Robert Pogson

One man, closing all the windows.

More FUD Goes “THUD!”

  • May 04 / 2012
  • 58
technology

More FUD Goes “THUD!”

For many years, users of M$’s OS have pompously touted as one of the advantages of being locked in to M$’s OS was the ability to play DVDs, “out of the box”. Well, that’s no longer going to be the case. M$ and its “partners” have a problem with small cheap computers. The licensing fees add up and since most users of PCs don’t play DVDs, including that licence in the mix is too much.

“Windows Media Player will continue to be available in all editions, but without DVD playback support. For optical discs playback on new Windows 8 devices, we are going to rely on the many quality solutions on the market, which provide great experiences for both DVD and Blu-Ray.

So much for all that hardware “working with” that other OS… So much for “backwards compatibility”. Times are changing.

see The Register – Windows Media DVD Playback Dead

58 Comments

  1. oiaohm

    Viktor “CinePaint is an interactive tool. Therefore it doesn’t run on any render server. It runs on people’s machines, who use it — or rather have used it — for dust busting, wire removal etc.”

    This is wrong. X11 forwards from server to desktop without issues. CinePaint gets to work on server without having to move the data-files off server to a client machine and back again.

    If you are running it client side you not seeing why you will be running it. Render servers that have been rendering everything else that have the data files on them is where you run it and forward the interface.

    One of Cinepaint features was a macro record and replay of modifications. So rerender seen reapply Cinepaint work and see if compositing artists had to redo that section. Yes compositing artists did not like it for that reason less work for them at times.

    So your “It runs on people’s machines” is false. Interface sent to people machines program running on server that is how its used.

    See you never used CinePaint or understands how it fits into workflow Viktor. Adobe tools are doing one part FOSS and Linux commercial do another.

    “Look at forums where VFX professionals converse. No CinePaint love.”
    Tool does not have to be loved. The advantage is turn around. Network is only so wide.

    For what CinePaint allows not having to take stuff out of server to fix a minor error to two comes into its own.

    Basically there is a gap Viktor. Linux render farm servers need a video stream editor to avoid having to shove huge volumes of data at times to client machines for minor alterations.

    Lot have been using CinePaint to fill this gap.

    “Dustbusting, wire removal, degraining etc.” Yes all can be done with application running report on render server with interface forwards to client.

    Note the at times comment. Its due to a particular issues that windows machines don’t address. Network bandwidth conversation.

    Yes the old cinepaint is also command line usable like the gimp it was based off.

    “No one has ever used CinePaint for compositing.” To be correct that is not true one of CinePaints first movies it was used to bind the footage up.

    Exactly what is used instead of CinePaint to avoid having to download a complete move sections to client machines for minor touch ups. And to avoid having to re touch due to a re render of something.

    Viktor CinePaint you might call dead but it still filling a workflow requirement for speed. Of course that workflow requirement will go to gimp.

    Client side applications cause turn around issues at times when a lot of things are going on.

    Its having the right tool for the right job. You need two image editors. One on the render server that forwards the interface and one on client machine. Both are for different issues. The render server one can be critical when dead lines are coming up to make it in time.

    Like blender one of the reasons why it so loved is that it can run render server and client sides. With interface forward from server or client side setting up data to be sent to server for processing. Both ways work.

    Of course someone like you Viktor who has not worked in movie production as it shows would not understand that you need a double set of tools. Hopefully as many of those tools identical as possible.

    In this case cinepaint usage is as a forwarded interface from render server. Gimp usage basically replaces that usage. cinepaint client side was basically never its major usage. This is why a windows version was not bothered about at first.

  2. Viktor

    CinePaint is dead.

    Look at the code base. Look at its age. Look at no updates.

    Robin Rowe writing it ain’t dead doesn’t make it so.

    Look at forums where VFX professionals converse. No CinePaint love.

    Look at job offerings from the VFX industry. CinePaint is not a requirement there.

    VFX has large Linux servers that that do rendering. This is why cinepaint has been been used over photoshop at times. Is that you can have it auto run a set of changes on a video in the render server where photoshop you cannot since it don’t run on Linux well at all.

    LOL! Dustbusting, wire removal, degraining etc. is INTERACTIVE work. Neither CinePaint nor another program does that by itself. What do you think compositing artists are paid for!?

    Since cinepaint will run on the render server it speeds up getting results.

    CinePaint is an interactive tool. Therefore it doesn’t run on any render server. It runs on people’s machines, who use it — or rather have used it — for dust busting, wire removal etc.

    Where did I say it was at the moment. No where.

    You implied that GIMP will be the next big thing after CinePaint.

    Cinepaint you can think of as a light adobe after effects that can work on film a lot like a normal painting program.

    What a load of crap. No one has ever used CinePaint for compositing.

    VFX workshop most likely will have photoshop and cinepaint. Cinepaint does not run on windows at all.

    Everyone has Photoshop. No one has CinePaint any more. And yes, CinePaint does run on Windows.

    Cinepaint has been better designed for video rework than image/graphics magick stuff. In a lot of way photoshop suxs for video reworking.

    And that would be why?

  3. oiaohm

    viktor http://www.cinepaint.org/ its not truly dead.

    VFX has large Linux servers that that do rendering. This is why cinepaint has been been used over photoshop at times. Is that you can have it auto run a set of changes on a video in the render server where photoshop you cannot since it don’t run on Linux well at all. Particularly handy for that mole disappearance or something else you might have todo latter.

    “GIMP isn’t used in the VFX business at all.” Where did I say it was at the moment. No where.

    I said cinepaint would die out to be replaced by gimp. Thinking cinepaint was a fork of gimp particular to be able to particular processing things on the rendering servers so you did not have to transfer work off server to a windows machine and back again.

    VFX workshop most likely will have photoshop and cinepaint. Cinepaint does not run on windows at all.

    Viktor
    “They use what gets the job done.”
    This is such a correct statement. Cinepaint has allowed getting the job done faster. Cinepaint has been better designed for video rework than image/graphics magick stuff. In a lot of way photoshop suxs for video reworking.

