Microsoft Halting Windows Media Player for Mac

[dirtskier]

yeah I've had no success at all with flip4mac and any streams (including english premier league broadcasts) I've been copying the url out of the failed flip4mac page and then pasting it into VLC. That's working for me.

damn, I hadnt even considered soccer broadcasts... here in the US you have to be reliant on the internet to even watch your own domestic league,

 

[MikeTheC]

Talk about dichotomy in an ecosystem...

It's interesting to see the variance between what format "the big players" use and what "the rest of us" use. I'm completely unsurprised by Microsoft's and Apple's choices of prefered video format, even if I'm a bit dismayed by it as a user of technology.

I find that WMA/WMV streams an awful lot better than QT. Now, I fully realize there's trade-offs to make this a reality, but nevertheless (and I'm saying this as a dyed-in-the-wool, since-the-80s, Microsoft-ripped-off-Apple Mac user) I'd almost rather use WMV than QT. Now, to be honest, I prefer to use DivX or XviD encoded AVIs, or reasonable-quality MPEGs to anybody's proprietary format. Not that this helps to put coins in the coffers of those who promulgate such standards, but I don't feel I owe them anything.

Now, it's pretty obvious reading the posts here that many, if not most, of the rest of you have experience beyond MacOS, and quite a lot of you have experience beyond MacOS and Windows, so I hardly need to stand up and shout "Hey, folks, go use Linux!" However, I think it would benefit anyone to have some kind of exposure to (and preferably also experience with) open-source software. It's a considerable eye-opener, even for those such as myself who are already aware of the concept of "having an alternative to Microsoft (and Apple)".

One of the things which also really sticks in my craw (though, again, sadly it does not surprise me) is Apple's head-up-their-a$$ attitude about not using a hyperdistribution mechanism (such as, say, BitTorrent) for at least their video presentations. Steve, ever the popular fellow, does a keynote, they video tape it and show it later, and then the public comes along and, in a thoroughly predictable and capable-of-being-known-in-advance way, maxes out their servers. Therefore, not only can one not partake of Steve's keynote, for instance, the day he does it, but also not for multiple days later when enough people have managed to slog their way through poor data feeds or have simply given up. This is 2006, and such distribution is not only laughable, but is a disgrace, especially for the company which prides itself on thinking different and pioneering and promoting state-of-the-art stuff.

</soapbox>

 

[MikeTheC]

Where will it end?

I'm talking about these EULAs that are pages long and need the services of an attorney to decipher.

Good grief, this Flip4Mac software is a free app, but they make you agree to all sorts of unreasonable demands for the privilege of using it:



If ever there was an area of the user experience that demands reform it's these darned end user licensing agreements. Why must we be coerced into agreeing to these contracts for each of the hundreds of software products that we use?

(I'm sure no one but me even cares about EULAs, much less reads them).

Well, before I begin, may I remind everyone here of the Sony-BMG fiasco? If you think flip4mac's EULA is something, did you ever look at the Sony-BMG EULA?

Here's an excerpt (article URL in the quote's headline) from a EFF.org article highlighting the more "interesting" parts:

EFF.org DeepLinks 11/09/05:http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004145.php

• If your house gets burgled, you have to delete all your music from your laptop when you get home. That's because the EULA says that your rights to any copies terminate as soon as you no longer possess the original CD.
  .
• You can't keep your music on any computers at work. The EULA only gives you the right to put copies on a "personal home computer system owned by you."
  .
• If you move out of the country, you have to delete all your music. The EULA specifically forbids "export" outside the country where you reside.
  .
• You must install any and all updates, or else lose the music on your computer. The EULA immediately terminates if you fail to install any update. No more holding out on those hobble-ware downgrades masquerading as updates.
  .
• Sony-BMG can install and use backdoors in the copy protection software or media player to "enforce their rights" against you, at any time, without notice. And Sony-BMG disclaims any liability if this "self help" crashes your computer, exposes you to security risks, or any other harm.
  .
• The EULA says Sony-BMG will never be liable to you for more than $5.00. That's right, no matter what happens, you can't even get back what you paid for the CD.
  .
• If you file for bankruptcy, you have to delete all the music on your computer. Seriously.
  .
• You have no right to transfer the music on your computer, even along with the original CD.

I fully understand and agree with you about EULAs. They are a stain upon our industry, and are rapidly spreading throughout other areas of human society. And, who knows, we may very well license ourselves into oblivion.

I posted in an earlier post about open-source software. I've been exposed to that environment by way of both using a number of open-source programs (none the least of which being Video LAN Client) and using Linux on my x86 box.

This thread is hardly the place for me to expound on my mere punter-observations and commentary on the state of affairs of computerdom and the freedom of using Linux to anything else, but suffice it to say that I can see the day when I will probably no longer use a Mac, either.

