Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Media

Real Announce Helix Grant Program, Player 178

Posted by simoniker from the not-to-be-confused-with-other-helix dept.
Rob Lanphier writes "RealNetworks made two announcements at LinuxWorld this week: we will be giving out up to $75,000 by the end of the year for development of open source projects based on the Helix multimedia platform. Also, we just formally launched the Helix Player project, which is a project to build a GTK+ based user interface for Linux, Solaris, and other UNIXy operating systems. Press releases for the grant program here and player project here"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Real Announce Helix Grant Program, Player More

Real Announce Helix Grant Program, Player

Comments Filter:

  • Pffff... If only (Score:3, Informative)

    by AKAImBatman ( 238306 ) <akaimbatman@gmaYEATSil.com minus poet> on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @08:55PM (#6630398) Homepage Journal
    The Helix program is nothing but a set of "standardized" shells. The media player is simply the player sans any codecs and the server is simply and encoder/server again sans the codecs. Apparently, you're supposed to buy the codecs from Real. Even more annoying is the fact that you can't even download the blasted beta software without becoming an active developer and signing and faxing 5 different NDAs! What the hell kind of "open source" is this anyway?!

    • Re:Pffff... If only (Score:4, Interesting)

      by minus_273 ( 174041 ) <{aaaaa} {at} {SPAM.yahoo.com}> on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @08:59PM (#6630440) Journal
      hey i got the beta version no faxing here.. just registered online but more than that i ask,, what does this thing do that xine 's gtk interface laready doesnt do? or Maplyer.. which is very cross platform and fast...
      • It's not a question of "how many formats" it supports. When evaluated in terms of streaming media capabilities, MPlayer and Xine are a joke compared with Helix Player.
        • Exactly why do you say this? MPlayer supports windows media streaming, real media streaming, and quicktime media streaming. Does Helixplayer support all these?

          • Re:Why? (Score:4, Interesting)

            by joaorf ( 695907 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @10:42PM (#6631159)
            Like I wrote before, it's not a question of how many formats it supports. Helix is also capable of playing, encoding and serving proprietary formats like WM and Quicktime if just someone writes a plugin for it. And the plugin architecture of Helix is very clean: just drop the plugin file in a directory and use it.

            Helix has got a much more advanced streaming technology. It can get/send streams by TCP, UDP and HTTP. It supports multi-bitrate streams (a single stream can be encoded in more than one bit rate). The player has better buffering. And it supports something than neither Xine or MPlayer have ever dreamed of: markup and scripting with SMIL, RealText and RealPix.

            • "markup and scripting with SMIL, RealText and RealPix"

              I always wished mplayer would put advertising all over its gui. Uggghhh. Remind me again why we need to reinvent the wheel rather than support the current players?
            • Every single thing you said MPlayer / MEncoder does, except the SMIL. All SMIL wll ever be used for is ads before the movies anyways. It' smore of a bug than a feature.
      • Ahem:

        Your account does not have the "Project Document - View" permission needed for you to access the page you requested in the distribution project (view your permissions). Either ask the project administrator for more permission, or log in using a different account.

        Just shoot me now.

    • Re:Pffff... If only (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Senor_Pedo ( 648805 )
      Why is this different from, or more importantly, better than mplayer or xine? Those are both media players that include the codecs and do quite a good job, if I do say so myself. Just wondering.
    • Those who like following links before complaining may have found this:

      https://player.helixcommunity.org/2003/draft/int ro .html

      Wow! Support for all the latest video and audio codecs! Including the proprietary-but-excellent Real stuff, Ogg Vorbis, MPEG-4, and others.
      • I'll believe it when I see it. With the way things have worked to date, you'll probably need 3 click throughs for the player, then as a separate binary download, you'll need to either sign NDAs or download a package riddled with Spyware. To date, Real has shown *very* little openness in the process despite the supposed "open source" bent. If it's open source, WHY do I need to sign NDAs? It just doesn't add up!
        • Well, Real certainly views their codecs as core IP, and don't want them out in the wild.

