“Nowadays I collect, store, and listen to music mostly on digital media, so I thought I’d find myself a Linux audio player that does all the things I need it to do. Little did I know how many options I had! After evaluating more than a dozen applications, I’ve found three that I feel provide the best mix of features and performance.” Read more at Linux.com.
Quest for a Linux Audio Player
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
he tested with a current developement version of ubuntu. the comments he made about amarok for example are not true. i can only comment about this one because i dont use the others, but im sure they would have performed better too.
He is confusing amaroK with the engine he uses. It’s a mistake easily made though. I found that amaroK with gstreamer and all the appropriate plugins is rock solid and does more then I imagined I’d need, but actually do need now I know it’s there. Getting your amaroK install to read all your M4A, AAC, etc, can be a hassle. But that’s the distributor’s responsibility.
Getting your amaroK install to read all your M4A, AAC, etc, can be a hassle. But that’s the distributor’s responsibility.
And it is the editor’s responsibility to edit or reject crappy ‘reviews.’ No, I user should no know which engine amarok uses (Joe Average user has no concepts of audio ‘backends’, he just wants to play his audio files). But if a user is as clueless as this writer is, than he has no business running a development version of an operating system, especially one that is as unstable as dapper.
This must be one of the worst submissions I ever read. There is absolutely no point to it – because it is misleading for Joe Average, while it forces more experienced users to point out the simple mistakes the writer did.
You call ‘constantly crashing’ ‘rock solid’?
“amaroK can be displayed with a WinAmp or iTunes-style interface. It would not play my WAV, FLAC, ASF, WMA, my mono MP3, or my downloaded podcast MP3s, and it would not play my audio CD.”
amarok can play all these formats, at least out of the box with xine engine (the default one default) and win32codecs
In dapper-drake he just needed to install libxine-extracodecs to play them all ( kubuntu dapper uses xine as backend for amarok and kaffeine). In my humble opinion it outperforms rythmbox. The problem with the article was apparently that the author didn’t know he had to include some extra libs to mke full use of multimedia (the weakest point of ubuntu, but I understand why they do it, and I fully agree with their way of doing.
Edited 2006-04-04 10:55
So it is a problem with ubuntu, not with amaroK. I wish these people wouldn’t be so blind.
“It’s not working so it must be because of the last button I pushed”
but if it could use mplayer as engine and play everything mplayer can (including video) it would be even nicer!
I would also like to be able to split the collection tree on genre (or any id3-tag) and have separate trees for them – it just does not feel right to see Björk on top of Cannibal Corpse 🙂
but if it could use mplayer as engine and play everything mplayer can (including video) it would be even nicer!
I’ll just give you some clues then :
The MPlayer engine is FFMPeg. Amarok can use GStreamer as a backend. There is a plugin for gstreamer that uses FFMPeg.
The author saying MPlayer can play everything (which it really does) means Amarok can play everything. I’ll let you connect the bits above so you finally understand that Amarok can use MPlayer engine already, since a long time ago.
I would also like to be able to split the collection tree on genre (or any id3-tag) and have separate trees for them – it just does not feel right to see Björk on top of Cannibal Corpse 🙂
So ask for the feature if it’s not already done. I’m surprised it’s not done yet though.
Ahh, I didn’t know/care that gstreamer was ffmpeg-based and thus can play everything that mplayer can. Until now. Thanx. Still, I don’t see Amarok indexing and playing my movies yet. I’ll better request that too.
Edited 2006-04-04 14:32
The amaroK team has been discussing the use of video in amaroK before, on their blog
http://amarok.kde.org/blog/archives/54-aMDE.html
Mplayer is not a library (unlike xine, gstreamer and others), hence it’s difficult to make an engine from it.
True. I use Amarok myself without any problems, including CD playback. Perhaps the author of the article should do some more research! From the Amarok page: What media types does amaroK support?
None. Yes, that’s right! None! We have a backend independent approach, so the question you should be asking is “What media types does GStreamer/xine/aRts/NMM/MAS/KDEmm support?” So as you can guess we pretty much support absolutely every audio format you can think of. GStreamer can even decode text and PNG!
For more information, have a look at Audio Engine Comparison.
This guy is totally clueless, I’ve never had amarok not play something with the xine engine. Maybe before he runs his mouth, he should look into getting things to run properly.
You’re right. Why should he use the software when he could be configuring it ad nauseum.
