Why is it that, when I insert an audio disk, I see it as an audio disk on my desktop, but when I click it, GNOME shows the .wav files that are present. No application is suggested, even under "Open", to play the damned music. If I go to Application, sound and video, the first option, "Audio Player", opens XMMS.
Great! I click the forward button... I'm presented with a list of the... no, no, no! not the files on the CD, but the files in my home directory!!! Wow, we're really moving forward! I painfully navigate to /media, there's nothing in /media.
Let's check mtab, my DVD/CD is on sr0, I believe. Nope, nothing there.
Well, if the intend was to scare away Mac and Windows users, I would think that the success rate is 100%. I've been using Linux for 8 years and even "I" am scared! I do understand Fedora is for geeks, but would it make their life that difficult if things kinda worked? Didn't anybody notice that the present set-up makes absolutely no sense?
At least, normally, you should go to => System, Preference, File Management, Media to select a default CD and DVD player. Still impossible! No option to change anything. I wrote about this. Nobody replied.
Who's responsible for setting things this way? Is anyboby responsible somewhere or is it "We do all this together in a haphazard way" ? If so, never expect any significant market share for Linux. Radio-Canada will continue to use Windows Media because "Linux is too hard for ordinary people" (MSFT trademark).
You think I'm a ranter? I've been told this quite often. But, while some people write code, I write to the Quebec Press Council.
I explain that a certain so-called journalist is just a Microsoft sycophant. Every time he used Windows Vista, of course, there were a few... almost bugs. but certainly no show stopper.
With Linux, the question is more complex. When a new version of Firefox comes out, for instance, instead of waiting for the upgrade, he gets the executable at Mozilla and, then, everything gets really complicated.
Of course, the Press Concil understands perfectly what's going on. I made sure my basic complaint was very easy to understand: I explained the journalist NEVER discussed the appropriateness for the State -- television, amongst others -- of using proprietary format and never discussed tied sales. That's it, that's all.
Still, after counceiding that the Press organisation lawyers had well understood my POV, the Council judged that the journalist gives a lot of coverage to Linux -- they didn't elabore on the kind of coverage: they can't evaluate, of course -- and, you know, given that Linux hardly has 1% of the market share, they found the coverage was adequate.
So, I filed an appeal... and sent a copy to the Professional Federation of Journalists... I got my appeal.
But the fight is far from over. The Press Council is heavily subsidized by the employer of said journalist, and Radio-Canada, another member of the Microsoft club. Seeing subsidies vaporize scares the shit out of those learned men: they could lose their precious jobs!
So, they'll try every trick in the book to give a very mild tone to their judgement. But I have a few other tricks in my book to set the records straight, though having the support from the Linux community would certainly help.
Cause... do you really believe I got any help from local coders for this fight? I got none, absolutely NONE. Why? Cause I'm a ranter. In other words, though I am not a programmer, when I see things that are not done correctly, I say so. They tell me I should fix the bugs.
Why is it that there are so many programmers and I can't even set a default application for reading CD and DVDs? While I'm alone to do what I consider my job, why is it that the whole community doesn't get its act together to do such simple things?
Sometimes I wished I could proselytize in a more positive way. I'd like to tell Apple users that Linux equals or surpasses OS X in user friendlyness, but it doesn't. It was like this ten years ago, it is still like this now. Countrary to what we could think from the success of Steve Jobs at the helm of Apple, in the Linux world, the only people who count are programmers. They'll fix things... soon.
But Linux is not so young anymore. After 18 years, it has 1% market share. I believe there are some organizational bugs that need to be ironed out. For now, from an administrative POV, Linux is a merry-go-round that doesn't make much sense.
What do you say, am I a ranter or an evangelist? Is it good for Linux to be ruled by programmers, the alternative not being necessarily the marketing department? :)
Red Hat has some clout. How come they don't say "We want a music player that first detects CD files and plays them" and accept to include them on the default CD only on this condition?
Etc., etc., etc.
On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 22:26 -0400, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
Why is it that, when I insert an audio disk, I see it as an audio disk on my desktop, but when I click it, GNOME shows the .wav files that are present. No application is suggested, even under "Open", to play the damned music.
Which part of "Fedora does not support proprietary formats" do you not understand? If you want .wav support, you need to add codecs from a non-Fedora repo. I apologize if you did this and it didn't work, but you don't say so.
Regarding the rest of your post, I have no opinion.
poc
On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 22:26 -0400, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
Why is it that, when I insert an audio disk, I see it as an audio disk on my desktop, but when I click it, GNOME shows the .wav files that are present. No application is suggested, even under "Open", to play the damned music.
Which part of "Fedora does not support proprietary formats" do you not understand? If you want .wav support, you need to add codecs from a non-Fedora repo. I apologize if you did this and it didn't work, but you don't say so.
I can read the CD, so the codecs are installed.
What I explained is that the way to get the CD playing is far, very far, from as obvious as if you were using a Mac or Windows.
User friendlyness is N-I-L.
On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 22:26 -0400, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
Why is it that, when I insert an audio disk, I see it as an audio disk on my desktop, but when I click it, GNOME shows the .wav files that are present. No application is suggested, even under "Open", to play the damned music. If I go to Application, sound and video, the first option, "Audio Player", opens XMMS.
Great! I click the forward button... I'm presented with a list of the... no, no, no! not the files on the CD, but the files in my home directory!!! Wow, we're really moving forward! I painfully navigate to /media, there's nothing in /media.
Let's check mtab, my DVD/CD is on sr0, I believe. Nope, nothing there.
Well, if the intend was to scare away Mac and Windows users, I would think that the success rate is 100%. I've been using Linux for 8 years and even "I" am scared! I do understand Fedora is for geeks, but would it make their life that difficult if things kinda worked? Didn't anybody notice that the present set-up makes absolutely no sense?
At least, normally, you should go to => System, Preference, File Management, Media to select a default CD and DVD player. Still impossible! No option to change anything. I wrote about this. Nobody replied.
Who's responsible for setting things this way? Is anyboby responsible somewhere or is it "We do all this together in a haphazard way" ? If so, never expect any significant market share for Linux. Radio-Canada will continue to use Windows Media because "Linux is too hard for ordinary people" (MSFT trademark).
You think I'm a ranter? I've been told this quite often. But, while some people write code, I write to the Quebec Press Council.
I explain that a certain so-called journalist is just a Microsoft sycophant. Every time he used Windows Vista, of course, there were a few... almost bugs. but certainly no show stopper.
With Linux, the question is more complex. When a new version of Firefox comes out, for instance, instead of waiting for the upgrade, he gets the executable at Mozilla and, then, everything gets really complicated.