There are principally four major groupings of professional Mac users: those who do desktop publishing and graphic design (such as myself); those who do graphic arts work (fine art, commercial art, etc.); those who do web development; and those who do video work. And the day will soon be upon us when all of these areas are well represented on the professional level in Linux. I already have my exit strategy planned (as one may guess from what I've said above) and I look forward to having the freedom that only the FSF/OSS world brings.

</the other soapbox>

 

[shamino]

One of the things which also really sticks in my craw (though, again, sadly it does not surprise me) is Apple's head-up-their-a$$ attitude about not using a hyperdistribution mechanism (such as, say, BitTorrent) for at least their video presentations.

And one of the things that sticks in my craw is the fact that the SlashDot/Linux crowd believes there can never be anything better than the politically-correct favorite free program.

BT isn't the only distributed download system. Apple subscribes to Akamai, which does the exact same thing. Except that Akamai doesn't sponge bandwidth from people downloading content. Instead, they maintain their own distributed network of high capacity servers and charge publishers for access - which is the only viable model for a commercial entity.

Do you seriously think Apple (or any other corporation) could get away with a distribution mechanism that turns every user's computer into a server? Do you think this would last five minutes before the lawsuits start flying? My choice to download a video clip should not force me to turn by home LAN into a part of their distribution mechanism.

It's one thing if I want to donate bandwidth and processing power to a non-profit group that I believe in (say, Folding or SETI). It's quite another for a for-profit corporation deciding to take that bandwidth from me, without compensation, in order to lower their costs and turn higher profits. I'm not paying for a DSL line so that corporations can boost their profits.

 

[MikeTheC]

One of the things which also really sticks in my craw (though, again, sadly it does not surprise me) is Apple's head-up-their-a$$ attitude about not using a hyperdistribution mechanism (such as, say, BitTorrent) for at least their video presentations.

And one of the things that sticks in my craw is the fact that the SlashDot/Linux crowd believes there can never be anything better than the politically-correct favorite free program.

BT isn't the only distributed download system. Apple subscribes to Akamai, which does the exact same thing. Except that Akamai doesn't sponge bandwidth from people downloading content. Instead, they maintain their own distributed network of high capacity servers and charge publishers for access - which is the only viable model for a commercial entity.

Do you seriously think Apple (or any other corporation) could get away with a distribution mechanism that turns every user's computer into a server? Do you think this would last five minutes before the lawsuits start flying? My choice to download a video clip should not force me to turn by home LAN into a part of their distribution mechanism.

It's one thing if I want to donate bandwidth and processing power to a non-profit group that I believe in (say, Folding or SETI). It's quite another for a for-profit corporation deciding to take that bandwidth from me, without compensation, in order to lower their costs and turn higher profits. I'm not paying for a DSL line so that corporations can boost their profits.

Oh, where to begin with this one.

First off, Akamai and others are not a means of hyperdistribution. They are server farm providers, period. And, as server farms, they can all be overrun due to them being static in nature. Sure, they may have the ability to dynamically scale to an extent, but there are limits. Oh, and the last time I checked, Akamai was based on some distro of Linux.

Second, regarding lawsuits, you can't effectively sue if no damage has been done. And if I'm able to contribute to someone else's effort to see Steve's (or anybody elses') videos while someone else is contributing my own efforts, I fail to see the problem. And anybody who would sue while using a distributed-download technology would have to be, well, pretty much brain-dead. And trying to make the argument that because they're a for-profit corporation, they're basically stealing your bandwidth (and therefore theoretically maybe should be paying for it), using that rationale, aren't stores basically leaching off of your gasoline supply every time you drive over to one to buy something? My goodness, Wal-Mart, you need to provide me with driving gas to get to your store so I can buy stuff from you; how dare you presuppose to make me spend my money for the privilidge of buying something!

As for a practical example of the use of BitTorrent in a commercial setting, how about the updates for World of Warcraft? The update utility is in fact a BT client. Where are the lawsuits there? Blizard must be shaking in their shoes...

Third, I sense some kind of hostility towards open-source software here. Did Linus or Richard beat you or take your lunch money or something?

(Ok, that was a cheap shot, I admit. But I just couldn't resist.)

 

[shamino]

Second, regarding lawsuits, you can't effectively sue if no damage has been done.

Turning my computer into a server for distributing a product is theft of service, if done without getting permission.

I'm sure you don't like it when spyware does stuff like this. Why should it be any different if it's a corporation you aren't predisposed to hate?

And if I'm able to contribute to someone else's effort to see Steve's (or anybody elses') videos while someone else is contributing my own efforts, I fail to see the problem.

If you want to voluntarily give your computer and LAN to Apple to use as they see fit, that's your choice.

It's quote another thing if they slip server protocols into QT and force you to turn your computer into a distribution server in order to download content.