Yeah, why bother reading instructions or using your brain for a few minutes when you can spend hours on writing a whining, inaccurate article instead?
Really, there’s nothing to configure, you only have to install the decoder plugins for your audiofiles after that it just works.
Edited 2006-04-04 11:00
Most people don’t even know what a decoder plugin is and they shouldn’t have to to listen to their music. In Linux land the divide between user and administrator is very blurred. This is why most people don’t use Linux.
I guess all Windows mediaplayers support all formats out of the box, huh?
Oh wait, not a single one does…
I’d be curious as to which piece of multimedia software and on which platform that can play any and all formats in existence with 0 user configuration that you might be referring to…
I’d be curious as to which piece of multimedia software and on which platform that can play any and all formats in existence with 0 user configuration that you might be referring to…
Simple : Linux + ALSA + FFMPeg + Win32codecs + MPlayer/Gstreamer.
You can have a guess at the power of the thing if you download GeexBox. But even the default GeexBox does not play everything (even though it’s already better than any OS out there), because they don’t use a recent FFMPeg CVS version.
The only thing this combo won’t play is new closed formats. But I think that’s reasonnable and understandable : it’s software, not magic.
You’re right. Why should he use the software when he could be configuring it ad nauseum.
You’re right. Why should he write a review at all (or rather, why should an editor accept it?) when he is obviously so clueless… which is not a sin in itself, but why would anyone so clueless run a development version of an operating system? Does his writing represent audio playback in linux based operating systems? No, it doesn’t – but the title suggests that it does, and that is my problem: what the article is really about is “audio playback problems for a clueless person running a development version of an operating system.”
you can do something like that, just change the grouping in the collection browser. its a button on the top of the collection browser
It is always possible to install codecs to allow a player to support more media file types.
My favorite player is xine. I have choosen it because I have tried all other players and discovered that It is the only one which is memory, CPU and code efficient, and the quickest in development and probably the only one that can support exotic file formats like wmvhd (windows media video high definition @720p & @1080p), movhd (apple’s high definition format) and mov (especially vitual reality contents).
My second choice will be xmms.
Cool, now how about a Linux sound system that let’s more than one program play audio at a time.
“Cool, now how about a Linux sound system that let’s more than one program play audio at a time.”
Oh, you mean like ALSA with a half-decent hardware mixing audiocard? Or using the ALSA dmix plugin? Or using JACK? Or using, the admitedly rather crappy, Esound? Or Arts?
The user shouldn’t have to know about all that. All I know is that I have pretty much always had that problem with most of the Linux distributions I’ve used. I don’t care about why, I just want it to work without having to figure out how the sound system is designed and neither do most users. I’m so tired of people telling me that it’s my fault that Linux doesn’t work well. That’s why I went back to Windows after using Linux for about a year even though I hate having to use Microsoft software. Why? Because it’s so much easier to use and ALL my hardware works without having to screw with it for hours. By the way, I can’t record anything either. Works fine in Windows though. Shouldn’t that work or am I stupid because I just want to use my computer and not have to fix it all the time?
The user shouldn’t have to know about all that
He has. Or he won’t be able to listen to most videos on any OS.
All I know is that I have pretty much always had that problem with most of the Linux distributions I’ve used
That’s because you thought you were elite and used a free distro without any help, and without knowing anything about Linux, copyright laws and patents.
A common mistake.
I don’t care about why, I just want it to work without having to figure out how the sound system is designed and neither do most users
So next time, buy a commercial distro where they payed for you to use codecs legally without hassle.
I’m so tired of people telling me that it’s my fault that Linux doesn’t work well
Instead of being tired, you should listen : it’s your fault entirely for using sth beyond your grasp (a free download distro) without help.
You need a commercial distro if you don’t know anything : they provide you documentation and hotline.
That’s why I went back to Windows after using Linux for about a year even though I hate having to use Microsoft software. Why? Because it’s so much easier to use and ALL my hardware works without having to screw with it for hours
That was a very wise move. Because if you did not manage to find help in a year of using Linux and still stuck with free downloads, you are obviously hopeless.
By the way, I can’t record anything either. Works fine in Windows though. Shouldn’t that work or am I stupid because I just want to use my computer and not have to fix it all the time?
No, you are stupid because you wanted Linux to work like Windows, failed doing that (obviously, it’s impossible to do) during one year, and still did not realise where your mistake was. You’re a pathetic fool, I’m afraid.