    Cinepaint you can think of as a light adobe after effects that can work on film a lot like a normal painting program.

    New engine in gimp now means what cinepaint has been doing can be done by it again. Gimp still has its video work flow processing. Yes gimp is not just a static image processing program.

    Sorry Viktor you don’t know what you are talking about. VFX areas are some of the mixed up closed and open source areas you come across. Its all about getting the results in the shortest time. Since cinepaint will run on the render server it speeds up getting results.

    It still does not change my statement if you want to see exactly how much the bit depth crimpling has been holding gimp back try cinepaint.

    Remember Viktor cinepaint was developed as a stop gap.

  4. Viktor

    Phenom in the movie trade on Linux a program called cinepaint is used. This will most likely die out with the 2.10 release of gimp.

    Cinepaint has been dead for a long time. GIMP isn’t used in the VFX business at all. No, the Blender Institute doesn’t constitute a VFX business.

    VFX houses don’t care if they have to buy Photoshop. They use what gets the job done. Perhaps you haven’t noticed, but apart from such things like Python, which has become kind of a de facto scripting language for VFX applications, the applications themselves are either closed source in-house developments or off-the-shelf software. Open sourcing stuff happens in homeopathic dosage, if at all. ILM released OpenEXR because it was beneficial to them.

  5. oiaohm

    oldman
    “They provide only what they need to provide to keep the million man random bug generator at bay. So if they have to provide the expertise to patch or fix some half a$$ed crap in the kernel the do so and chalk it up to the cost of keeping Linux viable.”

    And you think windows is better. Seriously its not it worse. You have in some cases 80 different drivers for the same block of hardware under windows. Each can be incompatible with your driver that has to talk threw that to your bit hardware.

    When it comes to a random bug generator nothing takes it developing drivers for windows.

    Linux you can see all the core hardware interface drivers down to the source code and there is one to a max of 2 in the kernels.

    oldman
    “You will howeve note that the source code for the real money making stuff is kept closed.”
    Most cases no. Lot of the closed source in DVD and Blu-ray players is black hole code. This is where you cannot legally release it because you signed a patent or trade-secret agreement to use it. This code normally will get redone the least since you want to keep the least number of developers patent effected as able. So it will contain the most bugs and give the users the most problems. That you device plays after 12 months pass up gives your user a reason to buy a new one in future. This is the sad reality.

    You might say is the code that makes the money its also the code that gives the users the bugs in most cases. And coders a less likely to be paid to work on it. This is Dvd and blu-ray players.

    When you get into embedded closed equals non maintained. Yes I know windows software market appears the other way. There are questions if or if not it is the same as the embedded at least in some areas.

    Viktor Imagemagick and Graphicsmagick have frontends. Yes they both can be used interchangeable in most cases. One of those front ends is digikam.

    Phenom in the movie trade on Linux a program called cinepaint is used. This will most likely die out with the 2.10 release of gimp.

    I really do wonder what people like you are going to do Phenom as gimp improves. 2.8 has just been released 2.10 currently is looking to have fully 16 bit and 32 bit integer or float per channel for all operations.

    The core engine between gimp 2.8 and 2.10 is basically universes apart. It will be at long last something at the level Imagemagick.

    Something else that is more interesting gegl does not contain a channel limit. Ok not a sane one I think max of 4 million colour channels is kinda what you call not limited. Yes gegl is the new engine for gimp. The question is if opencl assistance will be enabled out box yes so using video card to help in the render.

    That one step could be most of photoshop advantages gone. Problem here is gegl has developed as a side branch to gimp. So gimp has stood stationary as gegl has rushed ahead.

    So if you just look at gimp vs photoshop on development speed gimp looks to be moving really slowly. But if you look at gegl vs photoshop, gegl appear to be moving faster. Merged back into one basically will catapult question is how far. There is 10 years + of development in gegl while gimp core basically stood still.

    If gimp is catapulted past photoshop anyone in future look at your comments will think you are a complete idiot Phenom they will not think of the fact gimp use to be weak.

    cinepaint give a bit of a idea what gimp can do with a upgraded core. Gimp 2.8 was sorting out the UI. Gimp 2.10 is sorting out the engine. Question is what is going to be the one after 2.10? Photoshop killer? Progression threatens to be that fast.

    Its always important to know why something is progressing slowly.

    List of things cured by gegl. Editing images large than ram in system. Channel depth issues. babl to add as many channels as you need or want. Support for vector images and vector data so recording like brush stokes and change like the brush that was used to do the stroke after the stroke.

    Proper non destructive editing. Full support for all colour space types with room to expand in future.

    Yes with gegl you could do something horid. Like RGB,CMYK,CcMmYK,RGBY and Hexachrome in one image with all the channels side by side with each other. Or in other-words I cannot make up my mind what colour system I am using so I am using them all.

    Gegl is fairly much future proof. The merging of Gegl to gimp front end is already over 90 percent done in the development branch heading to 2.10.

    Every weakness people have complained about in gimp engine has been worked on in gegl almost all are fixed in gegl and that is why you have not been able to see the repairs.

  6. oldman

    “Yet those commercial interests provide programmers to the Linux kernel.”

    They provide only what they need to provide to keep the million man random bug generator at bay. So if they have to provide the expertise to patch or fix some half a$$ed crap in the kernel the do so and chalk it up to the cost of keeping Linux viable.

    You will howeve note that the source code for the real money making stuff is kept closed.

    As I said, they laugh all the way to the bank.

  7. Viktor

    Last time I tried PS, I could not get bulk resizing to work. I used ImageMagick instead.

    I’m pretty certain Photoshop wasn’t created for batch converting images. But you can always ask ILM if they need an ImageMagick expert.

  8. Phenom

    Pogson wrote: “Last time I tried PS, I could not get bulk resizing to work. I used ImageMagick instead.”