          That said, the track record of companies monitizing proprietary codecs is NOT good. They could probably GPL RealVideo 9 tomorrow and it really wouldn't hurt them much, and might help in a lot of ways.
          • Agreed. In fact, very little of their business these days seems to come from the technology itself. They are instead pushing to sell more content such as games, movies, and music. Definitely a worthwhile goal, and all that much more reason to be straight with the development community.

          • Real licenses their codecs. They use ATRAC for audio, i'm not sure what they have for video.

            They *can't* GPL them.
            • They have a ATRAC3 derivative for the high data rates for RealAudio. But the "cook" audio codec which most use is developed in house, as is RealVideo.

              The ATRAC3 stuff is mainly for mobile audio devices, an area where Real doesn't seem to be playing anymore. I've used cook for everything I've done in the last few years.

        • Wrong (Score:2)

          by robla ( 4860 ) *
          You don't need to sign an NDA to get the source code. You are either mistaken or lying. Which is it?
          • Since when? When I last came to the Helix community, I couldn't even get the binaries without going through hoops (never did manage to get them). Source was so completely blocked off that it was rediculous to even *try* to get it without becoming a full fledged Helix developer! Maybe things have changed, but the damage has already been done.

    • Open Source is not the same as Free Software (Score:4, Informative)

      by jbn-o ( 555068 ) <mail@digitalcitizen.info> on Thursday August 07, 2003 @01:51AM (#6632424) Homepage
      What the hell kind of "open source" is this anyway?!

      The kind it was designed to be--that movement doesn't consider the freedom to share and modify the program to be as important as the practical development advantages to a business. Sometimes this means approving licenses that are also considered free software licenses, sometimes it will not. The FSF has an informative article on the philosophical differences between the two movements [gnu.org].

      • In effect, these companies seek to gain the favorable cachet of ``open source'' for their proprietary software products--even though those are not ``open source software''--because they have some relationship to free software or because the same company also maintains some free software. (One company founder said quite explicitly that they would put, into the free package they support, as little of their work as the community would stand for.)

    • don't know where to begin... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Kunta Kinte ( 323399 ) on Thursday August 07, 2003 @02:43AM (#6632636) Journal
      The Helix program is nothing but a set of "standardized" shells. The media player is simply the player sans any codecs and the server is simply and encoder/server again sans the codecs.

      The codec is only a piece of the picture. The container format is very important, and usually what people standardize on. Helix is giving us that and more.

      The project was not, I suspect, suppose to be an 'end-user' type project. Note that they did not release any binaries. Helix is a platform.

      Helix provides a uniform, client, server, and encoder source base. All open source. All we need to do now is build binaries around that. Industry will much easier pick up a product built on Real's helix, than something managements never heard of.

      I'd wager that the legality of MPlayer and xine is questionable. From the dll's they import to the codecs they emulate. Real is giving us something that they own for sure.

      • Great post (Score:3, Informative)

        by robla ( 4860 ) *
        This is a great set of observations. We've learned a lot in the past year, and we realized that with this initiative, we can't be as hyperfocused on developers as we have been in the past. Hence why we're working on the building a great piece of *open source* end user software for Linux/Solaris/etc.

        So in short, you're correct, the initiative is focused on developers, and I'm glad you're recognizing the value of the system.

        Rob Lanphier
        Helix Community Coordinator [helixcommunity.org]

    • Wrong (Score:5, Informative)

      by robla ( 4860 ) * on Thursday August 07, 2003 @03:59AM (#6632889) Homepage Journal
      Getting the code is admittedly more complicated than it needs to be (and we're working on that), but hyperbole like the parent post should not be modded up as "Informative". The steps are:

      1. Sign up for the site, filling in a form with proposed user name, real name, company name, and email.
      2. Receive confirmation URL, and visit included URL
      3. Agree to site terms of use
      4. Agree to RPSL (an OSI certified license)
      5. Get source code via CVS/SSH

      Why are we being hardasses about making sure that people agree to licenses? It's a combination of the way the legal system works, and our general conservativeness that stems from being a publicly traded company.

      There are good reasons to ensure that "manifestation of assent" occurs, even for open source. I'll defer to Larry Rosen's excellent paper on the topic [rosenlaw.com]. Larry, as you may know, is the General Counsel for the Open Source Initiative, and while his opinion is only an opinion, it's a very well informed one.

