncoder forum is very lacking. When I first started using it, I was largely derided for not knowing all about video encoding to begin with and got more than one RTFM response.

The documentation is extensive, but the organization could definitely use some work and a few more real world examples would be helpful.

That said, after a month or so of struggling with it, I am pretty competent with it now and have yet to find a situation where it can't do what I want it to do. Convert from one format to another, resync video, make DVD compatible MPEGS (though it doesn't compose DVDs), etc. It's got a variet of filters, including I think 4 just for de-interlacing (I do a lot of TV captures to raw MPEG that need to be converted to AVI).

So the program itself is excellent. The support however, could definitely use some work. If you want to see some newbie bashing, the mencoder mailing list definitely a good place to hang out.

Re:MEncoder is fantastic (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257718)

I don't use MPlayer, largely because the built-in UI (or lack thereof) makes it a pain to deal with.

You've obviously never heard of gmplayer, which is the offical GUI, and comes included with MPlayer.

When I first started using it, I was largely derided for not knowing all about video encoding to begin with and got more than one RTFM response.

No, you were probably derided because you were making mistakes very clearly covered in the appropriate section of the docs.

It's got a variet of filters, including I think 4 just for de-interlacing

Probably about a dozen deinterlacers, actually.

If you want to see some newbie bashing, the mencoder mailing list definitely a good place to hang out.

Since you make it sound like you were brutalized, I decided to go search the archives...

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.mencoder. user/973/focus=973 [gmane.org]
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.mencoder. user/1042/focus=1042 [gmane.org]
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.video.mencoder. user/1059/focus=1059 [gmane.org]

What I found were rather clueless questions, which could have been easily resolved by searching the mailing list for similar problems. And despite all that, you had perhaps a dozen different people posting multiple replies to your messages, giving very useful information without the slightly flaming.

I don't have any idea how you could consider that "newbie bashing".

Nice to see (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257255)

that it is still alive and kicking. For you people that run SUSE 10.0 and want to have an easy way to install it:
1) Read this site [servepics.com]
or 2) Open a terminal an type
wget http://houghi.org/script/MPinstaller [houghi.org] && sh MPinstaller

tuBgirl (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15257424)

What is happening to the Mac OS X port? (2, Informative)

kgp (172015) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257471)

From TFA:

Me: What do you think, how much percent of the users use the Windows, FreeBSD and other ports?

Diego: The Windows port will probably get popular once we commit the Windows GUI, which should happen soon; already some people seem to use the command line version on Windows. MPlayer OS X is popular as well.


I use MPlayer all the time on Mac OS X.

The problem is seeing any visible progress on this port. Or even fixing major bugs and releasing a build.

The current release is the MPlayer-dev-CVS-050904.dmg (i.e. September 4th 2005). This release had a massive bug that rendered the playlist an unusable -- you could add items to it. And the menu bar was not being hidden in full screen mode on the default video renderer. I'd label both of these showstoppers (breaks major functionality) and would expect a fix. It's now 8 months later and not even a dev CVS build.

So I continue to the use the MPlayer-dev-CVS-050724.dmg version.

I've never been able to find nightly builds of the Mac OS X port, either. Not through lack of trying but maybe I missed something.

Is any active development taking place on the Mac version?

Re:What is happening to the Mac OS X port? (2, Informative)

evilviper (135110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257821)

It's now 8 months later and not even a dev CVS build.

There was a major hardware failure, which took down the main server for several months. Development has continued on CVS, and you can grab a snapshot any time you wish. This hasn't just stopped OS X development. If you were a bit more observant, you'd see there haven't been new releases on the server for ANY architecture for nearly a year.

There are at least 2 MPlayer devs with PPC/OS X machines, who continue to find and fix bugs. I'm sure you'll see new OS X releases soon.

Viva La MPlayer! (2, Informative)

miyako (632510) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257506)

I've played with a number of various multimedia applications, and I always come back to mplayer. Personally, I use KMplayer [kde.org] when I want a GUI, since it has a few nice features that GMplayer doesn't (drag and drop playlist, maintains the correct aspect ratio of the file when resizing, nicer integration with KDE). I still occasionally use Ogle [chalmers.se] for DVDs, but I'm eagerly anticipating MPlayer supporting DVD menus.
For those of you who might have stuck with Xine based players and haven't played around much with MPlayer, there are a few reasons I really like it:
The largest reason is that it plays bloody everything. I've personally never come across a file that I couldn't open with MPlayer. The worst I've ever run into is in some files that are slightly corrupted I've had to use the -idx flag to reindex the file so that I can gracefully skip over bad sections of the file instead of the video just stopping playing. I find this particularly handy when I'm downloading television shows off bittorrent and the seeders all go away when I'm at like 90%.
Mplayer also seems more lightweight ot me than Xine. Most of the time, if I'm watching video at my computer, it's because I'm doing something that's taking long enough that I'm sitting at the desk waiting for it to finish (compiling a lot of software, doing 3D rendering, etc.) so it's nice to be able to dedicate more cycles to whatever real work is getting done while still being able to relax with a video.

OK interview as far as it goes (1)

BluBall (16231) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257541)

Would have been great if s/he asked about snow and nut. More importantly and relevant would have been to ask about mplayer g2. It's been moribund for awhile. I think this is why they were emphasizing the difference between developer and maintainer. Mplayer is just being maintained and new stuff is limited to tweaks it seems.

I say this as a long time and current user.

The Gentoo spirit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#15257543)

It seems that all the devs are gentoo users - where are the binary packages? You can't even find them in major distributions (such as Debian). I heard they had some objection to them on "lol u r not l33t" grounds. Anyone know enough to elaborate?

complete modularity of proprietary/patented bits (1)

richlv (778496) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257657)

a lot of distributions do not include mplayer in their completely-free versions.
the reason ive heard of is containing of patented stuff if mplayer core that can not be easily modularised.

now, im not sure anybody qualified to give information will see this, but it would still be nice if some information could be given regarding this problem.
having mplayer included (probably as default media player) in more linux distribution could help it's usage enormously.

oh, another thing... last release has happened in quite some time. what happened to 'release early, release _often_' ?
no, cvs does not count. having more regular releases would help in getting the latest code to users both for creating positive impression and gaining wider testing audience.

yeah, in case it was not obvious - im using mplayer ;)
thanks for the great job.

Re:complete modularity of proprietary/patented bit (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257774)

the reason ive heard of is containing of patented stuff if mplayer core that can not be easily modularised.

Yes, pretty much ALL audio and video codecs you've ever heard of, or used are covered by numerous patents which require payment of royalties by the program maker. Companies like RedHat/Suse don't want to pay $10 in license fees for each user which downloads the distro.

It certainly can't be modularized, for performance reasons, nor would you want it to be, as MPlayer with 1 video codec is just as useless as not having MPlayer at all, and perhaps worse, because of people beliving that MPlayer sucks.

It's an idential situation as with Xine, VLC, etc.

oh, another thing... last release has happened in quite some time. what happened to 'release early, release _often_' ?

That's not MPlayer's credo. If you really care, the reason is because of a major hardware failure. The next release is probably only a few days away now, and you can grab latest CVS at any time.

Coloured subtitles (1)

fireman sam (662213) | more than 8 years ago | (#15257775)

Maybe someone can answer this:

Everytime I rip a dvd with subtitles they appear white reguardless of the colour of the actual subtitles (in a standalone dvd player). This is because mplayer/mencoder changes only the luminance channel (so only brightness changes). However, the other day I ripped a dvd. The resulting avi had yellow subtitles. I have been unable to reproduce this, even with the same dvd.

Weird.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...