As I wrote, I'm not paying for my DSL line so that strangers I've never met can download content I didn't author.

And trying to make the argument that because they're a for-profit corporation, they're basically stealing your bandwidth (and therefore theoretically maybe should be paying for it), using that rationale, aren't stores basically leaching off of your gasoline supply every time you drive over to one to buy something?

My car and gasoline are not being used for other people's shopping.

As for a practical example of the use of BitTorrent in a commercial setting, how about the updates for World of Warcraft? The update utility is in fact a BT client. Where are the lawsuits there? Blizard must be shaking in their shoes...

I won't comment on what Blizzard is doing, since I don't own any of their products.

But if they are forcing their customers to become distribution servers as a condition of using the program, that would be a deal-breaker for me. Thanks for letting me know. I'll make sure not to buy anything they sell.

 

[rt_brained]

<yawn>

 

[Marky_Mark]

<yawn>

Indeed.

 

[steve_hill4]

I don't see this as any major loss. You can get the flip4mac plugin to allow playback of these WMP files through Quicktime, which let's face it has a much nicer UI and is easier to use.

The lower the number of Microsoft apps available for Mac though does raise one question, what icons will Microsoft display in their dock on the back of their Office For Mac packaging and at shows where they demonstrate their Mac products?

 

[MikeTheC]

I don't see this as any major loss. You can get the flip4mac plugin to allow playback of these WMP files through Quicktime, which let's face it has a much nicer UI and is easier to use.

The lower the number of Microsoft apps available for Mac though does raise one question, what icons will Microsoft display in their dock on the back of their Office For Mac packaging and at shows where they demonstrate their Mac products?

Maybe they hope to destroy us through attrition. Hmmm...

 

[steve_hill4]

Maybe they hope to destroy us through attrition. Hmmm...

Previously in their screenshots and on their Office for Mac demo machines, their dock consisted of the Office Apps, Messenger, WMP, Internet Explorer and Virtual PC, (and few other beside that). IE has gone, WMP has gone, Virtual PC may soon be redundant, (won't work on x86 Macs at the moment and if we can dual boot, there will be little need for it anymore), leaving them with Office and Messenger in their docks.

Apple are in the position where they produce much fmore software for Windows than Microsoft do for Mac OS. I just think it's humourous that despite stopping development for Macs and pushing their own formats and programs forward on PCS, more people are still using iTunes, QT and such than ever on PCs. With this being the year of the Mac rebirth, Microsoft may be postioning themselves out of the market they need to be supporting more.

 

[Yvan256]

As for a practical example of the use of BitTorrent in a commercial setting, how about the updates for World of Warcraft? The update utility is in fact a BT client.

It sure is, and not participating in the sharing really slows down my updates download to a crawl. I won't open these ports and I've got a limited monthly data transfer amount.

The WoW updates aren't really friendly for non-sharers. Worst thing is, it tries to do it every time, even if it knows from all the previous times that it can't do sharing. Slows things down even more when starting to download an update.

I do agree, though, that Apple would gain by putting their Keynotes on BT (and huge, hi-res files too). After all, if it's free for streaming, why continue to pay for streaming if people are willing to download/share it for free?

Or even worst, why not make money by putting it on iTMS?

 

[Yvan256]

Ah well, hopefully this will decrease usage of the equal worst video codec ever (other one being avi). Flip4Mac makes things *bearable though*. I do not understand why people can't make all their vids on their websites as .mpeg or .mov though. Reliability.

.mpeg/.mpg is MPEG-1, and looks like crap (while still requiring lots of bandwidth, relatively speaking).

.mov is QuickTime, it's just a wrapper like .avi, which means tons of different CODECs.

We need .mp4/.h264 videos which is an "open" standard (there may be fees required, but the specs are available, not closed).

 

[Photorun]

We need .mp4/.h264 videos which is an "open" standard (there may be fees required, but the specs are available, not closed).

Here here! Errr, hear hear, however you type that... you're spot-on! Windows Media is not only is VERY closed, it sucks. We sometimes use it, side by side with MPEG-4 or MOV or sometimes AVI depending on the settings and it just plain sucks, then again, it's made by Microsoft, which sucks, and works in Windows, which REALLY sucks!

MPEG-4 is good, it's not Apple per se, it works, it's crisp, as is .h264 (can be sorta one in the same), it's where the industry SHOULD go. However Microsuck and their suckiness have implimented their OWN version of MPEG-2, and MPEG-4 which, is not only heinous, is incompatible with the actual standard. Anybody that knows M$ well knows this is their typical tactic, acting like they'll adopt a standard but covertly take or in most cases steal (doubt they're paying for the naming) and intentionally make it so it's not open at all but closed, which is the point of standards. A Windoze Media Sh**player export of their horrible take on MPEG-4 is bigger, more artifact laden, and probably on their part intentionally bad, after all, it's competition to their lousy standard they want everyone to use.