      As for the functionality, it's more than just "shells". There's complete software there, and it's the foundation of our commercial products. Additionally, the combination of Ogg Vorbis, SMIL 2.0, JPEG, GIF, and PNG is very powerful, and *all open source*. No RealAudio/RealVideo necessary, and the app is pretty unique. For an example which plays in the Helix Player (and versions of RealPlayer/RealOne Player with the Ogg Vorbis codec installed), check out the following link:

      http://rtsp.org/2003/demos/oggsmil/oggdemo.smil [rtsp.org]

      Once one starts looking at SMIL (especially SMIL 2.0), you begin to realize that a system that can support it does a lot.

      Rob Lanphier
      Helix Community Coordinator [helixcommunity.org]
      • You'll note that my userid (jbanes) is older than the hills. If you have logs that go back far enough, you may even note that I was all over the site, and back again, agreeing to all kinds of licenses, trying to get *something*. I wound up with a headache, a bad mood, and not a single binary or source program to show for it. Compare this to OpenOffice or Netbeans, where I can run around and grab source, binaries, docs, whatever, without going through an endless dracoian process. If things have changed on yo
      • Why are we being hardasses about making sure that people agree to licenses? It's a combination of the way the legal system works, and our general conservativeness that stems from being a publicly traded company.

        Right, well look: here [openoffice.org] is an example of an exemplary corporate-sponsored open source project. Rule number 1:

        Do not make it difficult to get the source.

        Once you're made the decision to go open source, then you have to walk the walk.

        Note that Larry's tract is oriented towards end users presu

  • Translation (Score:3, Insightful)

    by The Bungi ( 221687 ) <thebungi@gmail.com> on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @08:55PM (#6630404) Homepage
    "Please help us make our propietary piece of crap spyware nagware platform more popular. Thanks!"

    But anyway, better read all this [helixcommunity.org] carefully.

    • Re:Translation (Score:2, Insightful)

      by joaorf ( 695907 )
      Or you can translate: "Take our fine code and use it to make your own software better".
      That is possible, just like other projects are using Mozilla code.
    • But anyway, better read all this carefully.

      Helix's licenses have been cleared by the people that help protect the open-source definition http://opensource.org/ [opensource.org]

      By the way they're not giving a client. They're giving us the framework to build the client, and the server, and the encoders. There's no "nagware" unless open source developers choose to put it there.

      The problem I suspect is that the helix project is geared to to people that can do something with the source, not end users. Hence most of slashdo

  • $75K? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by CaseyB ( 1105 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @08:56PM (#6630408)
    So, they'll be paying the equivalent of the salary of a single developer for a year. And this is impressive, why?

    • Re:$75K? (Score:5, Funny)

      by smash ( 1351 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:01PM (#6630456) Homepage Journal
      So, they'll be paying the equivalent of the salary of a single developer for a year. And this is impressive, why?
      Hey.. don't knock it.

      Its half of their yearly revenue these days...

      smash.

    • Because they don't have to.

      When someone gives you something do you always complain that is not really that much? In my mind offering $75,000 to a cause is a pretty generous gesture.

    • Re:$75K? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by adug ( 228162 )
      What are you talking about, $75k buys 7 programmers in India for a year.
    • So, they'll be paying the equivalent of the salary of a single developer for a year. And this is impressive, why?

      These days that $75k can pay for 10 programmers from india who don't have your shitty attitude.

  • Open Source DRM: (Score:5, Funny)

    by Ieshan ( 409693 ) <ieshan@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @08:57PM (#6630415) Homepage Journal

    options.c /*Please comment out this option if you want to disable DRM. Doing so *may* make you liable for copyright infringement!*/
    bool DRM_Enabled = True; /*Please comment out this option if you want to disable the automatic sending of personal information (shopping habits, social security number, recently visited pr0n sites) to RealNetworks. Doing so *may* disable use of this player!*/
    bool player_works = True

    etc.. etc..

  • could be cool (Score:5, Insightful)

    by didjit ( 34494 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @08:57PM (#6630419) Homepage
    sounds like this could be a good thing. the older versions of real player for linux worked with moderate success. but they were shoved far out of reach on the real site like that guy in office space who likes his stapler so much. the versions weren't quite current and the players were sub-standard compared to the windows version. it'd be nice if they released a decent media player for linux and even better if it were open sourced.