Of course, the Press Concil understands perfectly what's going on. I made sure my basic complaint was very easy to understand: I explained the journalist NEVER discussed the appropriateness for the State -- television, amongst others -- of using proprietary format and never discussed tied sales. That's it, that's all.
Still, after counceiding that the Press organisation lawyers had well understood my POV, the Council judged that the journalist gives a lot of coverage to Linux -- they didn't elabore on the kind of coverage: they can't evaluate, of course -- and, you know, given that Linux hardly has 1% of the market share, they found the coverage was adequate.
So, I filed an appeal... and sent a copy to the Professional Federation of Journalists... I got my appeal.
But the fight is far from over. The Press Council is heavily subsidized by the employer of said journalist, and Radio-Canada, another member of the Microsoft club. Seeing subsidies vaporize scares the shit out of those learned men: they could lose their precious jobs!
So, they'll try every trick in the book to give a very mild tone to their judgement. But I have a few other tricks in my book to set the records straight, though having the support from the Linux community would certainly help.
Cause... do you really believe I got any help from local coders for this fight? I got none, absolutely NONE. Why? Cause I'm a ranter. In other words, though I am not a programmer, when I see things that are not done correctly, I say so. They tell me I should fix the bugs.
Why is it that there are so many programmers and I can't even set a default application for reading CD and DVDs? While I'm alone to do what I consider my job, why is it that the whole community doesn't get its act together to do such simple things?
Sometimes I wished I could proselytize in a more positive way. I'd like to tell Apple users that Linux equals or surpasses OS X in user friendlyness, but it doesn't. It was like this ten years ago, it is still like this now. Countrary to what we could think from the success of Steve Jobs at the helm of Apple, in the Linux world, the only people who count are programmers. They'll fix things... soon.
But Linux is not so young anymore. After 18 years, it has 1% market share. I believe there are some organizational bugs that need to be ironed out. For now, from an administrative POV, Linux is a merry-go-round that doesn't make much sense.
What do you say, am I a ranter or an evangelist? Is it good for Linux to be ruled by programmers, the alternative not being necessarily the marketing department? :)
Red Hat has some clout. How come they don't say "We want a music player that first detects CD files and plays them" and accept to include them on the default CD only on this condition?
Etc., etc., etc.
---- this may be the first and last time that I ever respond to your posts but...
All operating systems that I am aware of do not actually 'mount' an audio CD. This means Macintosh, Windows and yes, Linux.
http://www.computing.net/answers/linux/how-to-mount-an-audio-cd/9260.html
They provide players to play the audio files on the CD's but an audio CD format is not a filesystem for a computer and it never has been.
So you have offered a long winded message to the list that primarily informs us that you are not only unafraid to demonstrate your ignorance but believe that you can somehow evangelize things that you don't understand.
Craig
On 07/16/2009 10:40 PM, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 22:26 -0400, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
Why is it that, when I insert an audio disk, I see it as an audio disk on my desktop, but when I click it, GNOME shows the .wav files that are present. No application is suggested, even under "Open", to play the damned music.
Which part of "Fedora does not support proprietary formats" do you not understand? If you want .wav support, you need to add codecs from a non-Fedora repo. I apologize if you did this and it didn't work, but you don't say so.
I can read the CD, so the codecs are installed.
What I explained is that the way to get the CD playing is far, very far, from as obvious as if you were using a Mac or Windows.
User friendlyness is N-I-L.
What you're missing is that the codecs are required for the player to load and play the media. The codecs are not required to read the contents of the CD.
A wonderful 3rd party repo is rpmfusion.org. They provide many wonderful tools and options to make your desktop linux experience much more enjoyable...
On 07/16/2009 10:40 PM, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
What you're missing is that the codecs are required for the player to load and play the media. The codecs are not required to read the contents of the CD.
I see. You're teaching me a lot here. I always thought that, when you install the mplayer codecs, it was really to play Windows Media and, maybe, some more video codecs. Now you tell me it's only to load the media. Interesting.
A wonderful 3rd party repo is rpmfusion.org.
Well, I've been through the fedorafaq site and I do believe I installed therpmfusion repository. I didn't collect the mplayer codecs on mplayer's site :)
They provide many wonderful tools and options to make your desktop linux experience much more enjoyable...
It's just too bad that you stop short of telling me which codecs "required to load and play the media".
I'm very quick on the yum install command and since I have the rpmfusion repository installed, it will be my pleasure to install all that's needed... when I wake up tomorrow :)
On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 22:26 -0400, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
Why is it that, when I insert an audio disk, I see it as an audio disk on my desktop, but when I click it, GNOME shows the .wav files that are present.
There are no files on an audio disc, of any type, it cannot be mounted. It is not WAVE data on the disc, although the decrypted compact disc digital audio (CDDA) data is similar to one possible format of wav, it's not the same.
On various computer systems, if I try to open an CDDA in a file browser I will see a faked representation of a disc with selectable files. But all they are, are clickable items for me to tell the computer to do something related to a certain part of the disc.
On Fedora 9, I see faked "Track01.wav" contents, etc. On other competing systems I see tiny (other types of) files, which are treated rather like MP3 playlists (giving some player a reference to what to play - disc 1, track 2, etc).
It is then up to that additional application to play the track. Or some handler in the middle, that makes a track on a disc appear like it actually were a file, to give something to the application at the other end of things to play.
For what it's worth, this issue is not unique to Linux. I've certainly had grief trying to get Windows to play audio CDs, in the past. It can get really fun when someone's installed two different CD burning applications on their computer, and they all have a fight about who gets to play with the disc in the drive.
No application is suggested, even under "Open", to play the damned music.
Not having a populated list of CD player programs, sounds like a Gnome problem... Though it could be that you haven't installed any capable applications that inform Gnome that they're available as a CDDA handler.
If I go to Application, sound and video, the first option, "Audio Player", opens XMMS.
When I've used XMMS, in the past, it couldn't directly play CDDA. It needed a plug-in for that. Though it's probably included by default, by now. It also needed configuration: It needed you to specify a place on the directory tree that it would understand as a reference to your audio CD, so that when you accessed that part of the file system, it was to read tracks from the audio disc, instead. This is the same sort of thing as I outline further above, but XMMS implementing for itself, rather than Gnome acting as the go-between. This is an XMMS application issue, not a Linux one.
Other CDDA capable programs take different approaches. They'll detect a CDDA disc in the CD drive, and provide their own disc/track content selector.
Further to this, CDDA programs have (about) two options for playing the discs:
1. They can send commands to the CD drive, telling it to start spinning the disc, move the laser in so-much to play track so-and-so, and decode the audio itself (the drive), and the analogue audio out from the drive will got to a spare input on your sound card, for an analogue path to your speakers/headphones. Naturally, this requires an audio lead between your CD and sound card, and lots of modern computers don't have one installed.