I think you must think the people doing professional sound work in Linux are gods or liers, and things like Audacity are huge software that does not work.
Instead of being tired, you should listen : it’s your fault entirely
you are obviously hopeless
You’re a pathetic fool, I’m afraid
No, you are stupid because you wanted Linux to work like Windows
All this from one reply. Of course, he did go back to Windows so you’d expect the Linux brigade to come out and shoot him down
No, you are stupid because you wanted Linux to work like Windows
Erm, doesn’t most of the open source world seem to be copying Windows/MS products. Every open source functional spec is based on the assmumption that it will imitate the MS equivilant…?
All this from one reply
No, it was from several reply, and of course, put out of context, as you carefully kept out all the important info.
If that’s all you retained from the reply, I pity you really.
Of course, he did go back to Windows so you’d expect the Linux brigade to come out and shoot him down
He was not shot down, I tried to explain to him with his own words (in case you did not notice) so he could understand where the problem was.
It’s too late to shoot him down anyway, as he is already back on Windows.
Erm, doesn’t most of the open source world seem to be copying Windows/MS products
Not at all. Perhaps that’s your perception, which is likely, given how you read posts : phasing out all the important bits.
Every open source functional spec is based on the assmumption that it will imitate the MS equivilant…?
If that was true, Linux desktop would be in the same state as Windows. Fortunately it’s far better, and the underlying is better too.
At least that’s my opinions taken from fact. The facts are the difference now with Linux, against how it was back before 2001 when I switched.
I was taking 80+ % of my time trying to make Windows work (for me and for others), getting angry every single day cause it was not working (especially multimedia).
MPlayer is no imitation of Windows for example, it’s rather the contrary, like MPC trying to copy MPlayer.
“If that was true, Linux desktop would be in the same state as Windows. Fortunately it’s far better, and the underlying is better too.
At least that’s my opinions taken from fact. The facts are the difference now with Linux, against how it was back before 2001 when I switched.
I was taking 80+ % of my time trying to make Windows work (for me and for others), getting angry every single day cause it was not working (especially multimedia).
MPlayer is no imitation of Windows for example, it’s rather the contrary, like MPC trying to copy MPlayer.”
Dude you are so full of cr*p, you could be identified as a clogged toilet.
Your facts are based on nothing. 80% of your time making the OS work? I haven’t heard a lie this bad since Bubba Clinton said “He didn’t have sex with that woman Monica.”
Windows DOES work and it works quite well. In fact better than Linux on the same hardware. Microsoft has spent decades and billions to make sure all the PC hardware works perfectly with Windows. And it does. And Linux is STILL trying to get to this point (ndiswrapper, ACPI, etc…)
If you’re referring to Spyware, viruses, etc… Then you screwed up again. A) Never run as Administrator and B) Never use IE or Outlook Express. Those 2 things will eliminate 99% of the problems.
You need to “Get the Facts”. Geesh!
UPDATE: I was surprised by the author being surprised at the number of audio players available on Linux. Yeah, all 10 of them. Wow, what a HUGE selection. There are probably thousands of GOOD audio players for Windows. So if you want choice use a real OS. Use Windows.
Edited 2006-04-04 15:11
Erm, doesn’t most of the open source world seem to be copying Windows/MS products. Every open source functional spec is based on the assmumption that it will imitate the MS equivilant…?
Actually it’s the other way around.
MS has never innovated on the Windows-platform, however MS is good at copying other projects.
Windows and ALL MS-applications are nothing but expensive low quality ripoffs from other projects.
You were asked to put down the bong before. I see that hasn’t yet been done.
I don’t have a bong. I don’t smoke grass.
But nice to know you think I do, considering the “content” of your bio.
MS has never innovated on the Windows-platform, however MS is good at copying other projects.
Are you trying to say that .NET is copying mono, Visual Studio is copying KDevelop, and MSSQL Server is copying MySQL?
.NET is copying java, visual studio copied borland and sqlserver is just an RDBMS like oracle, DB2 etc etc
.NET is copying java, visual studio copied borland and sqlserver is just an RDBMS like oracle, DB2 etc etc
Seems you don’t have sufficient knowledge to comment in this area. FYI, Java is not comparable to .NET. The right comparisons are Java – C# and .NET – J2EE. Visual Studio is not similar to Borland. I like Delphi more than Visual Studio; I used say that Visual C is visual environment that isn’t visual, and Delphi is more visual than Visual Basic
. And SQL Server is not “just an RDBMS”, it is big RDBMS. The crappy mysql is good for visit counter. I often lose my data if the server crash. PostgreSQL is much better on this. But until now still can’t find open source RDBMS that support OLAP.
