Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Quicktime In Linux 354

brianmed writes "Yes, it works. Codeweavers has just announced their crossover plug-in. It enables users to access popular Windows files and plug-ins in Linux. Right now it is geared towards Quicktime, Shockwave, and Word viewers. Quicktime trailers play just fine. I also have pine setup to launch the the MS Word viewer on command. It is a happy day." Alright, time to start testing. I've also been talking with Jeremy White of Codeweavers: he's got a request for help, as well as an interesting piece on business models -- the Crossover is not entirely GPL. See the above for more information.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Quicktime In Linux

Comments Filter:
  • by Christianfreak ( 100697 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2001 @04:58PM (#2227044) Homepage Journal
    And that can cause problems. The website says that the plugin costs $19.95. I understand the need to compensate developers for their work but charging for a plugin that is free (as in beer) on other platforms is not going to migrate people to Linux. This will be news when there are free plugins that install right and work just as well.
  • Is this a good idea (Score:4, Interesting)

    by skrowl ( 100307 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2001 @05:07PM (#2227077) Homepage
    If I can write my software in Windows (90+% of the market) and know it will eventually be able to work through emulation on other platforms (EVER write a native app for a platform other than windows?

    No flames / "Trolls!" / etc. This is a SERIOUS question from a professional (I get paid to do it!) Windows developer.
  • SWEET (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Ulwarth ( 458420 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2001 @05:51PM (#2227295) Homepage
    This is EXACTLY the sort of thing that Linux needs right now. Funny to think that with all the awesome software we have (Apache, KDE, the Gimp, Linux itself...) the thing we need the most right now is a lame little viewer for some proprietary media formats. But it's true.

    I have no problem at all paying for software like this. Especially since they have priced it quite reasonably.

    Now, let's hope it actually _works_ and isn't just marketing hype surrounding a shoddy product. :)
  • by aussersterne ( 212916 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2001 @05:59PM (#2227322) Homepage
    Uh-oh, here we go again.

    What are the "clear limitations" of X? We now have anti-aliased text, direct-rendered 3D hardware support, true-type font support, support for running on embedded devices (i.e. iPaq)... What else do you want?

    Meanwhile, X has some *clear* advantages: much more seamless multi-display support, remote display capability, network font servers, easy extensibility...

    Installation and icons are the responsibility of the distribution and the API. It's not about X, it's about Red Hat and GNOME, which could solve both problems. And color pointers have been done by several software packages, among them many of Loki's games. There are also X extensions around (or at least there used to be -- search freshmeat) for color and animated color root window pointers. Your speed claims are ridiculous. I personally watch full-screen DVD video all the time using vlc in X. It looks great to me, no frames are dropped, and my hardware is virtually identical to yours. Just search for 'vlc' at freshmeat. I also own and play Quake III all the time under X using my GF2 card, and it's within just a few frames of the Windows speeds I get, with some definite advantages -- like being able to run it in a window. If your 3D card isn't as fast, just maybe you should ask your video card manufacturer for some drivers! And don't make fun of my Nvidia card and their 'closed' drivers -- all of your Windows 3D drivers are closed.

    Just because you don't know how to do it doesn't mean it isn't possible. And the things you're talking about would be just as difficult to get together if you had to do it by hand under Windows -- so blame the people who put it all on your CD-ROM (whoever made your distro) and not X, which is a great piece of software that is very stable, mature, and well-designed.
  • by mr100percent ( 57156 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2001 @06:25PM (#2227433) Homepage Journal
    I dislike the idea. It's like windows developers telling mac users to "get VirtualPC."

    Bad idea, and it might not help much.
    Good question though.

  • by mr100percent ( 57156 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2001 @06:34PM (#2227470) Homepage Journal
    Just what Mostly useless code are you talking about? Apple is more standards-compliant than MS, Quicktime files are pretty open format, it's the sorenson codec that's closed. MPEG-4 is based on QT's file format.

    Apple is not bad at open source. Darwin runs pretty well, and they're financially motivated to do so, unlike some other companies.

    The quicktime streaming server is not just "open source then do nothing", it's ported to NT, linux, Solaris, etc.

    Apple is now tied closer to BSD. They hired Jordan Hubbard, and used to have Wilfredo Sanchez. Both are really good at tieing *Nix stuff to OS X. Try using Perl or PHP on it. It kicks.
  • by flashms010 ( 465056 ) on Tuesday August 28, 2001 @10:03PM (#2228138)
    I recall when when QT first came to windows.

    Just after MS ripped off key Quicktime code from a 3rd party consultant (litigated, settled), it emerged that Quicktime for Windows was facing unusual, suspicious performance and compatibility problems sourced in the Windows OS itself. I believe that MS's shenanigans with QT were brought up again during the MS monopoly trial.

    Apple conscientiously produces good software, so its problems on Windows weren't due necessarily from bad coding. The whole situation brings to mind how MS used incompatibilities to crush DR-DOS (and IBM to crush a chip maker before that). Of course, shortly after all this, the windows Mediaplayer made its debut.

    So, going by this particular conspiracy theory, you bought into MS's crap hook, line, and sinker. Remember, Apple owns a massive chunk of hollywood because of the quality of its tools. On the one hand, MS has a good reason for helping you overlook this core fact.

    On the other hand, Apple has to work overtime to produce cool new products because so many people hate the very idea of Apple's existence: they won't release substandard software if they can help it.
  • by blakestah ( 91866 ) <blakestah@gmail.com> on Tuesday August 28, 2001 @10:22PM (#2228227) Homepage
    looking for Apple to just HAND you stuff?

    They provide Quicktime viewers for Windows and MacOS. They make the Sorensen codec the default for creating video content.

    Adobe provides PDF viewers for ALL operating systems, and has made their document format, PDF, into an OPEN standard. Even if they didn't provide a viewer, I could write my own.

    Apple, OTOH, uses patents to block me from viewing copyright content I own under linux.

    God, I'm sick of whiny people expecting stuff to be open sourced. Apple says sorenson won't allow a linux version, not them.

    Stop lying. Apple has exclusive licensing rights. They can do whatever the heck they want with Sorensen.

    http://xanim.va.pubnix.com/xa_unsupported.html

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Working...