1.a. Some drives also have a digital audio out, and can pipe the digital audio to something else for decoding (your sound card, your expensive HiFi stereo amplifier with digital audio inputs, etc.). As above, in point 1, this requires an audio lead from the drive to the next thing in the chain.
2. They can stream the data off the disc, the same as reading data from a data disc, and use your computer to decode the encrypted audio (*) to audio you can listen to.
* All audio CDs are encrypted. It's not a secret encryption, it's part of the way audio CDs handle playback errors (scramble the data put on the disc, so if a big lump of data is unreadable, it's actually only a few missing bits here and there, spread over a wide area, that can easily be guessed at, when unscrambling it for playback).
Great! I click the forward button... I'm presented with a list of the... no, no, no! not the files on the CD, but the files in my home directory!!!
Sounds like a bug in your browser (Nautilus, for Gnome). Perhaps it needs a CDDA plugin that you haven't installed.
Try to find out what's available for it: yum search nautilus
Wow, we're really moving forward! I painfully navigate to /media, there's nothing in /media.
There won't be. Only data discs will be mounted, and have files somewhere inside /media.
At least, normally, you should go to => System, Preference, File Management, Media to select a default CD and DVD player. Still impossible! No option to change anything. I wrote about this. Nobody replied.
Seen this mentioned before, even discussed it with the person, but this was prior to Fedora 11 being around. Nautilus is your file manager for Gnome, that's the starting point of fault finding, bug reporting, for this issue.
You think I'm a ranter?
Yes. And if you do it in the wrong direction, it'll be a useless rant.
Cause... do you really believe I got any help from local coders for this fight? I got none, absolutely NONE. Why? Cause I'm a ranter. In other words, though I am not a programmer, when I see things that are not done correctly, I say so. They tell me I should fix the bugs.
Most common answer: What doesn't work for you, is working for them, so they cannot fix your particular problem. This can be hardware differences, but a very likely scenario is a difference in what's installed on your system and theirs, and it could well be that you've simply got an inadequate installation.
Or, if you're dealing with programmers completely unrelated to audio disc playback, that they're doing other things, and aren't interested in doing something else, and they'll leave it for someone else who is interested, and has the information needed to do the job.
Linux is a group affair. No *one* body makes it work. It's created and maintained by all those interested in working on it. For those that continue to be involved in the project, it does what they want it to do. If you want it to do something else, you have to get your hands dirty.
In short, regarding your problems:
Gnome desktop - nothing listed as a handler application for CDDA Nautilus - Not interfacing to your chosen CDDA handler.
2009/7/17 Alan Cox alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk:
In short, regarding your problems:
Gnome desktop - nothing listed as a handler application for CDDA Nautilus - Not interfacing to your chosen CDDA handler.
Is Rhythmbox installed ? I would expect that to own CD playing (as it does normally when in use)
-- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@redhat.com To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
Just a question - does anyone know which modules need to be loaded for Audio CDs to play
My situation is sometime between F10 and F11 my system has stopped recognising audio-cd media
All over optical media is fine (Data Cd's, DVDs,DVDs DVD CD's vcds) just not audiocds - nothing happens - no messages in system log or dmesg
I know it is possible that my DVD drive is failing subtly but I would like to investigate the issue further
At present sound-juicer/Rhythmbox wont recognise the existence of any media in the drive
any help appreciated
On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 22:40 -0400, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
Which part of "Fedora does not support proprietary formats" do you
not
understand? If you want .wav support, you need to add codecs from a non-Fedora repo. I apologize if you did this and it didn't work, but
you
don't say so.
I can read the CD, so the codecs are installed.
Wrong. Reading the CD has nothing whatever to do with the codecs. The codecs are required for decoding the .wav files, not for reading the CD file list, which is in a standard format.
You probably want to take a look at RPMfusion.org.
poc
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 20:51:39 -0430, Patrick wrote:
On Thu, 2009-07-16 at 22:26 -0400, gilpel wrote:
Why is it that, when I insert an audio disk, I see it as an audio disk on my desktop, but when I click it, GNOME shows the .wav files that are present. No application is suggested, even under "Open", to play the damned music.
Which part of "Fedora does not support proprietary formats" do you not understand? If you want .wav support, you need to add codecs from a non-Fedora repo.
Are you kidding? WAV is a non-proprietary container format, which very often contains just raw PCM data which can be passed to audio output hardware directly. Some WAV files contain Microsoft ADPCM, compressed data which need a special decoder, but sox/aplay/libsndfile (all in Fedora) support this format.
On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 00:33 -0400, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
On 07/16/2009 10:40 PM, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
What you're missing is that the codecs are required for the player to load and play the media. The codecs are not required to read the contents of the CD.
I see. You're teaching me a lot here. I always thought that, when you install the mplayer codecs, it was really to play Windows Media and, maybe, some more video codecs. Now you tell me it's only to load the media. Interesting.
That's not what he's saying. Mplayer is a media player application. It comes with some free codecs, and doesn't come with other non-free codecs. Therefore you have to add them. There are many guides to this on the net (Google is your friend). Here's one: http://www.fedoraguide.info/index.php?title=Main_Page#Multimedia_Application...
poc
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:26:51 -0400 (EDT), gilpel wrote:
Why is it that, when I insert an audio disk, I see it as an audio disk on my desktop, but when I click it, GNOME shows the .wav files that are present. No application is suggested, even under "Open", to play the damned music. If I go to Application, sound and video, the first option, "Audio Player", opens XMMS.
Great! I click the forward button... I'm presented with a list of the... no, no, no! not the files on the CD, but the files in my home directory!!!
XMMS is not installed by default. At some point of time you've installed it yourself.
It's an old piece of software with quite a number of problem reports in Fedora bugzilla. Some of these have been closed incorrectly when some versions of Fedora reached EOL. If I recall correctly, the XMMS desktop menu entry is wrong, and therefore it doesn't accept file/path arguments passed to it.
Without the help of a virtual file-system for Audio CDs, XMMS cannot play the WAV PCM tracks found on an Audio CD. Unless you read its documentation to learn how to point it to an audio cd (and the xmms-cdread plugin for digital Audio CD input is orphaned again, I think).
On 07/17/2009 12:33 AM, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
On 07/16/2009 10:40 PM, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
What you're missing is that the codecs are required for the player to load and play the media. The codecs are not required to read the contents of the CD.
I see. You're teaching me a lot here. I always thought that, when you install the mplayer codecs, it was really to play Windows Media and, maybe, some more video codecs. Now you tell me it's only to load the media. Interesting.