    Now all professional computer designers, photographers and artists will migrate in flocks to Gimp. Yes, sir, absolutely!

  9. Robert Pogson

    Phenom wrote, “Just check out the progress of Photoshop versus the progress of Gimp.”

    Last time I tried PS, I could not get bulk resizing to work. I used ImageMagick instead.

  10. Robert Pogson

    Viktor wrote, “FLOSS is but an abbreviation. It’s not a “way to do IT”.”

    Nope. FLOSS means folks who have the software have permission to run the code, examine it, change it and redistribute it. That’s perfection in IT, that there are no limits and good code can be re-used indefinitely. That supports exponential growth of IT not limited by budgets, schedules, or paper-work. That’s IT unfettered. It is the right way to do IT. To direct IT, one must lead, follow or get out of the way. FLOSS allows any or all of those approaches.

    Compare that with what M$ told HP and IBM back in the day when their monopoly was solidifying/strengthening. With FLOSS that kind of interference is much less likely and it is much more likely that there is a work-around. non-FREE software is the wrong way to do IT for many reasons.

    Is this the right way to do IT?:

    • HP requested losing the Rolling Stones music from Lose ’98 because it might offend some of HP’s customers:“The Welcome to Windows dialog box that appears at the first boot up is accompanied by a background music that certain people could find offensive (Rolling Stones type of music with loud breathing sounds. This is not appropriate for certain age groups.”
    • M$’s comment: “Weird request! I don‘t know what to say here!”

    There is no good business argument for offending an OEM and its customers, but M$ felt powerful enough to dictate to HP. That’s not the right way to do IT.

  11. oiaohm

    Yonah
    “It doesn’t seem like you’ve had much experience or else you’d know that handling media with such copy protection methods interferes with the normal operation of the drive’s own internal hardware regardless of the host OS.”

    In fact I do. And I can tell you the battle is way less once you wake up particular mounting options in Linux and freebsd turn off particular firmware features in drives. And all those internal fails depend on those features being on in the drive. Like in drive checksuming so allowing disc to be read that otherwise is unreadable. So that idea of independent to the host OS bit is a joke since some host OS change the drive settings so by passing the firmware road block. Interesting enough the same settings for forensic reading of dvd and blu-ray discs.

    “What I presume, Peter, is that you can’t point me to a single fully FLOSS Blu-ray or DVD player.”

    Notice Viktor what Yonah refers to. Neither of you understand the options to allow normal drives to read these protected discs is built into the Linux kernel.

    Now you are being picky Viktor you want fully FOSS. Same with oldman. You are forgetting a simple point the player cannot play the data if the kernel does not get it. Damaged sectors on disc must be read by the OS kernel in use first before player gets access to it. Once you can read the disc duplication becomes a lot simpler. Past the kernel most discs play issue-less in VLC. More discs play in VLC on Linux using the mount options than VLC in Windows. Even discs the closed source players on Windows cannot play do play in VLC in Linux using the mount options of players.

    The thing is to read around those damaged discs are forensic set-ups. Linux can do them OS X can do them. Windows by design don’t provide the control options to drives to set them up.

    Viktor and Yonah the simple reality Linux kernel does provide all you require at kernel level to duplicate those discs. Do you have the software interfaces to make it easy most likely no. Reason why Linux kernel has the means it is in the players.

    oldman
    “So it would seem that once again commercial interests use open source code on their terms and laugh all the way to the bank.”
    Yet those commercial interests provide programmers to the Linux kernel.

    Yonah my trouble free upgrades is that I stay well clear of particular distributions due to quality control issues. Ubuntu is one of those distributions. Anyone who has worked with enterprise rated distributions will tell you they don’t puke all over themselves when upgrading.

    Most complaints about Linux distrobutions is using lower grades of them. For some reason they get popular.

    “Dare you suggest every 12.04 upgrade will succeed 100% of the time?”
    Never ubuntu insecure trash. pull out the rainbow books review is secuirty quality its insecure. Next check the migration testing and roll back systems. Wait Ubuntu don’t provide you with Migration plan documents or a clean roll back option.

    At this point if you upgrade Ubuntu expect it to work you are nuts in my eyes. Debian is ok there is always a roll back option that works.

    Yonah
    “discs manufactured with intentional defects for the purpose of making copying the disc difficult IS a form of Copy Protection and would be defined as such by ANYONE with an intermediate level of experience in CD/DVD duplication.”
    This wrong define means you don’t see it as a damaged disc so don’t use forensic methods to avoid this problem. So you wait for the next copy protection crack instead of straight up defeating it.

    Correct define is also required so you can find the solution to it. Basically they should be approached like copying a scratched or otherwise damaged disc.

    Wrong terms equals failing to copy because you don’t find the right resources on options you can turn on and off.

    I call them damaged discs because that is exactly what they are. People who call them the wrong thing have to wait longer to be able to copy them.

    Yes particular drives are better at reading damaged discs as well.

    Its funny you see all these people complain about these copy protections just sit down with some forensic people and watch them copy them like they are nothing using quite generic tools.

    Also here is another thing. USA it can be illegal develop a tool to break copy protection. Its not illegal to make tools with the goals of coping damaged discs. Correct terms also makes trading of the tools todo it legal in more countries.

    Funny using the wrong terms means you cannot trade the tools to defeat it also don’t hang out in the groups that have the tools to defeat it in a lot of cases when the so called damaged disc stuff that people try to call copy protection before its even released. People doing forensics on damage discs have to repair a lot worse than what the damage discs from media companies do.

  12. Viktor

    FLOSS is the right way to do IT.

    FLOSS is but an abbreviation. It’s not a “way to do IT”. And you, Mr. Pogson, wouldn’t make a good IT manager. Because you’re not a pragmatist, but rather a die-hard ideologue.

  13. Phenom

    Pogson: “Why reinvent the wheel or pay multiple times for the production of the same software?”

    Because obviously this makes it better. Just check out the progress of Photoshop versus the progress of Gimp.