  • Ooooh... (Score:5, Funny)

    by sbszine ( 633428 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @08:58PM (#6630432) Journal
    Can I port the bit of Realplayer that takes over your browser and can only be removed with holy water and a complete reinstall?
    • Can I port the bit of Realplayer that takes over your browser and can only be removed with holy water and a complete reinstall?

      Please let me know when you do complete that port, so I can gouge my eyes out with a rusty fork covered with botulism and slather my wounds with salt and lemon juice!!

  • It's still a good thing (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mao che minh ( 611166 ) * on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:03PM (#6630469) Journal
    While the Helix media player is merely the player minus codecs, and the server is only an encoder that also lacks the codecs, it is still a step in the right direction.

    When open source meets traditional business the results aren't always what the GNU and FSF might get excited about, but an honest effort is better then nothing.

    Just imagine if someone like Adobe showed this much community support with open source.

    • Re:It's still a good thing (Score:4, Insightful)

      by AKAImBatman ( 238306 ) <akaimbatman@gmaYEATSil.com minus poet> on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:24PM (#6630619) Homepage Journal
      While the Helix media player is merely the player minus codecs, and the server is only an encoder that also lacks the codecs, it is still a step in the right direction.

      I have a hard time swallowing this argument. There is absolutely *nothing* difficult about making a GUI or a bit of network code. Which of course begs the question, WTF are they doing? I suppose they may be developing a cross platform API for high speed video rendering, but again, that's not that huge of a project (most, if not all Multimedia OSes have special video extentions, including Linux). Codecs are where the real code/technology is. And that happens to be exactly what's missing.

      I can get you an old Chevette without an engine, suspension or wheels for cheap. Want to buy it?

      • Re:It's still a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)

        by benwaggoner ( 513209 ) <ben.waggoner@mic ... t.com minus poet> on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:47PM (#6630772) Homepage
        Nothing difficult about making a good GUI? I give you exhibit A: MPlayer. Dozens of different UIs available, all terrible.

        Nothing difficult about network code for streaming media? Huh? You've got to deal with client/server communication over a lossy connection using UDP, doing retransmission of packets, buffering, doing scalable switching between streams. Doing this well is at least of the same order of difficulty as a good codec.

        • Re:It's still a good thing (Score:4, Informative)

          by AKAImBatman ( 238306 ) <akaimbatman@gmaYEATSil.com minus poet> on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @10:15PM (#6630950) Homepage Journal
          I've been there and done this stuff. It is not that difficult. Granted, I tend to use Java for developing networking apps which simplifies the memory management immensely. None the less, with a little bit of development into a good C/C++ library, you can make networking just about as easy. The networking problem domain is very well understood and any programmer worth his salt should have little difficulty in developing a good server.

          As for MPlayer, I would like to point you to the DivX player and the ton of other "media players" on the market that are simple GUIs for codecs. Many of them are quite good. MPlayer's is poor because the focus is on just playing the videos, not making a good UI.

          I guess I'm particularily annoyed about the whole thing because I almost *like* Real. Their software is cross platform (sort of), the codecs are quite good, and the player is generally pretty slick. When they announced Helix, I just wanted to try it out, maybe help a little, etc. But as I attempted to follow development, I found that the whole process was so closed that any attempt to have a casual interest was frustrating. Even worse is that Real had no intention of releasing their codecs. While this is somewhat understandable, none of their announcements made this clear. In fact, it seems that they went out of their way to make people *believe* that the codecs were part of the project. Their entire position amounted to "it'll be great, feel good about it, now go away". Had they simply been up front about their intentions and their goals, I think they would have received a much better response. Not to mention that the community would probably have made the effort to add the missing codecs.
          • Try hopping on the Helix Community IRC sometime. Lots of the developers hang out there, and I've found it's a very responsive way to ask questions.

            As for the networking problem, I suspect what you're doing is quite a bit simpler than the full scope of a client/server streaming media architecture. While the theory is reasonably well documented, this isn't the kind of thing a guy writes in a basement in a few months.
            • Try hopping on the Helix Community IRC sometime. Lots of the developers hang out there, and I've found it's a very responsive way to ask questions.