A wonderful 3rd party repo is rpmfusion.org.
Well, I've been through the fedorafaq site and I do believe I installed therpmfusion repository. I didn't collect the mplayer codecs on mplayer's site :)
They provide many wonderful tools and options to make your desktop linux experience much more enjoyable...
It's just too bad that you stop short of telling me which codecs "required to load and play the media".
I'm very quick on the yum install command and since I have the rpmfusion repository installed, it will be my pleasure to install all that's needed... when I wake up tomorrow :)
Here's a better "guide" for you to follow...
Tim wrote:
No application is suggested, even under "Open", to play the damned music.
Not having a populated list of CD player programs, sounds like a Gnome problem...
Maybe. Who will write to GNOME? Who's respnsible that things work (TM)?
As I explained to Antonio, Rhythmbox certainly fixed the problem, though.
Though it could be that you haven't installed any capable applications that inform Gnome that they're available as a CDDA handler.
What's the "capable application"? Why isn't the capable application included?
If I go to Application, sound and video, the first option, "Audio Player", opens XMMS.
When I've used XMMS, in the past,
Yup, in the past, you too? We're in the present, you know?
it couldn't directly play CDDA. It needed a plug-in for that. Though it's probably included by default, by now. It also needed configuration: It needed you to specify a place on the directory tree that it would understand as a reference to your audio CD, so that when you accessed that part of the file system, it was to read tracks from the audio disc, instead. This is the same sort of thing as I outline further above, but XMMS implementing for itself, rather than Gnome acting as the go-between. This is an XMMS application issue, not a Linux one.
Other CDDA capable programs take different approaches. They'll detect a CDDA disc in the CD drive, and provide their own disc/track content selector.
Further to this, CDDA programs have (about) two options for playing the discs:
(...)
Naturally, this requires an audio lead between your CD and sound card, and lots of modern computers don't have one installed.
I suppose that's the problem I had. That's why I had to read the instructions here:
http://www.spencerstirling.com/computergeek/xmms.html
After this, everything worked. At last, I could see /dev/sr0 !!!
But it seems RhythmBox is aware of this <B>big problem</B> most modern computers have and it just works without roaming the net to fix it. Don't you think they take more care than XMMS developers to get this to work? The page I read dates back to 2005 and the problem is still present...
Honestly, unless the devil himself is at the helm of RhythmBox, I'd stop fooling around and go for it. I didn't experience a single problem and never had to roam the net to get it working. So why isn't it the default? Has the devil something to do with it?
At least, normally, you should go to => System, Preference, File Management, Media to select a default CD and DVD player. Still impossible! No option to change anything. I wrote about this. Nobody replied.
Seen this mentioned before, even discussed it with the person, but this was prior to Fedora 11 being around. Nautilus is your file manager for Gnome, that's the starting point of fault finding, bug reporting, for this issue.
Yes, mentioned before, discussed, maybe bug report filed, prior to Fedora 11, maybe Fedora 9...8, who knows. That's a lot of lost time for many people, cause you must not be the only one.
How come there's nobody at Red Hat/Fedora <B>responsible</B> for making reports about this and having things fixed. Playing Jobs, in other words? You know, kinda: "Will you get this fixed or should we use Thunar... and XFCE? Will you get XMMS working or will we use RhythmBox? Will you get Brasero working or... Cause, in the end, you see, everything will work. You don't work, you're not there."
And the same for documentation. I wrote to this guy at FedoraFAQ to explain that the instructions for installing the NVIDIA driver weren't complete. I never heard from him and the page hasn't changed, except, maybe, a link has been added to NVIDIA's site. (Maybe it was there before too. I don't remember.) Same for the minimum hardware requirements to install Fedora on FedoraProject. Despite a bug report, it hasn't changed.
It's a pity to see how we're going nowhere fast, declining all responsibilities by telling the newbies to RTFM!
You think I'm a ranter?
Yes. And if you do it in the wrong direction, it'll be a useless rant.
Well, I'm trying to evaluate the direction but it's hard. It seems that, before he was sick, Steve Jobs was reading emails sent by users and sometimes give a quick answer. Jobs is seen as at the head of Apple, and you can write to him. If he doesn't read your letter, he'll have somebody read it. If you don't like teh way his computers work, he has to listen because he intends to sell you some more. And, man! does he ever sell his crap!
But here, all you receive as an answer is "File a bug report". Hey, wait a sec! Doesn't anybody at Fedora use Fedora? How come nobody never noticed that Brasero doesn't work or XMMS is a pain? Why should we be writing all the time when, apparently, nobody gives a shit?
I said Fedora was a great distro, and I mean it, but it could be much better if we stopped pretending that Fedora is only for geeks and made it work for everybody. The geeks wouldn't lose anything, there's still lots of fun to be had for tehm.
Cause... do you really believe I got any help from local coders for this fight? I got none, absolutely NONE. Why? Cause I'm a ranter. In other words, though I am not a programmer, when I see things that are not done correctly, I say so. They tell me I should fix the bugs.
Most common answer: What doesn't work for you, is working for them, so they cannot fix your particular problem.
Na. As you explained, XMMS doesn't play well with modern hardware and it's been this way for years.
Linux is a group affair. No *one* body makes it work. It's created and maintained by all those interested in working on it. For those that continue to be involved in the project, it does what they want it to do.
Yes, but a distro such as Fedora can set its rules for the software it will accept.
If you want it to do something else, you have to get your hands dirty.
In short, regarding your problems:
Gnome desktop - nothing listed as a handler application for CDDA Nautilus - Not interfacing to your chosen CDDA handler.
In short, for my problems:
1) Scrap XMMS, install RhythmBox
2) Scrap Totem, install Mplayer with all the plug-ins
3) Scrap Brasero, install K3B
4) Scrap Nautilus, install Thunar (For the URL bar, but when I went to /dev/sr0, I was asked which application I wanted to open said file. I of course entered rhythmbox, and it worked! Not much use, of course, since I only have to right click the CD icon to open rhythmbox.)
5) Scrap Glipper, install Klipper, though Klipper has bugs in GNOME. I might give Clipman another try.
6) Etc., etc., etc.,
I have yet to configure Firefox in about:config so that one click in the url window selects everything. I hope it's still possible. With the precedent version I had, clicking the icon to the left would do the job. Not anymore. Those bastards like to make you sweat with every new release!
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:26:51 -0400 (EDT), gilpel wrote:
Why is it that, when I insert an audio disk, I see it as an audio disk on my desktop, but when I click it, GNOME shows the .wav files that are present. No application is suggested, even under "Open", to play the damned music. If I go to Application, sound and video, the first option, "Audio Player", opens XMMS.