  14. Clarence Moon

    So it would seem that once again commercial interests use open source code on their terms and laugh all the way to the bank

    I do not think they are laughing, oldman. Rather they are just smugly satisfied with their prudent choices of how to implement their wares. If you have a dedicated purpose, appliance type device that depends mainly on your own application level software, there is no reason on earth to use an OS that you have to pay a license fee to use unless that OS provides some set of features that your product needs but that you are unwilling to develop yourself.

    In the case of routers and other embedded microprocessor devices, that choice of OS can be linux or, more recently Android, without ceding anything to the competition.

    Linux fails as a commercial entity on the desktop because it lacks the critical mass of users who have de facto standardized among themselves on Windows and major applications created for Windows. If Linux had existed in its current form in 1990 or so, it may have been a far different world today, but that is not what happened and it is not possible to push any sort of reset button anymore.

    Mr Pogson provides an endless litany of examples of where he claims Linux superiority and apparently has been doing so for years now. And the world is changed not one whit. He attributes that to a malevolent monopoly and/or conspiracy between Microsoft and OEMs who are either in cahoots with them or terribly abused by them, dependent on the day the post is made. I attribute it to the natural laws of marketing gravity that govern the psychology of all product markets, not just computers.

    Think of trying to introduce a new type of automobile to the world with 5 wheels and a steering tiller on the fifth to control its direction. That won’t fly with most purchasers. Or try to introduce a new brand of automobile with Plain Jane specs that you have to assemble yourself by getting various components from different sources. Would you buy one? Would more than 1% if the drivers in the world buy one?

  15. Robert Pogson

    oldman wrote, “it would seem that once again commercial interests use open source code on their terms and laugh all the way to the bank.”

    You’re getting it, oldman. The reason FLOSS is produced is so that it will be used. The GPL etc. are non-discriminatory. Anyone can use FLOSS. The licence comes with the software and it’s usually a $free download.

  16. Robert Pogson

    Viktor wrote, “Go, FLOSS!”

    I am glad we finally have a convert. FLOSS is the right way to do IT. Why reinvent the wheel or pay multiple times for the production of the same software? Sharing is good.

  17. Viktor

    The mistake here you presume mistakenly I don’t know this topic so did not read everything. There are more devices out there that have not release firmware sources on-line that are Linux.

    What I presume, Peter, is that you can’t point me to a single fully FLOSS Blu-ray or DVD player. Otherwise your whole bickering is pointless. Some players using “busybox” are simply not interesting, even if their partial source code is available.

    That’s the problem with you people: you get orgasms whenever you see any device with a tiny bit of FLOSS in it, but forget to look at the big picture. Hey, my old iPod nano uses FreeType, OpenSSL, SSLeay and Boost. Go, FLOSS!

  18. oldman

    “There are more devices out there that have not release firmware sources on-line that are Linux.”

    So what!

    I notice that all that is released is the kernel and the GPL/LGPL support libraries that are used. But none of the code that actually implements the guts of the devices seems to be present.

    So it would seem that once again commercial interests use open source code on their terms and laugh all the way to the bank.

  19. Yonah

    oe, congratulations on your trouble free upgrade, but remember you are but one man. For myself and some others, we weren’t so lucky in the past. I personally had a Ubuntu upgrade puke all over itself and fail to boot after a restart. If you do a little searching you’ll find forum posts and bug reports from others sharing similar tales of woe. Dare you suggest every 12.04 upgrade will succeed 100% of the time?

    Viktor’s DVD experience seems solid and mirrors some of my own. I copied all of my DVDs, both legal purchases and bootlegs, to my computer before I left my motherland. The first DVD that gave me problems was the newer James Bond movie, Casino Royale.

    Oiaham, you have lost face yet again. Your DVD arguments seem largely drawn from your own fantasies and your insistence on redefining what IS or IS NOT considered “copy protection” based on what you claim is Australian law. Nothing against your country, but nobody gives a crap about Australian laws regarding storage media, nor is such a thing even related to the topic at hand. You only mention this to stroke your own ego and put someone else down. Read carefully now, “discs manufactured with intentional defects for the purpose of making copying the disc difficult IS a form of Copy Protection and would be defined as such by ANYONE with an intermediate level of experience in CD/DVD duplication.” You may not like it, but changing the definition to suit your taste isn’t justified.

    It doesn’t seem like you’ve had much experience or else you’d know that handling media with such copy protection methods interferes with the normal operation of the drive’s own internal hardware regardless of the host OS. Or maybe you do. I suspect your ego gives you the false assumption that you know more than everyone else here and we are ignorant and gullible enough to believe your pseudo-explanations. As with the Source Engine, you wildly distort disc duplication procedures, concepts, and methods delivered in long-winded essay style making you appear knowledgeable. All so you can bless us with more hollow praise of Linux and feel even more proud of yourself for being so dedicated to all things FOSS.

    Bottom line, dude, it’s not working. Viktor is right and you’re wrong. Now I suggest saving face by telling us a story revolving around reprogramming an Automated Assault System to burn an entire spindle of DVD copies while cheating in a few rounds of deathmatch.

  20. oiaohm

    Viktor really did you not check my link to linux devices before yelling about sony at Robert Pogson. There are quite a few sony Linux devices just look for the items called Internet tv lot of them play dvd and blu-ray yep Linux kernel in Android.

    Samsung has baba devices that some are linux some are there own rt OS’s with goals to stop using there own rt OS.

    Basically is the ones that do more than just being a dvd player that are more often than not Linux.

    Of course it was no exactly shear luck. I own a Laser BLU-BD1080. I just forgot they don’t release source code on their site like all blu-ray devices.

    Even the sony blu-ray Linux based devices it order to get the source code you have to follow the same process as Laser.

    Yes even your example Pioneer PDP-4350SX a there is one http://www.pioneerelectronics.com/downloads/Linux/Downloads.html is a Linux DVD player.

    Viktor again did you not check out fully what you found. You mentioned Pioneer did not check out the source code download page fully before putting your stupid fingers on the keyboard.

