Fluendo To Sell Proprietary Codecs For Linux 276
Several readers wrote in to tell us that the open source media software development company Fluendo has announced plans to sell native Linux implementations of proprietary video codecs such as Windows Media, MPEG-2, and MPEG-4. (Press release here.) From the article: "Currently, many Linux video applications facilitate Windows Media video playback using Windows DLL files and Wine, which provides suboptimal performance, particularly with streaming video. Fluendo's codecs could potentially provide better integration for streaming Windows Media playback in Linux web browsers as well as through GStreamer-based desktop applications like Totem."
Correction: (Score:3, Insightful)
Look at all the flak NVidia's binary-only drivers take from the GNU-types, and those are FREE.
Re:Hmmmmmmmmn, (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess the vast majority of end-user couldn't care less what their video codec is doing, as long as it plays their damn video's. It's a bit like the NVidea Linux drivers: the free software purists see it as something awful to load a binary driver on Linux, but I for one am very grateful to have proper 3D accelerated drivers at all. Same goes for video playback... There will always be proprietary video codecs, just get over it. I don't see the problem anyway, if I'm want to run commercial software on Linux it is usually binary as well. Does that mean the software is useless or bad?
Good luck with that (Score:5, Insightful)
They'd probably be legally unable to be as good as MPlayer, (a universal video player, home page [mplayerhq.hu], debs [debian-multimedia.org]), as licensing some codecs will require signing up to agreements to play nicely with DRM. MPlayer is good because there's none of that nonsense: it just works, for every video that I've tried.
Don't troll. (Score:4, Insightful)
Correction: Leaked codecs. (Score:3, Insightful)
The "your codecs want to be free" crowd will take care of that problem.
Re:Hmmmmmmmmn, (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps because of security fears? [rapid7.com]
Anyway, bringing nvidia into the discussion is a red herring, there is a huge difference between running a binary blob in ring 0 and userland. Let's discuss userland binary rather than kernel mode binary.
Sounds great. If... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'll just wait here for the Free Software fire-breathing demons of zealotry. It's quite cold right now and my furnace needs a break.
I have a better idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Hmmmmmmmmn, (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Hmmmmmmmmn, (Score:3, Insightful)
Because it's better for the public good if the drivers are open.
Re:I have a better idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Correction: (Score:4, Insightful)
I can write software and choose to release it open or closed source... that feels pretty free to me.
Erm... nvidia can too.
"Freedom to disagree" anyone? Oh no... it's YOUR way only, that's freedom!
Re:Good luck with that (Score:3, Insightful)
Totem/Rhythmbox provides me that. Yeah, I know, anyone who would say that mplayer isn't for him must be stupid or luser, it is stock answer to my requirements. But it won't change a bit what I said.
Mplayer is legal nightmare and isn't even developed fully anymore. Yes, it is nice to do some crazy things like playing movie in framebuffer, but that's it.
Buyers could be Gstreamer/GNOME/KDE users who would want to be legit for some reason - companies, shops, public terminals, etc. So this offer provides rather elegant way to do this. For me, I will stick with gstreamer bad/ugly plugins.
Re:Hmmmmmmmmn, (Score:1, Insightful)
for this reason amongst others, open source is well worth being evangelical about, and it must be done NOW, with everything on the system.
a/c because im at work =(
Re:Yes, they're part of ffmpeg (Score:5, Insightful)
And kudos to ffmpeg team. I use Totem with gstreamer bad/ugly/ffmpeg combo and I can say - hats off to you guys. Quality is very good.
Worse than that (Score:1, Insightful)
e.g. SuSE (even when a german company) didn't do MP3.
Re:Good luck with that (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly, FFMPEG is illegal in MAJORITY of IT world. Why it is so hard to say that? It is patent minefield.
Re:Hmmmmmmmmn, (Score:2, Insightful)
Sometimes I need a feature in software that's not already there. Other times, I need to tinker with some hardcoded value or behavior. (Like the time I needed to modify wget to get around a broken robots.txt.) One time, I wanted to use xvidcap, but found that the latest version of the code was old enough as to not compile on a modern GCC. (I'd be happy to release my updated version, if anyone cares.)
Fluendo = "Streaming Penguin"? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's significantly better, actually. Not because it's technically superior (although it may be), but because it can legally be rolled into a commercial version of Linux. Right now, you can't legally distribute a Linux distro with multimedia support (at least not in the U.S.), because they depend either on MS DLLs (obvious copyright problems) or patent-encumbered free implementations (which can't be distributed with the distro for legal reasons).