Great! I click the forward button... I'm presented with a list of the... no, no, no! not the files on the CD, but the files in my home directory!!!
XMMS is not installed by default.
Really? After all I said on the matter, I'm surprised nobody corrected me
At some point of time you've installed it yourself.
I'd be very surprised. What's teh default CD player for Fedora/Gnome, then?
Shannon McMackin wroteÈ
Here's a better "guide" for you to follow...
Thanks! I didn't have it in my bookmarks.
On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 02:57:19 -0400 (EDT), gilpel altern org wrote:
If I go to Application, sound and video, the first option, "Audio Player", opens XMMS.
When I've used XMMS, in the past,
Yup, in the past, you too? We're in the present, you know?
Then don't install it. It doesn't get installed by default.
It's an old Gtk+ application, which has a very few fans left. xmms.org even calls it "legacy". Several times some developers have started a fork to replace XMMS with a successor like BMP, XMMS2, Audacious, in some cases starting with nothing else than a port to Gtk2, in other cases replacing the implementation gradually. You can find packages for some of them in the repositories.
But here, all you receive as an answer is "File a bug report". Hey, wait a sec! Doesn't anybody at Fedora use Fedora? How come nobody never noticed that Brasero doesn't work or XMMS is a pain? Why should we be writing all the time when, apparently, nobody gives a shit?
It may be specific to XMMS. Don't generalise. I don't put my hands into the fire with regard to the Fedora xmms package maintainer(s), but there's one thing you should not forget. Every piece of software packaged for Fedora needs somebody to take care of it in various aspects. The packages themselves, run-time testing (users can contribute that), finding and fixing bugs, as well as any upstream development that may be necessary. Software, which doesn't have any users, who are interested in it and who are willing to contribute something, may end up in a poor state or in poorly maintained Fedora packages. In many cases, it is beneficial to build small teams that give the packages some love - instead of filling the role of a pure consumer who relies on an arbitrary "packager" to do everything. So, for example, somebody who wants to use XMMS (and since the player is an optional download and not mandatory) should consider helping with some of the package maintenance tasks.
XMMS doesn't play well with modern hardware and it's been this way for years.
Then don't install it. It doesn't get installed by default. (repeating myself here)
XMMS development has stopped years ago. IIRC, there has been a minor release in 2007, three years after the previous one, marking the 10th anniversary of XMMS, but it hasn't moved forward over several years.
Tim:
Though it could be that you haven't installed any capable applications that inform Gnome that they're available as a CDDA handler.
gilpel@altern.org
What's the "capable application"?
One that's capable of playing CDs, as opposed to one that isn't.
Why isn't the capable application included?
That, I cannot answer, for numerous reasons. One being we don't know how you did the install. Whether you customised it, or went with the defaults. For all we know, you could have deliberately not installed something, and that something might have been what was needed.
When I've used XMMS, in the past,
Yup, in the past, you too? We're in the present, you know?
I haven't installed the latest OS, yet. And with my current OS, it was so long ago that I don't recall whether I added XMMS along with extra stuff, or just added the basic package.
But it seems RhythmBox is aware of this <B>big problem</B> most modern computers have and it just works without roaming the net to fix it.
Tales I've read suggests that RhythmBox doesn't "just work." For *some* people it doesn't, as can be said for many other programs.
Don't you think they take more care than XMMS developers to get this to work?
I can't answer for them. But some programs are geared more towards one thing (e.g. playing oggs and mp3s) than other things (playing CDs). It depends on what the creators wanted to do with their program.
The page I read dates back to 2005 and the problem is still present...
There are reasons to do things differently. For some users, such as ones without megafast PCs, getting the CD drive to do the actual playing is better than having the computer do it. Plus, you *may* get hardware error correction in the drive, and spinning a CD at the normal CD spin rate is much quieter than the computer spinning the disc at full speed to decode the data.
Honestly, unless the devil himself is at the helm of RhythmBox, I'd stop fooling around and go for it. I didn't experience a single problem and never had to roam the net to get it working.
I've had RhythmBox give me sheer hell, at times.
How come there's nobody at Red Hat/Fedora <B>responsible</B> for making reports about this and having things fixed. Playing Jobs, in other words? You know, kinda: "Will you get this fixed or should we use Thunar... and XFCE? Will you get XMMS working or will we use RhythmBox? Will you get Brasero working or... Cause, in the end, you see, everything will work. You don't work, you're not there."
This project works differently than Apple Computers.
I don't believe XMMS is a default, any more. For my last Fedora install, I'm sure I had to add it, myself. Personally, I prefer it to some alternatives, it's less CPU intensive to run.
It's a pity to see how we're going nowhere fast, declining all responsibilities by telling the newbies to RTFM!
That depends where the manual is. I think that telling someone to RTFM is actually a good starting answer, certainly when there's a good one. Read the damn manual, before you do your nut about something.
But here, all you receive as an answer is "File a bug report". Hey, wait a sec! Doesn't anybody at Fedora use Fedora? How come nobody never noticed that Brasero doesn't work or XMMS is a pain? Why should we be writing all the time when, apparently, nobody gives a shit?
a. Fedora Project is different than Apple Computers. b. We, the community run it, more than some head office. c. No one person will have tried every single application in the distro. d. Stop being silly.
Most common answer: What doesn't work for you, is working for them, so they cannot fix your particular problem.
Na. As you explained, XMMS doesn't play well with modern hardware and it's been this way for years.
Actually, I find XMMS does.
In short, for my problems:
- Scrap XMMS, install RhythmBox
Last time I looked, I'm sure XMMS wasn't installed by default, and RhythmBox was.
- Scrap Totem, install Mplayer with all the plug-ins
Yes, Totem sucks. Even for the codecs that it does support, from the get-go, it's a CPU pig.
Mplayer's quite good, but I've seen GUIfied versions of it that was just plain horrible. And you'll find plenty of people will stick the knife into mplayer for reasons why *they* don't like it, compared to something else.
- Scrap Brasero, install K3B
Personally, I'm against installing any KDE applications when you don't actually use KDE. K3B should be an installation choice when you want a KDE-inclusive system.
I have to say that I'm far from impressed by any of the burning applications that I've tried out, and that'd be at least half a dozen, by now. I tend to use the basic /burn a disc with these files/ feature that Nautilus has for simple CD/DVD burning, and command line burning utilities when I need something special.
- Scrap Nautilus, install Thunar (For the URL bar, but when I went to
/dev/sr0, I was asked which application I wanted to open said file. I of course entered rhythmbox, and it worked! Not much use, of course, since I only have to right click the CD icon to open rhythmbox.)
I don't particularly like Nautilus, but for other reasons. It's only a basic file browser, it's not a file manager (it's too simplistic for that task).