    But Pioneer blu-ray players are the same as sony and everyone else doing blu-ray. They use the limitation of GPLv2 that you only have to give the source code to the owner of the device so its on no website you have to place a request and pay a handling change.

    Reality is reality Viktor they don’t really want to publish how flawed the damaged disc methods are.

    Its also not understanding limitations placed by patent holders preventing open release of source code on website yet allowing source code to be released to required parties being the owner as required by GPLv2. Just go read GPLv2 and see where it says source code has to be on website or that it has to be mentioned in advertisement of the device. It does not place that requirement.

    So I did not pick the sole Blu-ray player that the source is not on-line I picked a common reality.

    “And you can be assured: most Blu-ray and DVD players use real-time operating systems. Not Linux. Not even RTLinux.”
    In fact no only limited function devices are this. More advanced function blu-ray players turn out to be Linux or freebsd because they need a fully functional network stack. Lot of the real-time OS’s have network stack issues. Yes a little too real-time for there own good.

    There is a lot more Linux out there. Linux runs under the radar at lot as a little GPL slip with instructions that most buying people lose.

    In fact Viktor I had named two a sony and laser by the time of your second comment you are clearly seen the post naming the sony.

    “And it remains a mystery what exactly is used by this Blu-ray player. Most likely it’s only busybox, and nothing else.” Sorry the sony one is full Android google tv device so Linux kernel for sure. No busybox in there but there is a kernel. My second one was one you could not question Viktor.

    Really twit Viktor you are stuffed completely the sony device is 100 percent confirm on-line what the beast is. My first laser giving has it hidden. The Panasonic shows the Linux kernel as well.

    Give up Vikor your logic is false.

    Advanced copy protection on blu-ray has brought a requirement to talk network well. The Linux and Freebsd network stacks are some of the best going. Other RT OS’s are not that good in network stacks.

    Time goes on Vikor time of just DVD players there was a lot of RT OS’s inside. The time of blu-ray is here now. The world shifted.

    The mistake here you presume mistakenly I don’t know this topic so did not read everything. There are more devices out there that have not release firmware sources on-line that are Linux.

  21. Viktor

    Panasonic, Hitachi, Samsung, Sony are all members of The Linux Foundation

    Who gives a crap if they’re members of the Linux foundation? By your logic there would have to be Linux inside the PS3. Yet there isn’t.

    Your pal, master twit oiaohm, claimed that many, many DVD and Blu-ray players use Linux. Unfortunately he hasn’t 1) detailed for exactly what it’s used and 2) brought forth the name of just one Blu-ray player, claiming that it uses Linux; but by sheer luck it’s a player where the source code can’t be found online, which is astonishing, as better known manufacturers like Pioneer etc. publish theirs online.

    So, once again, the burden of proof lies on your side to name DVD and Blu-ray players which use Linux.

  22. Andrew

    “…Linux out-of-the-box has just as much of a lack of DVD video playback as Windows XP did.”

    My manager installed Linux Mint out-of-the-box and was able to play DVD’s.

  23. Wes

    Pogson wrote: I have obtained a lot of PCs for schools over the years and never saw such a thing.

    I doubt you looked all that very hard, then. Although I did notice you never actually said “It played DVD movies”, but rather “it had a DVD drive”. Of course, you also didn’t mention the version of Windows it had or a host of other things. So I am left to guess blindly for the details you left out. If your school’s computer came with Windows 7, it probably was the Business or enterprise edition. That was irrelevant to my point as I was referring to XP, but even there, one of the reasons Business is more expensive is it comes with the DVD playback feature. Windows 7 Home Basic and Starter don’t. Vista Starter, Home Basic, and Business didn’t either. And no matter what you think, pretty much every home consumer PC comes with a 3rd party DVD playback. PowerDVD gets most of its revenue from those very preinstallations. This will be just as true in Windows 8. Linux is not going to win the day because you can type terminal slop to download libdvdcss from France. As you may have noticed, Linux out-of-the-box has just as much of a lack of DVD video playback as Windows XP did.

  24. Robert Pogson

    Viktor wrote, “most Blu-ray and DVD players use real-time operating systems. Not Linux. Not even RTLinux.”

    are all members of The Linux Foundation

    Frank Rowand, Sony Corporation:
    “Real-time unix has been used successfully since at least the late 1980′s in many diverse areas, including audio, video, manufacturing, finance, test and measurement, and military applications. Linux support for real-time has been actively developed and maintained in the community since 2004, is included in several commercial distributions, and is partially in the kernel.org tree, with features from the out of tree patch set continuing to flow into the kernel.org tree. “

  25. Viktor

    Sure. You had to pick the sole Blu-ray player whose source code isn’t distributed online. An obvious choice, because now I have to take your word for it. Which ain’t wise. It’s also curious that you can’t find the source code anywhere. It seems this particular Blu-ray player isn’t popular with the FLOSS crowd. Otherwise someone somewhere would’ve uploaded the code somewhere. And it remains a mystery what exactly is used by this Blu-ray player. Most likely it’s only busybox, and nothing else.

    And you can be assured: most Blu-ray and DVD players use real-time operating systems. Not Linux. Not even RTLinux.

  26. oiaohm

    Viktor It is in the box and a independent letter to the manual. With contact phone number and email to get the source code send out for a small handling fee.

    Nothing about GPL says you have to say it on the website or provide it by website. Yes I don’t make life simple for you. Why should I make it cheap or simple for a twit who don’t know the topic.

    oldman
    “I think you should sir, if only because it will prove that you are not makiung this up in the name of winning a fight.”
    Really why should when the reality is even worse on how dumb this guy is. http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a/News/Sony-Internet-TV/ you don’t have to look far to find that Linux usage is highly common in blu-ray and dvd players.

    When sony samsung and other major dvd vendors are using Linux and Vik Ham does not know what kind of twit am I dealing with here. Yet he tried to make out to be some kind of person with knowledge about Dvd protections. Sorry Vik Ham you are a twit.