              I'm sure they do. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they're doing great stuff. My beef is with Real and their constant slights of hand. I just can't take the project seriously when they won't be honest.

              As for the networking problem, I suspect what you're doing is quite a bit simpler than the full scope of a client/server streaming media architecture. While the th
      • There is absolutely *nothing* difficult about making a GUI or a bit of network code. Which of course begs the question, WTF are they doing?

        Raises the question, raises it. Not begs, raises. To beg the question is to engage in circular reasoning. To raise a question is to bring one up. This error crops up all the fsckin' time on /.; I figure some fanboy saw the phrase `beg the question' and thought it sounded cool.

        Incidentally, the Skeptic's Dictionary is a poor reference for examples of begging the

        • Oh boy, another one of these. :-/

          "Begs" the question is correct in a colorful sense of the english language. After you make a statement that has an obvious question attached to it, the question is "begging" to be asked. "Raises the question" is correct, but generally isn't as colorful of a speech construct.
          • No, it's not correct. `To beg the question' has a very specific meaning; to use it otherwise is to misuse. What you have posited is a folk etymology (there's a technical term for it which eludes me at the moment), like claiming fuck stands for `for unlawful carnal knowledge' (it does no such thing: it's a proper Germanic word, cognate to fican, ficken &c.), or claiming that history is sexist, or creating *burgle from burglary.

            That a thousand people misuse a phrase does not make it correct.

    • Speaking of codecs:

      https://xiph.helixcommunity.org/

    • Re:It's still a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)

      by GigsVT ( 208848 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:44PM (#6630752) Journal
      No, it's not a good thing, and you are completely wrong about Adobe.

      Adobe has supported open source more than most people know (or care to believe).

      I don't particularly like Adobe either, but as a company, they aren't half bad. They have released the postscript and PDF specs, in full, for free, and the license allows anyone to write an implementation of them, without royalty or encumberment.

      This has been an incredible boon for open source and Free Software. If you think printing in Linux sucks now, just imagine how bad it would have been had Adobe been dicks about PS and PDF standards. Adobe is way ahead of the game...

      They realized they can make more money by getting a fully open standard adopted, rather than trying to force a closed standard down everyone's throats, and face competing standards that do basically the same time.

      We would be downloading 3rd party open source postscript and PDF interperters from overseas to avoid patents, like we have to do now with mplayer codecs.

      What Real is doing is a sham. They don't give a fuck about Free Software, this is just their way of trying to get in on that "Linux thing" without actually giving a little.

      I know that Elcomsoft ordeal has left a bad taste in people's mouths, but we can't forget that Adobe isn't an unconditional enemy, they have been a strong ally in the past, and hopefully they saw the error in their ways regarding the DMCA.
      • I do have to agree with this. I've written quite a few PDF generation, document field prepopultors, and document merging programs. A great API for dealing with the PDF format is PDFBox [pdfbox.org]. Now if we could only get PDF creation programs not to insert invalid garbage into the files...

      • Re:It's still a good thing (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Lord_Dweomer ( 648696 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @11:10PM (#6631442) Homepage
        The other good business practice of Adobe that I'd like to point out is this:

        Photoshop has to be THE most pirated piece of software on the internet. Does Adobe know this? Yes. Do they do much? No. Why? Because they realize that they are getting everybody hooked on it. And when these people go to their job, and need to use graphics software, what are they gonna say to the person who buys it? "Get me Adobe Photoshop." I mean, aside from freelancers, corporations are the only ones willing to pony up the 600 bucks or whatever it runs these days. And you know what? Last I checked, Adobe wasn't doing half bad financially. The RIAA and other companies could learn something from them.

      • "I don't particularly like Adobe either, but as a company, they aren't half bad. They have released the postscript and PDF specs, in full, for free, and the license allows anyone to write an implementation of them, without royalty or encumberment." PDF is a nice format, but let's be clear. PDF is not as open as you might think. I found this out first hand when I was trying to write a PDF viewer in Java last year. Basically, type 1 fonts are to blame. Java does not support embeddable type 1 fonts and Ad
    • Just imagine if someone like Adobe showed this much community support with open source.