I tried Thunar quite some time ago, didn't like that, either.
For a basic workhorse file manager, I don't mind emelfm2, too much. It has basic file filtering, etc., that make using GUIfied file listers useful for sorting through large muddled messes of files. And it's relatively easy for users to configure what choices you get for double-clicking and right-clicking on particular file types. And not showing ANY icons for files, at all, makes it a lot faster for dealing with large file collections.
- Scrap Glipper, install Klipper, though Klipper has bugs in GNOME. I
might give Clipman another try.
There are places to discuss what forms default installations. If you have good reasons to suggest things should or shouldn't be installed, then debate them appropriately.
Though, as I mentioned earlier, putting KDE things into a Gnome system, isn't a great idea, and you'll find those deciding basic/default package lists will say the same thing. For a Gnome desktop, the defaults will be Gnome or generic applications, likewise for KDE desktop installs.
I have yet to configure Firefox in about:config so that one click in the url window selects everything. I hope it's still possible. With the precedent version I had, clicking the icon to the left would do the job. Not anymore. Those bastards like to make you sweat with every new release!
To each their own... I prefer one click to put a cursor where I click, so I can correct some mistake / modify something. Something else to do something other than put the cursor where I click the mouse (the default behaviour for almost all mouse clicking in a typeable area), seems a more sensible default.
Tim:
Tales I've read suggests that RhythmBox doesn't "just work." For *some*
people it doesn't, as can be said for many other programs.
It seems you haven't tried the latest version... I'm now listening to Fleetwood Mac on absolute Classic Rock. Not a problem again.
Don't you think they take more care than XMMS developers to get this to
work?
I can't answer for them. But some programs are geared more towards one
thing (e.g. playing oggs and mp3s) than other things (playing CDs). It depends on what the creators wanted to do with their program.
When I have a minute, I'll egt some mp3 and oggs. I bet you they'll play no problem.
How come there's nobody at Red Hat/Fedora <B>responsible</B> for making
reports about this and having things fixed. Playing Jobs, in other words?
You know, kinda: "Will you get this fixed or should we use Thunar...
and
XFCE? Will you get XMMS working or will we use RhythmBox? Will you get
Brasero working or... Cause, in the end, you see, everything will work. You don't work, you're not there."
This project works differently than Apple Computers.
And, after 18 years, we have 1% of market share on the desktop.
(Listening to Janis...)
My estimation is that if Linux doesn't get 5% of the market share within 3 years, it's done.
So, I give up. What do you suggest to get people using Linux, NOW? More of the RTFM rant?
a. Fedora Project is different than Apple Computers.
Maybe "this project" should evaluate the marketing methods of Apple and retain what makes sense: i.e.: listening to the users, amking sure everything works, etc.
b. We, the community run it, more than some head office.
A community may say: this guy is responsible for giving us shit when something doesn't work and making sure that, in the end, everything works.
(Listening t the Who.)
As Beranger says, if Microsoft can hardly put out a version of Windows that works every 7 or 8 years, maybe Linux should reconsider having new versions every six month. Maybe there a way somewhere in between Debian's 3 year releases and Fedora's 6 month.
(Beatles)
c. No one person will have tried every single application in the distro.
Certainly, one person should have tried every single default application. And that Brasero shit is one.
d. Stop being silly.
If I stop being silly, nothing will change and, when Google comes in the picture, we might dwindle from 1 towards 0%.
(U2 playing)
- Scrap Totem, install Mplayer with all the plug-ins
Yes, Totem sucks. Even for the codecs that it does support, from the
get-go, it's a CPU pig.
At least something we agree on!
Mplayer's quite good, but I've seen GUIfied versions of it that was just
plain horrible.
Try SMPlayer. It's a version 0,6, but already quite usable.
- Scrap Brasero, install K3B
Personally, I'm against installing any KDE applications when you don't
actually use KDE. K3B should be an installation choice when you want a KDE-inclusive system.
I suppose adding the KDE libraries would indeed cause a space problem, but something has to burn CDs/DVDs the easy way.
(Bowie playing)
- Scrap Nautilus, install Thunar (For the URL bar, but when I went to
/dev/sr0, I was asked which application I wanted to open said file. I of
course entered rhythmbox, and it worked! Not much use, of course, since
only have to right click the CD icon to open rhythmbox.)
I don't particularly like Nautilus, but for other reasons. It's only a
basic file browser, it's not a file manager (it's too simplistic for that task).
I tried Thunar quite some time ago, didn't like that, either.
You should see Dolphin! It almost make me believe KDE4 will someday become a valid choice once again.
For a basic workhorse file manager, I don't mind emelfm2, too much. It
has basic file filtering, etc.,
What is file filtering? I try to do ~/Desktop/*html and I get no result. All the fricken' file managers I have installed. This used to be standard with the KDE file manager years ago. What happened?
- Scrap Glipper, install Klipper, though Klipper has bugs in GNOME. I
might give Clipman another try.
There are places to discuss what forms default installations. If you
have good reasons to suggest things should or shouldn't be installed, then debate them appropriately.
I'm afraid debating this with developers of this and that application would be very unproductive. Unproductive because, once again, nobody is in charge. No butt to kick, noboddy to thank for good work. Just some kind of Brownian motion seemingly going nowhere.
If Shuttleworth hadn't made all his money in the most proprietary field of software, I'd say Ubuntu is headed somewhere, but I'm not sure.
Though, as I mentioned earlier, putting KDE things into a Gnome system,
isn't a great idea, and you'll find those deciding basic/default package lists will say the same thing. For a Gnome desktop, the defaults will be Gnome or generic applications, likewise for KDE desktop installs.
I have yet to configure Firefox in about:config so that one click in
the
url window selects everything. I hope it's still possible. With the
precedent version I had, clicking the icon to the left would do the job.
Not anymore. Those bastards like to make you sweat with every new
release!
To each their own... I prefer one click to put a cursor where I click,
so I can correct some mistake / modify something.
First click select to erase without copying, second copies, thereafter, you edit. It's rather rare that you have to edit URLs.
Enough for today!
Tim wrote:
There are reasons to do things differently. For some users, such as ones without megafast PCs, getting the CD drive to do the actual playing is better than having the computer do it. Plus, you *may* get hardware error correction in the drive, and spinning a CD at the normal CD spin rate is much quieter than the computer spinning the disc at full speed to decode the data.
There is also the change from letting the CD drive feed an analog signal to the sound card and only having to set the mixer level to the setup that is more common today where you get the data over the (S)ATA interface and converting the digital signal to analog in software, or a hardware D to A converter. (Or leaving it as digital and feeding that to an external sound system.)