> FYI, Java is not comparable to .NET. The right comparisons are Java – C# and .NET – J2EE
J2EE = _JAVA_ 2 enterprise edition. How is that not java again?
.NET takes a high level language and compiles it down to an intermediary format which is then interpretted by a runtime. Same principal as Java. Comparing C# and Java is pointless… it would just be a comparison of syntaxes.
> Visual Studio is not similar to Borland
I did not say it was. I said that MS copied their developer IDE from those created previously by Borland.
> And SQL Server is not “just an RDBMS”, it is big RDBMS
So? Is ‘Big’ an MS inovation? Wait, DB2 running on mainframes was ‘big’ long before sqlserver came along…
I’ll leave out replying to your assertion that I lack knowledge or your personal preferences in software, sticking to the topic will just have to do…
Edited 2006-04-04 18:10
“And SQL Server is not “just an RDBMS”, it is big RDBMS”
Ah, so it is copying Oracle, DB2, Sybase, Informix, TeraData etc?
“The user shouldn’t have to know about all that.”
He doesnt. All modern desktop oriented distros sets this up automatically.
“Why? Because it’s so much easier to use and ALL my hardware works without having to screw with it for hours.”
Funny, for me it’s the opposite. All hardware I have purchased has worked out of the box in Linux and OpenBSD while most required special drivers to be installed on Windows.
Edited 2006-04-05 06:50
It already exists, it’s called ALSA, I use it for nearly two years with some config, it works out of the box without config since at least 6 months (linux 2.6.14 I think).
Also, I’m surprised that so much people asks for this, as I don’t know a lot of user running my kind of setup : 3 simultaneous sessions with sounds that can come from any of them. I think most users complaining on that just don’t want some app blocking the sound, not really several apps playing sound at the same time.
But that article certainly didn’t help. There are so many errors. If only I had some more time on my hands I’d write something better. With screen shots. And then I’d probably start out by examining the engines available and then the players afterwards.. after having used mplayer, xine and gstreamer I definately have more opinions towards the enginges than the players themselves.
!!!
This guy has not bad intention writting the article!!
He is just a Windows Media Player user that heard about Linux and want to try it…
Don’t be wreckless guys. He has seen the light and he has done his research. He will convert when he realises of the whole possibilities of OSs and the free-Open source Players.
After all, even if those players could not play wma, which actually can, who cares about that???
Why anyone in his mind and full awareness of the facts would want to play wma or wmv files???
He will “Get the Facts” soon…
!!!
This guy has not bad intention writting the article!!
He is just a Windows Media Player user that heard about Linux and want to try it…
Bad intentions or not, if one publishes a rewiew, then he or she should accept criticism. Wanted to try linux? First mistake: you don’t try a development version (which is not even release candidate or something). Second: you are doing application review, then “It should also be noted that the reviewer should have a fully functional system when doing application reviews, especially with one which requires external functionality (for example, xine win32codecs, which he was missing).” (www.planetkde.org, Seb Ruiz’s blog).
This is just typical of the Linux multimedia experience. Start with other a dozen players, then download a load of codecs so that you can play some obscure format like mp3. Then, discover that it doesn’t work with your sound system so crank open vi(m) and start to edit various config files. When/if you ever get it working you can proudly annouce that you can now play Ogg Vorbis files and pretend that it really matters!
Alternativly you could install Windows and discover it plays the formats that the rest of the planet uses. Sure, you had to pay for the operating system, but it was the magical ability to work out of the box with just about every bit of hardware you’ve got. And, when they release on OS upgrade/patch you’ll be amazed to discover that you Windows Media Player/iTunes/WinAmp will still continue to work.
Yes. The hundreds of codec packages you can download for XP exist, because you can play everything out of the box. And the reason, all windows users I know have more than one player installed simultaneous, is, because you can play every format with a single player.
Wake up!
This is just typical of the Linux multimedia experience. Start with other a dozen players, then download a load of codecs so that you can play some obscure format like mp3. Then, discover that it doesn’t work with your sound system so crank open vi(m) and start to edit various config files. When/if you ever get it working you can proudly annouce that you can now play Ogg Vorbis files and pretend that it really matters!