      Adobe helped to develop WINE to run their Photoshop. The graphic editor is still closed-source and commercial, WINE is still open-source. Seems to me like a reasonable win-win situation for all of us.

      • Adobe helped to develop WINE to run their Photoshop.

        Where did you get this information from? The only contribution I've seen from Adobe to WINE is with regards to font metrics, and even that was indirectly. Codeweavers did most of the work for getting Photoshop to run on WINE and that was primarily sponsored by Disney not Adobe. You might well be correct but this is this would be the first I've heard of it since I can't even find mention of it on the WINE mailing lists.
        • My fault about Adobe - it was Disney and you are correct in it. But my original point is still valid: commercial and open source software can co-exist.
          • commercial and open source software can co-exist

            Absolutely!!! I have paid for several pieces of commercial software for Linux namely Win4Lin, Codeweavers, Netlock, and StarOffice. I especially like the StarOffice model with an open source base product and the value added "finished" product for a fee.
    • Just imagine if someone like Adobe showed this much community support with open source.

      They don't do it with their software, but they have documented the PostScript, PDF and Type 1 font formats so anyone (eg Ghostscript) can use them.

      Meanwhile Real comes down hard on anyone who tries to make a player for their Real encoded streams; which wasn't a big deal when they had a simple unobtrusive player, say back in RealPlayer 5, but the monstrously bloated and annoyingly obtrusive versions you are forced to us

  • This may just work! (Score:5, Funny)

    by incom ( 570967 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:07PM (#6630500)
    Programmers could be the bounty hunters of the future, coding and chasing down bugs for profit and adventure.

  • TRPlayer?!? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by thor ( 3901 ) <thor@mineshaftgap.org> on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:09PM (#6630513) Homepage
    TRPlayer [linux-speakup.org]

    thor

  • project to build a GTK+ based user interface for.. (Score:4, Funny)

    by Gherald ( 682277 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:12PM (#6630538) Journal
    Linux, Solaris, and other UNIXy operating systems.

    Why not just sum that up with "Derivatives of SCO IP" ?!?

    People these days...

  • first proprietary player for linux (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ramzak2k ( 596734 ) * on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:24PM (#6630614)
    It is surprising to see the flak this news is receiving given that Real will be the first company to work towards a player(Helix player) on the linux platform. Now only if apple would follow suite, we wouldnt have to rely on cross over plugins to play these formats.
    • Now only if apple would follow suite, we wouldnt have to rely on cross over plugins to play these formats.

      Ummm... hello? There are NO CODECS included with Helix. It supposed to be some "open platform" for media.

      Translation: a way to drum up "good feelings" about RealPlayer by giving away a worthless shell that you have to sign an NDA to get.

      • YES CODECS (Score:3, Informative)

        by benwaggoner ( 513209 )
        The press release listed these codecs for this player:

        SMIL 2.0
        RealVideo (RV9, RV8, RV7, RVG2)
        RealAudio (RA8, G2 audio)
        MP3
        Ogg Vorbis
        MPEG4 (patent license for MPEG4 must be obtained separately)
        H.263
      • What do you mean "there are no codecs"?
        You have got Ogg, you can use the binary Real Media codecs, and you can write a plugin for any other format you want.

        But codecs are not the most important thing in a project like this. The core code that deals with streaming is more important, and what I hope other projects understand how valuable this Helix project really is.

        • What do you mean "there are no codecs"?
          You have got Ogg, you can use the binary Real Media codecs, and you can write a plugin for any other format you want.

          This is where Real's confusion campaign comes into play. The Helix project does not have access to the Real codecs! Instead, Real packages them in a distribution based on the open Helix code. This is not as open as you think it is. Although I'm glad to see that they're starting to look at bringing open formats such as OGG into the project.
      • Look, let me clear this up once and for all.

        All you long haired hippy open source zealots want all your programs and all the source code in the world to be free, but you spend exactly 0 time thinking about how companies can survive on this model. How can a company pay for 650 employees if they give 100% of their IP away? Answer: they can't.

        Real has to sell _something_. If they open source everything then their subscription model would likely die, since people could find a way to circumvent it given all th
        • 1. I am neither long haired nor a open source zealot. And I'm too young too be a hippy.
          2. I honestly don't care jack squat about the codecs.
          3. It was not my decision to make Real open source. It was Real's decision.