This makes Linux into a second-rate desktop OS, even if you're willing to pay for it, because it means key features don't work out of the box. There have been exceptions to this from time to time (Xandros, Lindows), but they weren't well accepted by the community, possibly because they tried to leverage their use of proprietary codecs as an advantage over other Linux distros, rather than against Windows -- not a good way to make friends.
A company which wasn't involved in the actual production of a distro, might be in a good position (assuming it dealt with everyone on the same terms) to produce codecs that could be incorporated into (a non-free, pay-per-copy) version of any distro. E.g., someone could take Ubuntu, add the codecs (paying Fluendo, obviously), and sell the result as a package, suitable for pre-installation. I don't think this would violate GPL either, if the codecs were built in a way that didn't require linking or otherwise producing a "derived work."
In short, Fluendo could be in a position to be ESR's "Streaming Penguin." [catb.org] In that paper, he discusses some of the major problems facing Linux as a marketable desktop OS, and the lack of modern multimedia capabilities are a real deal-breaker. In fact, the lack of multimedia capabilities are more of a weakness, than simply being free-as-in-beer is a strength; people are obviously willing to pay for an OS that works, but one that doesn't work out of the box (or works only after fiddling around with some shady instructions involving PLF mirrors) won't fly, even if it's free.
While people here on Slashdot may not regard having to manually install LAME, Xvid, Flash, and the Win32 codecs as a significant problem, it's one of the many reasons why you can't go out and buy a Dell pre-configured with Linux as a home computer. Even if there wasn't Microsoft trying to torpedo it before it gets going, I'm not sure customers would accept anything that didn't work right, right out of the box. Fluendo could, if they play their cards right, be a big benefit to the adoption of Linux.
Re:This could help acceptance of the Linux desktop (Score:3, Insightful)
What patents you are talking about? I bet you don't have any idea.
> And no, vlc and xine is no use for simple user.
Even if so... type:
% yum install totem-xine
It is Totem with xine backend. If you find it hard to use I really find you retarded.
Re:Correction: (Score:2, Insightful)
Funny how people tend to complain once they learn to expect something.
I think you're on the right track... (Score:4, Insightful)
If you can give me a Linux distribution that is supported and comes bundled with legal implementations of all the codecs at a reasonable price point, I'll buy it. Throw in something like Cedega for games or Crossover Office for other apps (if I even need it at this point) so I can get rid of my Windows installation entirely and that would be an ideal solution for me.
Proprietary, non-free applications are going to be essential to getting Linux into the mainstream. Software sellers aren't interested in an OS they can't sell software to run on.
Re:Hmmmmmmmmn, (Score:4, Insightful)
A few things:
a) It is infinitely better than a windows dll because it works (my machine is x86_64. windows blobs won't work there)
b) I don't have windows. How can I get windows binary blobs without buying windows or breaking the law?
c) True, I don't know what it's really doing, but it comes down to trust. I have personally met spoken to some of the fluendo/gstreamer folks and I trust them a hell of a lot more than some unknown devs at MS who I'll never even know the names of let alone meet and talk to.
Re:Hmmmmmmmmn, (Score:4, Insightful)
Redundant (Score:3, Insightful)
Good for non-i386 Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
I wonder if these Codecs could also be made to run under Solaris or BSD or other open source OSes?
Even for the people who use i386, this means there would be a legal codec so the big distos could include it with video players out of the box
Re:Hmmmmmmmmn, (Score:1, Insightful)
It's a patent licensing issue (Score:2, Insightful)
A.Supported by ffmpeg/libavcodec/whatever else through open source implementations
Re:Because OSS development IS better, honest. (Score:3, Insightful)
You'd think that, wouldn't you? Designing and implementing the software - you're right, in general. But in terms of finding bugs, frequently an outsider does better. It's practically a cliche in programmer circles that the bug you've been fruitlessly hunting for two days will be solved when a coworker looks over your shoulder for five seconds and says, "Oh, hey, there it is."
Many bugs are syntactic, not semantic. And someone who's familiar with the syntax, but not necessarily all the semantics, can spot things that others miss. Put in less technical terms, they see what the code actually does whereas someone who works with it constantly may just see what it's supposed to do.
And other bugs are related not to the problem domain per se but the way it relates to other domains. The Nvidia/Apple bug discussed here recently was due not to any deep graphics issue, but by improperly using memory - probably a signed value where an unsigned is required, so that hitting memory over 2GB does Bad Things. Yeah, I'd believe a relatively untrained programmer might spot that.
Re:Hmmmmmmmmn, (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I'm not very excited about paying money for essentially patent licenses. I supposed I'm resigned to being a patent license transgressor rather than monetarily supporting the patent holders. (Of course I also have the option of eschewing the content entirely, and mostly (but not entirely) do.)
Re:I don't know (Score:2, Insightful)