Alternativly you could install Windows and discover it plays the formats that the rest of the planet uses. Sure, you had to pay for the operating system, but it was the magical ability to work out of the box with just about every bit of hardware you’ve got. And, when they release on OS upgrade/patch you’ll be amazed to discover that you Windows Media Player/iTunes/WinAmp will still continue to work.
No – you might be able to play mp3’s and wma’s out of the box with Win XP but for most other formats you will have to download the codecs. It is even worse with video in windows more codecs and more programs to download even for common formats like quicktime and real.
With mplayer in Linux you can play anything, audio or video, that you can throw at it after just after installling one or two packages for the codecs, via a GUI package manager like synaptic or gurpmi. Most modern distributions will handle most sound hardware “out of the box”. If anything its simpler in Linux, no need for vim.
This is just typical of the Linux multimedia experience
No, this is typical of a clueless guy. Your sentence is typical of a troll too.
Start with other a dozen players, then download a load of codecs so that you can play some obscure format like mp3
Only one codec is necessary to play MP3 : the MP3 codec … Do you even understand the matter ?
Then, discover that it doesn’t work with your sound system so crank open vi(m) and start to edit various config files
Apparently you are clueless too. No matter of editing config files will make your codecs work, I’m afraid.
With MPlayer and every FFMPeg based players (by extension, every gstreamer based apps), playing files just works. No matter of editing will help you.
Just placing the codecs in the right place is enough actually.
When/if you ever get it working you can proudly annouce that you can now play Ogg Vorbis files and pretend that it really matters!
What is your point actually ? Are you bitter because of your Windows experience ?
Did you lose countless hours with Windows multimedia like me, saying to your wife : “I’ll launch the movie”, and 3 hours later, you finally made it work, angry and too late ?
I got over it and downloaded GeexBox. Now I have my Linux PVR that can read anything.
Alternativly you could install Windows and discover it plays the formats that the rest of the planet uses
I discovered it doesn’t long ago. You need all kind of codecs and different apps, or download all kind of incompatible codec packages, that stop to work at random times (but always when you’re going to watch a movie with your family). You don’t even know where these packages are, unless you take lots of time following what’s new in the scene. And even then, it won’t work with everything.
Sure, you had to pay for the operating system, but it was the magical ability to work out of the box with just about every bit of hardware you’ve got
Sorry to disapoint you, but my Windows XP can’t make my Plustek scanner work, nor my TV card, nor my joypad adapter, and I forgot one hardware.
All of these work like a charm on Linux though. But good try to further this false idea that Windows works with every bit of hardware.
The key is the drivers, and if they aren’t available on Windows, hardware won’t work.
And, when they release on OS upgrade/patch you’ll be amazed to discover that you Windows Media Player/iTunes/WinAmp will still continue to work
When I upgraded to Windows XP, VirtualDub recording stopped working. Which was one of the numerous apps I dearly needed, forcing me to keep Windows 98.
I’ll let morons like you trying to explain me what I did wrong for it not to work.
Hint : you will have a hard time doing that, as the multimedia API it used was thrown out by MS.
And it’s one example of Windows programs that did not work, I had countless others that did not work anymore.
I find people like you describing Windows like a dream pathetic, especially since I can’t recount the countless hours I lost helping people on this OS, and the countless hours I lost myself to make it work (stupid me) before giving up.
The key is the drivers
This from a Linux advocate… Driver support is lame in Linux, and just when you think you’ve got one they put out a new
I find people like you describing Windows like a dream pathetic, especially since I can’t recount the countless hours I lost helping people on this OS, and the countless hours I lost myself to make it work (stupid me) before giving up.
I’ll let morons like you trying to explain me what I did wrong for it not to work
Ookaze, I’ve just taken a look through some of your recent posting and you’re nothing more than a typical Linux fanboy. You bang on about how Windows sucks and how great Linux is without any real insight. It’s people like you that keep Linux off the desktop and stuck in the server cupboard!
I can’t recount the countless hours I lost helping people on this OS
Perhaps if you were more technically capable you would’ve sorted the problem out 🙂
This from a Linux advocate… Driver support is lame in Linux, and just when you think you’ve got one they put out a new
All my hardware works on my box, and the hardware of all of the users I migrated to Linux works too, and that’s enough to me.
Ookaze, I’ve just taken a look through some of your recent posting and you’re nothing more than a typical Linux fanboy
That must be true, as I so much better now on Linux. I won’t deny it.