    Its a simple case of Vik ham not knowing his topic as normal. Yes google tv devices do have Linux inside. Linux is common in high end dvd and blu-ray players as well as Low end. So its a OS dvd and blu-ray makers have to support to a point where windows they don’t have to support at all.

    Of course the art on linux in finding out the mount flags. Of course they are not using Linux default mount flags that would just make life too simple.

    Reality is Linux exists in lots of dvd and blu-ray players not advertised widely. Only find out when you get the gpl letter out box and phone or email up for the source code.

  27. oldman

    “Do you want me to provide you with download links next to the firmware sources. Just to prove that you are a absolute twit Vik ham.”

    I think you should sir, if only because it will prove that you are not makiung this up in the name of winning a fight.
    .

  28. oiaohm

    Laser BLU-BD1080 player got is Linux inside. Closed source play back program. But the mounting information to avoid structural tampering failure is include in the open source code part. A long with most A10 and other china based chips of dvd players.

    Just watch for the plays with the GPL declare inside there box. Then go get the source and be shocked how many are in fact running Linux. Then check the mount options they are using and copy magic solution to all those struct messing buggers.

    How many do you want me to list many thousand models per year of stand alone dvd players that are made that are Linux or freebsd. Name one player that contains windows. There is not a single one that contains windows other than xbox 360 that does not play lot of structor tamped discs anyhow. Of course not all stand alone dvd players are linux or freebsd some are vxworks and qnx and other odd balls.

    So shut up you twit. The base software image to most of them is in fact made by the same company that make powerdvd of all things. They do up a freebsd and a Linux image for placing in players. Lot of the cheep end players are one or the other.

    structural copy protection this is no copy protection its a mount options that is all. So disc has to be readable to Linux under the worst mount options Linux supports.

    Just because people are complaining about crap in forum does not mean they know anything. Lot are not aware its just a few simple mount options to fix.

    I mainly know this because guess what I have custom players built at times to fit into strange locations.

    libdvdcss is legal to install in Australia.

    Do you want me to provide you with download links next to the firmware sources. Just to prove that you are a absolute twit Vik ham.

  29. Viktor

    Ohio Ham, just shut up, will you? You are knowledgeable about Linux? One seriously doubts it. Maybe you want to look through some Linux forums and search for DVD playback problems. You won’t have to search for long. Next to the still ubiquitous “I don’t know how to install libdvdcss” problem, most other problems have to do with structural copy protection. Period.

    In Australia such copy protection is illegal? Who gives a damn? DVDs with structural copy protection exist in Australia, too. I know that because I have some Australian DVDs here. And do you want to guess what’s written on the packaging? Yes, there’s clearly written “DVD” on it, even if the copy protection employed violates the DVD standard (which it does).

    Where’s your proof that DVD players are running Linux or FreeBSD? You’ve got none, as usual. A friend of mine until recently ran a pretty successful modding business for DVD players, game consoles etc. He has modified countless DVD players of all known and virtually unknown brands. And not once has he seen Linux or FreeBSD inside such a device. Name your DVD players which run with Linux/FreeBSD or shut up.

    You don’t have a clue about anything, it seems. But you talk out of your f*kking a*s all the time.

  30. oiaohm

    Viktor
    “Show me how you directly play back a new DVD with structural copy protection with FLOSS on Linux.”
    Simple fact that is not copy protection by Australian law. Its providing a damaged disc as supported by the standard.

    “And structural copy protection is not real? Inserting bad sectors deliberately is not real? Manipulating the IFO files is not real? Creating “dirt” titles is not real?”

    Yes inserting bad sectors and Manipulating the IFO files is done in a way the standard defines disc damage. Everything they do could be replicated by careful scratching of disc. Heck that is how it they found it it worked. A master got scratched.

    Interesting enough VLC supports enough damaged media as per DVD standard these days ARccOS caught vlc and others a little hopping its still inside the define of damaged media.

    Mount disc in Linux with udf options nostrict and novrs set because that is how Linux and FreeBSD based dvdplayers mount it as turning both of those on take less CPU time. Again as per standard udf defines nostrict mode. In strict mode those bad sectors cause issues being made completely non readable so causing disc to fail to play. Where nostrict allow the bad to be read and past to the player. Yes this is why playing a lot of discs fail under windows as well default windows mounts udf strict as well.

    “Lot of stand alone dvd players” Note lot of not all. And its freebsd and Linux. freebsd they don’t have to release the source code. Freebsd and Linux do share work on there UDF drivers.

    Viktor AnyDVD is having trouble because there decoders are not to standard for allowing for damaged discs.

    Basically they are giving there disc damaging a polite name. It also allows them to get away with selling disc that are slightly warped in the pressing process. I have found this with sets of 3 and so on. That is not copy protection because if you buy multi there is nothing the same about them. The disc it self is physically warped inside the plastic so adding errors.

    So you might add so many errors intentionally. But this is the big bad but. More errors will be added in production. So the so called copy protection end up with consumers getting more discs that will not work in anything error + error problem. Almost No CD DVD or Blu-ray disc perfectly matches its master. High speed pressing see that it is not. Faster you press the more random warp in the disc you have. So a disc without damage done to master still will have damage. Interesting enough by pure luck a disc could have the same damage as those so call copy protection systems introduce. Failure to read it a failure to be to spec so player can cope with production produced errors.

    Vik ham you are complete idiot as normal. You really know nothing about DVD format or production or playback. So you don’t understand why it fails so don’t see that its not copy protection reading software that is required but damaged disc handling software that is required. Call those fake copy protections what they are. Intentionally produced damaged discs. Legally they cannot be called copy protection in Australia so there is no legal prevention to working around them.

    Proper true copy protection in Australia breaching is an offence unless you have to break it to break regional coding. Yes regional coding is not protected by law in Australia. The stuff you are talking about vik ham is not copy protection as define by Australian law. The more people call it what it is the better.