One of the big reasons for the change is that it saves money by not having to include and install an audio cable from the drive to the sound card. But it does complicate the p;ayer software a bit. It also means that if you do not add the cable yourself, the mixer control labeled CD does not control CD volume. (It controls the analog input labeled CD.)
Another side affect of this is that it is more complicated to play a CD and use other sounds at the same time. Unless your sounds hardware has more then one channel for digital input, you end up having to mix the Digital output from the CD with game sounds, system sounds, etc.
Mikkel
Tim:
This project works differently than Apple Computers.
gilpel@altern.org:
And, after 18 years, we have 1% of market share on the desktop.
Commercial software considers market domination to be an indicator of success. Others consider it successful when it does what they want it to, regardless of numbers. Likewise for manufacturers of other products, if they sell what they want, that's all they care about. Getting too big can have its problems, too.
Other than a few zealots, I've not seen it said that getting massive numbers of users is a goal. Nor converting people away from some other OS that they want to use. I use it, and like it, because it's better than the alternatives. And I have tried several.
As Beranger says, if Microsoft can hardly put out a version of Windows that works every 7 or 8 years, maybe Linux should reconsider having new versions every six month. Maybe there a way somewhere in between Debian's 3 year releases and Fedora's 6 month.
I question that Microsoft puts out an "operating system," and they've had to be dragged kicking and screaming towards the Unix notion of restricting users from doing stupid things, or outsiders from doing nasty things by remote. And there's enough distributions with different release schedules, and you're quite able to pick to use a different one if you don't like the schedule of the one you're currently using.
For a basic workhorse file manager, I don't mind emelfm2, too much. It has basic file filtering, etc.,
What is file filtering? I try to do ~/Desktop/*html and I get no result.
With emelfm2, you click a gadget to add a filtering rule, then get to set things like wildcarding, timestamping, or size filtering, to hide things from the file listing.
Yes, I'd like something similar in the file listers that applications pop up. We used to have that on the Amiga. It's all very well that some of those listers let you click a drop-down box to only show JPEGs, or whatever. But I like a free-form way to specify what I want to see. And I wish that application file listers could show the file sizes, not just names and dates.
There are places to discuss what forms default installations. If you have good reasons to suggest things should or shouldn't be installed, then debate them appropriately.
I'm afraid debating this with developers of this and that application would be very unproductive. Unproductive because, once again, nobody is in charge. No butt to kick, noboddy to thank for good work. Just some kind of Brownian motion seemingly going nowhere.
You still misunderstand the project. And I suspect you're in danger of thinking that your views on something are better than *all* of the other people involved in it.
To each their own... I prefer one click to put a cursor where I click, so I can correct some mistake / modify something.
First click select to erase without copying, second copies, thereafter, you edit. It's rather rare that you have to edit URLs.
Not if you write webpages.
Tim:
This project works differently than Apple Computers.
gilpel@altern.org:
And, after 18 years, we have 1% of market share on the desktop.
Commercial software considers market domination to be an indicator of
success. Others consider it successful when it does what they want it to, regardless of numbers. Likewise for manufacturers of other
products, if they sell what they want, that's all they care about.
Getting too big can have its problems, too.
It's really weird. I already said that you have a gift for explaining, which means you're certainly not completely dumb. How come you can't understand the importance of market share for Linux?
If Microsoft tries so hard to take away every part of market share they can from Linux -- e.g.: the netbooks -- it's certainly that they understand how important it is for them that Linux gets as little as possible. So, why wouldn't it be important for Linux to get market share?
At the present time, all the features of the French-Canadian state television is encrypted in Windows Media. If, in ten years from now, Microsoft lawyers get rid of their problems with the European Community and decide they have some time on their hands to break the neck of people who write codecs, what do you think will happen?
Do you really believe that Radio-Canada will reencode all their features in Dirac format, a format that nobody will ever use since it's not included with Microsoft products? Since there's hardly anything encoded in this format on the net, even most Linux users haven't installed the codecs! Dirac is not at version 1, perfectly usable apparently.
And other formats could have been used before that weren't streaming.
If there's anything that the Microsoft history teaches us, it's that, in the end, what counts in order to bring other OSes to complete irrelevance, is the proprietary formats ordinary people at the base use, not what servers use.
This has been explained 12 years ago by a Berkely student, but it's still relevant. It's always same old story, same old song:
From Microsoft Word to Microsoft World:
How Microsoft is Building a Global Monopoly
A NetAction White Paper
Nathan Newman Project Director, NetAction
http://www.netaction.org/msoft/world/MSWord2World.html
With ~1% of desktop users with Linux, and maybe half understanding what Linux is all about, it's impossible to exercise political pressure and establish a level playing ground.
We need user base and this doesn't necessarily mean making Linux dummer.
I question that Microsoft puts out an "operating system,"
Question all you want, that's what people use and, if not, they're using OS X, not Linux. Why does Apple have 5-6% of desktop users when it has adopted a BSD based system recently and Linux has only 1% and has always been based on a *NIX system?
Do you believe having as little user base as possible is a goal? If that's so, with the coming of the Chrome OS, you might feel very glad pretty soon.
What is file filtering? I try to do ~/Desktop/*html and I get no
result.
With emelfm2, you click a gadget to add a filtering rule, then get to
set things like wildcarding, timestamping, or size filtering, to hide things from the file listing.
If by "wildcarding" you mean getting some results for ~/Desktop/*txt, I say this should be working in all browsers, like it always did in Konqueror, for instance.
I don't mind so much not having filters for time, size, etc. but... I just took a look at emelfm2 and I made it my default. Norton commander style is still alive, it seems :) Overkill for beginners, though.
Just some kind of
Brownian motion seemingly going nowhere.
You still misunderstand the project. And I suspect you're in danger of
thinking that your views on something are better than *all* of the other people involved in it.
I do know that "all people involved in it" made great things happen... but we have only 1% market share. Excuse me for insisting.
On Mon, 2009-07-20 at 09:31 +0500, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
It's really weird. I already said that you have a gift for explaining, which means you're certainly not completely dumb. How come you can't understand the importance of market share for Linux?
a. This is Linux, other than for the few for-sale distributions "market share" is inappropriate terminology.
b. As I've already pointed out, just because you measure success by the percentage of users on different systems, doesn't mean others do, as well. You're the one failing to understand things.
Linux has been the success that it is, all these years, despite the low numbers, as far as you're concerned. It continues to succeed, despite the low numbers, because it does what its users want it to do.
It'll never replace Windows, because it'd have to be Windows (warts and all) to do that, and *we* don't want a Windows clone. There's no point to that, we've already got Windows if we want those problems.