You bang on about how Windows sucks and how great Linux is without any real insight
That’s just my experience with my Windows and the Windows of every single other people I know.
It’s people like you that keep Linux off the desktop and stuck in the server cupboard!
That’s easy for you to say. While you talk sh*t me, I surely installed Linux on more users PC than talking guys like you, so I’m not even impressed by your flame bait.
Guess what, I even installed Linux desktops for some users “because all your video files will play on Linux”. FYI, they could not play most video files on Windows.
I rather think that’s people like you that keep Lniux off the desktop, by telling people things don’t work on Linux, when they actually work far better than on Windows.
And you have guts telling me I keep Linux from users desktops ? Article like this one are what keep people off Linux desktops.
Try to explain to me where I’m wrong.
Perhaps if you were more technically capable you would’ve sorted the problem out 🙂
And yet I made my own Linux OS from scratch, I work with lots of big vendors Unices, and refuse to work with Windows servers after having many very bad experiences.
Today, I work in a bank with a Windows guru, a guy that can debug MS tools for them without having the code (now I’m surely more aware than most people of the <censored> that IE and lots of MS techno are), and even him can’t make Windows work correctly. Each time I have a Windows problem, if he can’t resolve it, he blames other software, and ultimately, he blames me, saying Windows does not work well with Linux users.
So you see, like when this guy says me that, when I see sentences like yours, I just laugh
and keep on with my Linux desktop, playing multimedia with the very same players the article guy tried to review.
Try to explain to me where I’m wrong.
Where you’re wrong is that you’re a Linux apologist. When people complain that something doesn’t work you call them stupid and clueless and can’t understand why they don’t want to have to search for codecs or edit configuration files. Anyone who compains about things being overly complicated just gets shot down. It’s this attitude that keeps Linux off the desktop, and until it changes it’ll never make it into the average persons living room. You may not like Windows, but MS 100% understands what the typical user wants and gives it to them. It’s strange how commercial software seems to understand the users needs but open source software just doesn’t get it. Let’s face it, if you can’t get the average user to use free software what chance have you got???
Ookaze, I’m curious if you’re marking me down when you read my replies..? You realize that if you are then it’s not if keeping with the OSNews policies… 🙂
PS: You may work in a bank, but sitting behind the till taking deposits doesn’t really count, does it..!?
When people complain that something doesn’t work you call them stupid and clueless and can’t understand why they don’t want to have to search for codecs or edit configuration files. Anyone who compains about things being overly complicated just gets shot down. It’s this attitude that keeps Linux off the desktop, and until it changes it’ll never make it into the average persons living room. You may not like Windows, but MS 100% understands what the typical user wants and gives it to them.
So, WinXP supports DivX out of the box? It suddenly got all codecs in the world included, like Real, Quicktime also? That’s news for me….I’ve never fiddled as much with codecs as in windows. In Linux there’s just a few packages you’ll find in synaptic (for apt-systems) after searching for “codec”, and you’ll have a quite wide selection of them installed on your system.
Don’t think it’s much easier on the Mac either, I guess codecs are codecs, and they just *have* to be installed, thats the rule of nature…
Windows users will easily get needed codecs pack, for example from cccp project http://cccp-project.net/. It is unfair to deceive innocent windows users to use linux by saying that the videos you download from p2p only work in linux, but you know that you only need to install codecs pack.
Codec packs for windows are nice, but they can cause problems too. I know one time I installed a codec pack and later it kept a game from working correctly. Apparently, the codec pack replaced the default windows mp3 codec and the game required it. (It was a MS game, so maybe it was using some hidden functionality or something)
It is unfair to deceive innocent windows users to use linux by saying that the videos you download from p2p only work in linux, but you know that you only need to install codecs pack
I did not tell my users anything, they saw the files do not work, they asked me how to fix it. I said I don’t fix Windows, but in Linux it will work flawlessly. Keep in mind my very bad experience with multimedia on Windows will prevent me from advertising Windows for it to anyone.
And so you think the name cccp comes to my mind immediately when I think “codecs in Windows” ?
Worse, it was about 2003 I think, when these people had the problem with videos, I don’t even think this package existed. Even worse, the FAQ and overall cccp site acknowledge everything I said about the bad experience with Windows codecs, the install procedure is tedious, it’s one more incompatible codecs pack, advertising to uninstall other codec packs, and you still can have troubles !
Thanks for this eye widening site, I’m even more glad I made them switch to Linux. My users could not install these things, you know.