    Ivan Debby Does Düsseldorf DVD might never play under windows due to the fact filesystem driver will not read it as even a disc in drive. Due to these annoying buggers making damaged discs you might never be able to play a particular DVD under windows end of story. So damaged disc stuff everyone should be equally up in arms about.

  31. Ivan

    Are you sure about that? I think the number of lawsuits will be next to none because of that example, or did you miss the “comma et cetera” in your rush to argue about Windows 8?

  32. Robert Pogson

    PowerDVD:
    “With over a 100 million copies sold annually, PowerDVD is the number one choice for media entertainment on PCs and the only player software you need for all your media content and entertainment devices.”

    Price to use your PC for what you want?

    Ultra
    Incl. PowerDVD Mobile & Remote
    + BONUS MediaEspresso $46.95
    CAD124.93CAD84.95
    Pro CAD79.95
    Standard CAD49.95

    I will bet a bunch of consumers will see this as “bait-and-switch” and sue people.

  33. Ivan

    Yes. I know a lot of people who use their PC for news, weather and multimedia. Some have huge collections of DVD movies.

    And how many of those people actually use Windows Media Player to watch DVDs?

    I expect this is another crack in the dam of the retail space for GNU/Linux.

    Which is more likely after someones puts in their Debby Does Düsseldorf DVD and it doesn’t play in Windows Media Player, Bob?

    1.) Person downloads, installs PowerDVD, etc. and watches Debby Does Düsseldorf

    2.) Person loses all of their data and installs Linux only to find out that Debby Does Düsseldorf doesn’t play without installing possibly illegal software with weird workarounds.

    Choice 1 is far more likely.

  34. Viktor

    Here’s one more for Ham:

    http://www.slysoft.com/download/changes_anydvd.txt

    Isn’t it funny how even now support for new DVD copy protections is added rather constantly? Show me how you directly play back a new DVD with structural copy protection with FLOSS on Linux (or on Windows or on Mac OS X). You will most likely fail.

  35. Robert Pogson

    Wes wrote, “Every PC maker ships a separate media playback program with Windows.”

    I have obtained a lot of PCs for schools over the years and never saw such a thing. For instance the Lenovo PCs my last school obtained had M$’s media player and nothing else. They had DVD drives.

  36. Wes

    How soon we forget. Do you not remember that Windows XP didn’t come with DVD playback either? And Windows Vista and Seven does not come with Blu Ray video playback either. Do you know why no one notices that? Every PC maker ships a separate media playback program with Windows. It will be just like that again with Windows XP. And people who already have computers will likely already have that software, which works now, and will work when Windows 8 comes out. This will not be a thing that will drive anyone to the loving embrace of Linux.

  37. Viktor

    Ohio Ham, I knew that you are stupid. But can someone be that stupid?

    So all DVD players have Linux inside now? Funny, because if that’s true the reference to the GPL and the possibility to download the code of the firmware is missing very, very often.

    And structural copy protection is not real? Inserting bad sectors deliberately is not real? Manipulating the IFO files is not real? Creating “dirt” titles is not real?

    The fact that such copy protected discs can be played back by almost all players is good enough for Hollywood. DVD player manufacturers quite often issue patches in order for the firmware to cope with a new copy protection scheme. Sony was once bitten by its own ARccOS copy protection.

    And yes — such DVDs which are sold in stores this very minute violate the DVD standard. But who’s there to care? No one.

  38. Robert Pogson

    Herr Blatt wrote, “I need to agree with you this time Pogson, removing the ability to watch DVDs just sucks.”

    Yes. I know a lot of people who use their PC for news, weather and multimedia. Some have huge collections of DVD movies. Having to pay to add more software for the feature will get their notice. “Everything works” applied to that other OS will be just a memory. OTOH there may be a silver lining, that DRM is not fully supported by M$, who still has influence in IT. That’s a good thing for openness. Will Hollywood change if their product no longer sells in the market? Will other “partners” of M$ realize M$ is not their friend?

    I expect this is another crack in the dam of the retail space for GNU/Linux.

  39. oiaohm

    Viktor “overcome deliberate structural faults” In fact shock horror not all dvd players will play these.

    “Standalone players usually have no problems playing these back.”

    This is lie. Lot of stand alone dvd players are in fact Linux or BSD inside. To get pass the Disney DVD is dead simple copy what the Linux stand alone dvd players do. Disable sector validation on mount.

    Under windows those tools you mention have to work hard. Under Linux is a complete different game because Linux is a platform the DVD have to work on. Copy what the Linux dvd players do and you are home playing any dvd.

    There is no advanced copy protection on DVD. Only thing that exists is damaged discs with DVD. Yes some companies see how far they can get damaging the disc image and still have it work. Result is shorter operational life of the DVD disc as well.

    Making defective discs is not copy protection is ripping your windows customers off. Linux customers are not effected to badly.

    Sorry victor the law defines what copy protection is. Defective disc is not copy protection. Disney is also very careful not todo that to region 4 discs either. Since under Australian law its intentionally providing a defective product.

    Australian law is very straight forwards on what copy protection is. If you can put it in a 1 to 1 duplicator and make a copy its not copy protection. Yes all Disney discs copy in a 1 to 1 duplicator so its not copy protection by Australian law.

    Viktor the country you are in must be legally primitive to allow customers to be sold defective product.

  40. Viktor

    Viktor what the hell are you talking about. There is no advanced copy protection on DVD. The format does not allow it.

    Why don’t you read up on copy protection schemes for DVDs? There are many in existance today that violate the DVD standard. Standalone players usually have no problems playing these back. But software DVD players do. Why do you think software like AnyDVD or MakeMKV is still improved all the time in order to overcome deliberate structural faults or mastering errors? For example, recent Disney DVDs employ such copy protection.

  41. Clarence Moon

    That last item may be old…

    Embarrassing, isn’t it? Do you think many Winnipegians, miffed by Microsoft’s dropping DVD playback capability in their Windows 8 media player, will go there and purchase bare bones units out of spite? I just don’t see that happening.