          My beef is that Real went out of their way to call something open source that was not, and to make it as complex as possible to figure out what was really there and what wasn't. THAT is what I'm pissed about. Had they been honest about what their goals were, I wouldn't be as upset as I am today.
    • Ahem. First of all, RealPlayer for Linux has been available for years and years. More importantly, you DON'T have to rely on the damn crossover plugins for ANYTHING. Just try MPlayer:

      http://www.mplayerhq.hu/

      It does include a built-in mini-WINE to allow it to use Windows codecs, but it has native implementations of most codecs. And it's free.

    • There are already MPlayer [mplayerhq.hu], the ffmpeg [sourceforge.net] library, mjpegtools [sourceforge.net], bbmpeg [cox.net], Ogg Vorbis [vorbis.com] and Theora [theora.org], Cinelerra [heroinewarrior.com]... I for one don't feel that I need a bone thrown to me by Real, much less a proprietary, binary-only, NDA-encumbered (no, more like encrusted) one.

      Others' mileage, of course, may vary. I admit, I may be just preaching to the choir here-- but I hope that what I just named off the top of my head can show potential moviemakers some of the options that are available.

      • There are already MPlayer, the ffmpeg library, mjpegtools, bbmpeg, Ogg Vorbis and Theora, Cinelerra... I for one don't feel that I need a bone thrown to me by Real, much less a proprietary, binary-only, NDA-encumbered (no, more like encrusted) one.

        What are you going to use for streaming? How do you encode? I hope you plan to pay royalities on that MPEG video. You are talking about MPEG4 right?... right?

        Helix is giving as a complete end-to-end multimedia solution. Client, encoder, and server. All unde

  • I've got something important to say about Real. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Chess_the_cat ( 653159 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:33PM (#6630679) Homepage
    Real >>>buffering 34%>>> Player is some >>>buffering 46%>>> of the >>>buffering 54%>>> finest >>>buffering 60%>>> software I've ever >>>buffering 70%>>> come across.

  • Development (Score:3, Interesting)

    by chunkwhite86 ( 593696 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:40PM (#6630728)
    While any commercial software that gets developed for Linux is a plus for everyone involved, I think their $75k would be better spend on a programmer for a year. This seems like an inexpensive way for them to generate "buzz" around their product in the OSS community - even though their product is not OSS.

    Don't get me wrong - I think the REAL codecs are great, but this "offer" isn't.
  • Since the helix 'platform' is just a player without codecs, and a server/streamer without codecs...

    Would they give me money for porting the Ogg stuff to thier platform :)
  • Where Redhat and Real were working together on an an updated RealPlayer for Linux. I'm I having a false recovered memory or did that just never pan out?

  • Primary Source vs. Impartial Submission (Score:4, Insightful)

    by panaceaa ( 205396 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @09:55PM (#6630822) Homepage Journal
    Should Slashdot editors post an article by someone who works for RealNetworks? He only gave links to sites run by Real. Shouldn't it at least contain a few links from actual news sources like C-Net [com.com], who might put things in a less partial perspective?

    One could argue that it's better to get an article straight from the source, then read the comments for impartial opinion and review. However, I disagree. Slashdot should be a collection of articles that the community found interesting and submitted on their own. It shouldn't become a press release distribution ground for promoting corporate agendas to Linux geeks.
  • I've always felt linux has been lacking massive quanities of advertisements.

  • Real is interoperable (Score:4, Interesting)

    by joaorf ( 695907 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @10:04PM (#6630882)
    Real Video 9 is probably the best video codec nowadays (along with VP6).
    And if you want interoperability, Real is still the way to go. There is no other format for streaming media where all the following applies:
    1. Streaming server running on Linux
    2. Encoder running on Linux
    3. Players for Linux (including Alpha, PowerPC and IA32 architectures) and a few other Unix-type systems: Solaris, AIX, IRIX, Mac OS X.
    4. Server and players capable of understanding SMIL
    Plus, most of the server, encoder and player code is open-source (except the GUI). I have already compiled it, and it works great.

    And people who really understand about streaming media know that MPEG4 is no alternative, yet.