It took me 2/3 times before they dared use synaptic-like programs, now they are hooked.
Where you’re wrong is that you’re a Linux apologist
And what is wrong with that ? I should be a Linux basher like you ?
When people complain that something doesn’t work you call them stupid and clueless and can’t understand why they don’t want to have to search for codecs or edit configuration files
Are you able to read ? Go reread what I’ve written. I’ve never said anything about people having to search for codecs or editing conf files : that’s the WINDOWS way.
In Linux, you don’t search for anything, it’s in the repository, and you don’t need to edit any file to make it work. Can you understand this ?
When people genuinely complain that sth does not work, I sure enough DO NOT call them stupid or clueless. My Linux switched users complain and I fix their few problems. Of course, I know what you say is a straw man. Now let me explain the situation to you :
When someone claims that sth in Linux does not work, then talks sh*t about Linux like he knows everything or his experience is the same for everyone, then I make it clear that he was at fault, and that he should not brag about it, especially for trivial matters like codecs.
FYI again, playing audio on Linux works flawlessly on Linux today, now if you try an experimental distro, you have to realise that you need to be even more knowledgeable than using a free stable distro release, which already means you need more knowledge than with a commercial distro.
The guy that made the review (and the one I was responding to) would surely need the hotline even with a commercial distro, and the guy tried a experimental distro !
Can you see the gap of knowledge ? The only thing I must applaud in this guy, is how he still uses Linux with his poor knowledge. Linux must be much more user friendly than I thought.
Anyone who compains about things being overly complicated just gets shot down
See ? Of course they are shot down, as it is NOT complicated, but you sure think saying it enough time will make it true.
You just have to know your way if you use an experimental distro.
I think there are even disclaimers to discourage clueless users from using them.
Anyway, copyright laws, patents and the like are what made the situation like it is today.
If not for these, all these codecs would be installed on any Linux distro out of the box.
Right now, you need to pay for a commercial distro to get most common codecs (like MP3) installed out of the box.
For MP3 for example, the problem lies int the fact that often, FOSS libraries include coding and decoding, as the decoding is safe, but not the decoding, we end up with none on some distros.
Even Windows XP can’t create more than 64 kbps MP3 out of the box, or play DVD.
It’s this attitude that keeps Linux off the desktop, and until it changes it’ll never make it into the average persons living room
Wrong ! With this exact attitude, I made Linux enter in lots of living room, playing videos. Now I’ll say sth to you that few people want to admit :
I’ve worked with lots of TRUE average computer users for years. I’ve done support on IRC for lots of people too. Now I can recognise an average user from a Windows shill/zealot/power user with pretty good accuracy. These people claim (like you) that average users have pain with Linux. My experience is that they don’t give a damn. When average users have problems, they tell me. Sometimes, they don’t even tell me, until I ask “how does it go with Linux ?”. These people won’t go “codecs don’t work on Linux”, they don’t even understand what a codec is. They will just say “it doesn’t play my files” (it never happened).
You may not like Windows, but MS 100% understands what the typical user wants and gives it to them
Wow. You mean, that’s why they were late to the Internet, saying it’s just a fad ? That’s why they put DRM in their next OS ?
I’ve already met one Windows brainwashed guy like you in real life. Some young certified Windows admin, that thought everything he read in MS books was true.
Even after taking days (12 hours a day) to do things that should have been done in minutes, his delusions would not go. The guy was fun though.
It’s strange how commercial software seems to understand the users needs but open source software just doesn’t get it
What ? You mean there’s a commercial app better than MPlayer ? You mean ripping DVD was done before DECSS ?
You mean there’s commercial P2P better that the most known FOSS ones ? I could go on but I will stop.
I’ll just add that today, no commercial OS can provide me what I have on my Linux desktop.
Let’s face it, if you can’t get the average user to use free software what chance have you got???
Didn’t you understand that it’s already done from my side ? My wife never used the computer very much before I switched to Linux.
PS: You may work in a bank, but sitting behind the till taking deposits doesn’t really count, does it..!?
You must be thick. So you think the architect Windows guru that works with me is sitting behind a till too ?
Are you able to read ? Go reread what I’ve written. I’ve never said anything about people having to search for codecs or editing conf files : that’s the WINDOWS way.