The day Microsuck starts dictating any of the crap they put out as an industry standard is the erosion of all that's decent, all that's good, a death of common sense, and a massive championing of mediocrity that would cause such a sucking sound it could deafen humanity.

 

[~Shard~]

<yawn>

Thanks for the in-depth contribution to the thread! If you don't have something worthwhile to say....

 

[AUBPsych]

Psh, I don't even use Windows Media Player on a Windows machine. I just hate it.

Winamp and iTunes > WMP.

 

[MrCommunistGen]

I just use VLC and MPlayer on both Macs and Windows computers. Opens just about anything except files with DRM. Many more features too! Deinterlacing, post-processing, A/V synch (at least on windows... not sure about on the mac because my iMac is barely fast enough to play the vids let alone DO anything to them).

-mcg

 

[cb911]

SWF in WMP? i thought that was what Flash Player was for?

and so much for the Microsoft Mac team's continued support for the Mac. after all they said at the MWSF keynote...

 

[wrldwzrd89]

SWF in WMP? i thought that was what Flash Player was for?

and so much for the Microsoft Mac team's continued support for the Mac. after all they said at the MWSF keynote...

They committed only to Office, and possibly Messenger...all the other apps go poof because Microsoft's Mac BU can't be bothered to make Universal Binary versions.

 

[sushi]

I hope that Microsoft drops the Mac version of Office/Excel/Word/etc.

This would be bad for Apple.

To increase market share in the business world, Apple needs Microsoft Office for the Mac.

 

[Marky_Mark]

This would be bad for Apple.

To increase market share in the business world, Apple needs Microsoft Office for the Mac.

People have been banging on about this for the last 20-odd years. Apple has lost market share, not gained it. Office has little discernable effect on Mac sales as far as I can see. It's a nice-to-have, but it's not essential. Like it or not, the people who most often buy Macs are media and design professionals, a small number of switched-on individuals who know about MacOS's advantages regarding nasties, out-and-out fashion victims and us. It's more often than not a 'heart' decision to buy a Mac, not a 'head' one. Now I'm not saying this is right, or how it should be, or even where Apple should find themselves in the great lottery of life, but it's the way it is.

 

[seamuskrat]

How does one define marketshare?

How do we define this term?

When Macs were in the first heyday in the 80's, they had a higher total percentage of personal computers sold of the total market, yet the market was small.

The industry moved on and the market expanded by leaps and bounds. If they sold MORE machines but the market outpaced them the market share goes down.

When we measure today- do we mean the total number of macs in USE versus the total number of PC s in use?

Or is it total number sold vs total number sold of PC?

You get very different numbers depending on how you look at them.

Since Apple is a niche player, look at the market % in its niche markets. It used to be that in education you would find Apple well over 65%. Not as high today, but they still have a formidable presence. Save with DTP, and DTV. As a cash register POS system, I am sure is it dismally low, as a niche player they do not offer a product for this segment.

All I am saying is that when you compare marketshare you have to standardize what you mean.

 

[Bern]

They committed only to Office, and possibly Messenger...all the other apps go poof because Microsoft's Mac BU can't be bothered to make Universal Binary versions.

Apparently there's 20 people over at M$ trying to understand where to put the "tick" in the box to enable universal code

As for Office, well I decided to give it the flick once and for all, mainly prompted by the ongoing abandonment of M$ to Mac users. Instead now I am using iWork '06 which I am sure over the next few years will get better and better and I intend to keep my Mac M$ free.

 

[bugfaceuk]

People have been banging on about this for the last 20-odd years. Apple has lost market share, not gained it. Office has little discernable effect on Mac sales as far as I can see. It's a nice-to-have, but it's not essential. Like it or not, the people who most often buy Macs are media and design professionals, a small number of switched-on individuals who know about MacOS's advantages regarding nasties, out-and-out fashion victims and us. It's more often than not a 'heart' decision to buy a Mac, not a 'head' one. Now I'm not saying this is right, or how it should be, or even where Apple should find themselves in the great lottery of life, but it's the way it is.

Could not agree more. Office felt more critical 5 years ago than it does now. Nowadays I work using Open Office 2 at home for everything except presentations. With the various XML formats (and not necessarily MS's for 12) it feels this is only going to get more flexible.

Let's say in, oh I don't know, 5 years, how much will we all care?

 

[shamino]

It's more often than not a 'heart' decision to buy a Mac, not a 'head' one. Now I'm not saying this is right, or how it should be, or even where Apple should find themselves in the great lottery of life, but it's the way it is.

Did you just accuse all Mac owners of being stupid?

Not exactly a good way to convince someone.