    • Re:Real is interoperable (Score:4, Interesting)

      by evilviper ( 135110 ) on Thursday August 07, 2003 @12:26AM (#6631983) Journal
      And people who really understand about streaming media know that MPEG4 is no alternative, yet.

      And what is the problem with MPEG4? Licensing is a serious problem, but I don't think you were talking about that.

      The only other problem with MPEG-4 is that most people use an AVI container, but that's certainly not required. You could be streaming MPEG-4 in an Ogg container if you like (although icecast for Ogg isn't considered stable, it has been operating in the wild for some time), or you could stick it in a .MOV container which is recomended, and stream it with any of the normal tools.

      An open standard is an open standard, and unless they are seriously lacking compared to the propritary alternatives, they nearly always win in the long run.

  • An open letter (Score:4, Insightful)

    by digitaltraveller ( 167469 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @10:22PM (#6630991) Homepage
    Dear Real Networks,
    Please go away and rethink your business model and come back when you are ready to release something of value.
    If you wish to win the hearts and minds of open source developers you need to do more than your current offer which smacks of "Here is 75K, code & licenses of questionable value, please go do our coding for us".
    Instead you might want to check out a _profitable_ business model like that used by TrollTech, SleepyCat Software, ZeroC and others. The scheme is this: Release your codecs as a GPL library that allows open source (GPL) code to link against it. Proprietary software is required to purchase a seperate license to use the library. Sell a high quality proprietary multimedia production app that uses these codecs.
    Remember, business is about taking measured risks, and it's time for Real "realize" this.
    Otherwise Real risks fading into obscurity. The sentiment here [in my office] is that this has already happened. The time for bold action has arrived.

    • Re:An open letter (Score:2, Interesting)

      by vikman ( 695272 )
      It's unfair to say Real hasn't committed resources or open sourced things of value. The technology and the source code that is available today is the product of years of hardwork.
      Further, there IS a Linux Player team at Real. We (this team) is as passionate as you are about creating a media player that is of good value to the community - and todays announcement was our way of asking you to come participate in the process. It's not just our giving away freebies that wins the minds and hearts of a community -

  • A simple, decent player for *nix platforms... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by GrimReality ( 634168 ) on Wednesday August 06, 2003 @10:51PM (#6631256) Homepage Journal

    Introduction

    The current situation is that one has to use RealOne player to play RealMedia files. One has to register the player before you can play a file, but the player will simply go around in loops asking you to register, no matter how many times you do it. Even when it does start to play it crashes and leaks --for it has become a kitchen-sink(TM) application.

    Of course, there are stuff like Xine and MPlayer, but their legal status is dubious and since being done the sneaky way is not working at the best.

    If RealMedia is reluctant to come out with a simpley player for playing RealMedia audio and video files ONLY (i.e. no 'jukebox' or ripping or audio-cd making and other junk), let others write them by making the codecs freely distributable (for playing back ONLY) and making the interface documentation freely available.

    Helix: Episode IV: A New Hope

    This Helix thing seems to be more than just the audio-video stuff, and seems to encompass a broader take on mult-media on the Internet.

    Does this bring up a hope that such simple players (non-sneaky) could be a reality in the near future?

    GrimReality
    2003-08-07 02:51:07 UTC (2003-08-06 22:51:07 EDT)

  • Please 1) release some codecs, 2) document your file formats so we can build code to play your encoded content, or 3) crawl off into a corner and die as quickly as possible.

    Right now Real-encoded content is the most incredible PITA, because there's lots of it, and converting it to MP3 to listen to on my portable MP3 player can only be done in real time.

    Perhaps if you (Real) hadn't kept your file formats proprietary, everyone would be using Real players instead of MP3 players. But hey, you made your bed, n
  • I figure I owe the Helix guys an apology for posting such cutting remarks. I probably could have phrased them better. What they have done/are doing is important stuff and should not be devalued. My primary complaint against Real/Helix is the amount of red tape the project has generated as well as the confusion the community page produces. It looks like some progress has been made in this area since I last attempted to visit their project, and I hope in the future Real will see the wisdom in emulating other

Slashdot Top Deals

"Look! There! Evil!.. pure and simple, total evil from the Eighth Dimension!" -- Buckaroo Banzai

Close