    I might also note that this store seems to dote on Windows and even Apple systems and their expertise in such. No mention of Linux. No mention of GNU either, even in their old close-out ad. Do you suppose you are overlooking a lesson?

  42. Viktor

    Viktor what the hell are you talking about. There is no advanced copy protection on DVD. The format does not allow it.

    And you’ve been living under a rock for the last few years? There are quite many new DVDs out there which employ copy protection schemes that violate the DVD standard. Usually these DVDs play fine on stand-alone DVD players, but can’t be properly played back with software DVD players. Disney uses such copy protection extensively. Why do you think software like AnyDVD or MakeMKV is still constantly updated when it comes to DVDs?

  43. oiaohm

    Also with blu-ray if you want to mass produce a regional free disc to ship where ever forget it. This is forbin by blu-ray licensing.

    This is why work has started on lib-ray.org . FOSS is moving from taking and working with existing standard to setting it own and pushing those forwards.

  44. oiaohm

    Viktor what the hell are you talking about. There is no advanced copy protection on DVD. The format does not allow it.

    Advanced copy protection only exists in blueray.

    CD DVD and Blueray are different things. They might be the same sized disk.

  45. Herr Blatt

    I need to agree with you this time Pogson, removing the ability to watch DVDs just sucks.

  46. Viktor

    Where I last worked, only two teachers asked to keep that other OS. One of them was for using a DVD with some Hollywood stuff. That’s just one of many lock-ins M$ uses. It’s gone. I like that.

    Sorry, but there was a) never a lock-in and b) it’s not gone. MPC-HC or MPlayer/MPlayer2 or VLC or whichever player that is built from FLOSS is not capable of playing back many DVDs with advanced copy protection. That’s a fact. So if you’re somehow dependent on playing back DVDs on a computer you have to buy a software DVD player. It doesn’t matter which OS we’re talking about. (Yes, DVD copy protection is pretty much useless today and should be done away with, but that’s besides the point.)

  47. Robert Pogson

    Viktor wrote, “What’s your problem again, Pogson? Microsoft removes a feature which costs them real money to license, but is used less and less”

    I understand the economics. It’s just been a long time since M$ was affected by economics. Where I last worked, only two teachers asked to keep that other OS. One of them was for using a DVD with some Hollywood stuff. That’s just one of many lock-ins M$ uses. It’s gone. I like that.

  48. Viktor

    Just for the record and for clarification (otherwise I might be misunderstood again as a glowing Microsoft supporter, Chuckle): I don’t like Windows 8 as a Desktop operating system. But this very topic is pretty distinct from it, and I don’t consider DVD playback to be an essential part of any OS.

  49. Robert Pogson

    One of the best places in Winnipeg to shop for computer stuff is Computer Boulevard on St. James Street. They are a bricks-and-mortar business and they are always busy when I visit. I have dealt with them for about 10 years.

    That last item may be old. I cannot find a link to it on their site but Google still sees it.
    The PDF: “/Producer(GPL Ghostscript 8.15)

    /CreationDate(D:20120113140239)
    /Creator(PScript5.dll Version 5.2.2)”

  50. Viktor

    What’s your problem again, Pogson? Microsoft removes a feature which costs them real money to license, but is used less and less (which they know from real empirical data). Perhaps you should consider taking “Economics 101″.

    I’m also surprised how you get from Microsoft being unwilling to pay for a license any longer due to declining use of the licensed functionality to this:

    So much for all that hardware “working with” that other OS… So much for “backwards compatibility”. Times are changing.

    WTF!? DVD drives still work with Windows, whether there are codecs necessary for DVD playback installed or not. And what has “backwards compatibility” to do with it? When has Microsoft ever claimed that you’d be able to play back DVDs with every Windows version to come? What will you complain about next? That Windows can’t play back VHS cassettes? (Windows 7 can run Windows 3.x software. That’s “backwards compatibility” right there.)

    It’s IMO not even the job of the OS to provide playback facilities for this or that format. If I want to play back this or that format on Windows, I install MPC-HC (or MPlayer or — God forbid — VLC), and I’m done with it. If I want a DVD playback software that is able to cope with the myriads of copy protection schemes, I buy one.

    And most important of all:

    If you want an official DVD playback solution on Linux you have to pay for it, too! Those do exist.

    http://www.fluendo.com/shop/product/fluendo-dvd-player/

  51. Clarence Moon

    This one in Prague.

    Prague, you say? I don’t get around there much anymore. Ditto Shanghai, LaPaz, and Brasilia. How about Winnipeg? Anything show up there yet?

  52. oe

    Wow seems like Crippleware with the length of that list of removed features. Funny how the sys admin in the comments says each WinXp to Win7 system takes a day to patch, to automate that you’d probably need 3′rd party stuff and some really thick MS-A+ manuals; meanwhile Ubuntu 10.04 machines I’ve had have upgraded smoothly to 12.04; no disk formatting, no wiping, no clean installs needed, no problems with drivers or other gotcha’s occurring that drive a resigned reformat and install….This is a first with any OS for me, even Linux itself, but it doesn’t surprise me at all that a Linux distro is the first to deliver on the promise of the seamless upgrade….

  53. Robert Pogson

    Clarence Moon wrote, “So is anyone going to run out and buy a computer with Linux pre-installed? Of course not. For one thing, there are none on the market most places.”

    There are lots of businesses selling them so someone must be “running out” to buy one.

    e.g. This one in Prague.
    “Set includes a computer-equipped cabinet components. Operating System (OS) is not part of the kit in case of interest you have to order. When you buy the OS installation is FREE report …

    They are doing a great job, according to NetApplications (20% GNU/Linux).

  54. Clarence Moon

    So is anyone going to run out and buy a computer with Linux pre-installed? Of course not. For one thing, there are none on the market most places. For another, if there were, they would not be able to play the DVDs either. Blame the DVD makers for pricing themselves out of the market.

Leave a comment