Linux isn't going to magically vanish because the relative number of users falls below some threshold. It'll go when there's insufficient people involved to keep it going.
Things like proprietary media formats will always be around, even if Linux gets a huge /market share/, And open formats still have a place even in a completely proprietary market.
On 7/20/2009 5:36 AM, Tim wrote:
On Mon, 2009-07-20 at 09:31 +0500, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
It's really weird. I already said that you have a gift for explaining, which means you're certainly not completely dumb. How come you can't understand the importance of market share for Linux?
a. This is Linux, other than for the few for-sale distributions "market share" is inappropriate terminology.
b. As I've already pointed out, just because you measure success by the percentage of users on different systems, doesn't mean others do, as well. You're the one failing to understand things.
Linux has been the success that it is, all these years, despite the low numbers, as far as you're concerned. It continues to succeed, despite the low numbers, because it does what its users want it to do.
It'll never replace Windows, because it'd have to be Windows (warts and all) to do that, and *we* don't want a Windows clone. There's no point to that, we've already got Windows if we want those problems.
Linux isn't going to magically vanish because the relative number of users falls below some threshold. It'll go when there's insufficient people involved to keep it going.
Things like proprietary media formats will always be around, even if Linux gets a huge /market share/, And open formats still have a place even in a completely proprietary market.
Well stated. +1
On Mon, 2009-07-20 at 09:31 +0500, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
It's really weird. I already said that you have a gift for explaining,
which means you're certainly not completely dumb. How come you can't understand the importance of market share for Linux?
a. This is Linux, other than for the few for-sale distributions "market share" is inappropriate terminology.
Indeed. "World domination fast" was a really bad joke:
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=8&qptimeframe=M&qp...
I'm sure people who are playing the game of reverse engineering the codecs and making sure that everything works despite all Microsoft attempts (1) will keep on doing so in another 18 years from now, even with only 0.0000...1% of people on the net using Linux.
(1) It's the first time ever that I can read MWV at Radio-Canada without endless hassles.
Same goes for DeCss. There's absolutely no need to have people understand what using "their Windows" really means. Windows is free, ins,T it: you get it when you buy a computer! One wonders where Microsoft's billion$ come from.
And, of course, all state television will use open source formats.
Anyways, you couldn't care less since you watch video in binary format, right?
Thanks for sharing your deep thoughts! I've had this discussion with happy losers all too often. Enough for now.
On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 01:23 +0500, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
I'm sure people who are playing the game of reverse engineering the codecs and making sure that everything works despite all Microsoft attempts (1) will keep on doing so in another 18 years from now, even with only 0.0000...1% of people on the net using Linux.
Of course you DON'T realise is that those creating those codecs are using the system. They'll keep on creating them, so long as they're using them.
I'm beginning to suspect that you're Karl 1.2.
On Wed, 2009-07-22 at 04:20 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 01:23 +0500, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
I'm sure people who are playing the game of reverse engineering the codecs and making sure that everything works despite all Microsoft attempts (1) will keep on doing so in another 18 years from now, even with only 0.0000...1% of people on the net using Linux.
Of course you DON'T realise is that those creating those codecs are using the system. They'll keep on creating them, so long as they're using them.
I'm beginning to suspect that you're Karl 1.2.
---- me too - he's probably 1 post away from my kill file.
Craig
On 7/21/2009 6:52 PM, Craig White wrote:
On Wed, 2009-07-22 at 04:20 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 01:23 +0500, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
I'm sure people who are playing the game of reverse engineering the codecs and making sure that everything works despite all Microsoft attempts (1) will keep on doing so in another 18 years from now, even with only 0.0000...1% of people on the net using Linux.
Of course you DON'T realise is that those creating those codecs are using the system. They'll keep on creating them, so long as they're using them.
I'm beginning to suspect that you're Karl 1.2.
me too - he's probably 1 post away from my kill file.
Especially since the Codecs he is ranting about don't belong to, nor were they made/written by, Microsoft. :-)
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Daviddgboles@comcast.net wrote:
On 7/21/2009 6:52 PM, Craig White wrote:
On Wed, 2009-07-22 at 04:20 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 01:23 +0500, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
I'm sure people who are playing the game of reverse engineering the codecs and making sure that everything works despite all Microsoft attempts (1) will keep on doing so in another 18 years from now, even with only 0.0000...1% of people on the net using Linux.
Of course you DON'T realise is that those creating those codecs are using the system. They'll keep on creating them, so long as they're using them.
I'm beginning to suspect that you're Karl 1.2.
me too - he's probably 1 post away from my kill file.
Especially since the Codecs he is ranting about don't belong to, nor were they made/written by, Microsoft. :-)
______
Perhaps the OP would benefit more from a paid Red Hat subscription. He appears to expect too much from a free, community supported OS.
~af
On 7/21/2009 6:52 PM, Craig White wrote:
On Wed, 2009-07-22 at 04:20 +0930, Tim wrote:
On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 01:23 +0500, gilpel@altern.org wrote:
I'm sure people who are playing the game of reverse engineering the codecs and making sure that everything works despite all Microsoft attempts (1) will keep on doing so in another 18 years from now, even with only 0.0000...1% of people on the net using Linux.
Of course you DON'T realise is that those creating those codecs are using the system. They'll keep on creating them, so long as they're using them.
I'm beginning to suspect that you're Karl 1.2.
me too - he's probably 1 post away from my kill file.
Especially since the Codecs he is ranting about don't belong to, nor were they made/written by, Microsoft. :-)
"Windows Media Video (WMV) is a compressed video file format for several proprietary codecs developed by Microsoft. The original codec, known as WMV, was originally designed for Internet streaming applications, as a competitor to RealVideo. The other codecs, such as WMV Screen and WMV Image, cater for specialized content. Through standardization from the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE),[1][2] WMV has gained adoption for physical-delivery formats such as HD DVD and Blu-ray Disc.
"Windows Media Video (WMV) is the most recognized codec within the WMV family. Usage of the term WMV often refers to this codec only. Its main competitors are MPEG-4 AVC, AVS, RealVideo, DivX, and Xvid. The first version of the codec, WMV 7, was introduced in 1999, and was built upon Microsoft's implementation of MPEG-4 Part 2."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Media_Video
Would it be too Karl 1.2 to ask you to elaborate? Do you have a reference indicating that the rights to the WMV codecs still belong to the Moving Picture Experts Group.... or the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers, or anybody else.
When people have something to say, I'm ready to listen.
-
Alan Cox -
Aldo Foot -
Craig White -
David Boles -
gilpel＠altern.org -
Michael Schwendt -
Mike Martin -
Mikkel -
Patrick O'Callaghan -
Shannon McMackin -
Tim