Windows has its problems, but in what situation do you need to edit configuration files in Windows for codecs? RealPlayer, Quicktime, WMP, DivX, they all install very easily and none of them require even a hint of a text configuration file. I guess if you go back to Windows 3.1…
FYI again, playing audio on Linux works flawlessly on Linux today, now if you try an experimental distro, you have to realise that you need to be even more knowledgeable than using a free stable distro release, which already means you need more knowledge than with a commercial distro.
You mention experimental distros, but how would his situation be any different if he’d used the current version of Ubuntu? 5.10 doesn’t install any of the non-free codecs, and to get everything working you still have to do quite a bit of apt-get installs and Googling to figure out which libraries and back ends are needed for what.
For the record, PCLinux plays everything but encrypted DVDs “out of the box”
5.10 doesn’t install any of the non-free codecs, and to get everything working you still have to do quite a bit of apt-get installs and Googling to figure out which libraries and back ends are needed for what.
No, you don’t. I’ve already answered this: EasyUbuntu.
It’s true the guy made some mistakes; there are codecs for wma, etc…
But i find the situation of audio players in Linux pretty weird. Let’s see:
Winamp alikes: they’re simple, stable, they work. However, nowadays many people (me included) prefer some more sofisticated interface, like iTunes/Rhythmbox.
Rhythmbox: oh well, where should i begin… incredibly unstable, specially if you’ve used it for a while and your song collection is large. It’s slow; i’ve got mp3s that it simply doesn’t play (don’t ask me why); sometimes it crashes; doesn’t show album cover; doesn’t come with Last.fm plugins; streaming radio sucks, and so it goes…
Amarok: has all the features, it’s stable, pretty good… however, it kinda sucks to use if you’re a Gnome user. It keeps starting arts even though i use Xine as a backend, and arts sucks, etc…
Banshee seems to be nice, but i’ve never actually used it and it requires the lastest Gnome, so…
all this talk of “he should have installed the right codecs” and “amarok can different back ends” highlight the glaring problem with linux.
He wanted to play audio, so he double clicked on the AUDIO PLAYER on his system. he shouldn’t have to know which back end it uses – he shouldn’t have to care. He shouldn’t need to have to worry about having the right codecs installed – the application should do all this for you.
IN windows, OSX you download the player, it plays (most formats) – mp3, ogg cd audio etc. because the decoder it normally installed also. it’s a complete system for playback..
Linux is far too obsessed with “choice” only to leave people confused and having to learn more than they need to about their system. Back-ends, front-ends, library files, headers, static linking etc… it’s all silly and unnecessary.
I hate to disagree, but… Well actaully, I don’t. You’re just plain wrong.
If I start up a player in windows, can I play divx/xvid out of the box? No, I have to hunt around for a codec to install. What about AC3? Nope. I could go on and on. The point of this story is that you need to install codecs under both windows and linux. I haven’t tried OSX, but I can only imagine it is the same situation there.
I will agree that sometimes the vast amount of choices linux gives you can cause problems. A good distro will try and resolve them, though, and never force a user to mess around unless they want to.
Linux? Which Linux?
Hmmm?
I’m getting sick of this pure FUD.
You BUY windows, you GET the MP3 Codec.
You BUY Suse, you GET the MP3 Codec.
Sorry it costs money to distribute. I’m truly sorry Linux has failed you give you something that costs money for free. Really, I mourn your loss.
If you have no issues with downloading the codec, then you can use K/Ubuntu or any other free distro of your choice, and open synaptic (or whatever package manager you prefer…you have that choice as well), and install the gstreamer-plugins or whatever you choose. Problem solved. Amarok, Kaffeine, will play almost everything.
Linux is about Freedom, not neccessarily getting everything done for you for free.
If you’re going to compare Linux and Windows, at least have the intelligence to learn a bit of background first.
“Linux SuxORZ cuz it aint givin me everything 4 free and settin it up 4 mee!”
Get over yourself! You know nothing! Go read a bit and come back when you’re educated on the subject.
quote: “If that was true, Linux desktop would be in the same state as Windows. Fortunately it’s far better”
Good one.. I laughed out loud when I read that…
“much better” LOL as if!
quote: “If that was true, Linux desktop would be in the same state as Windows. Fortunately it’s far better”
Good one.. I laughed out loud when I read that…
“much better” LOL as if!
Is it nervous then ?
I have something even funnier for you : I switched some people to Linux, saying to them that they then would be able to play all the videos taken on P2P that they could not play on Windows. 45 minutes later, after installing Mandriva and installing the plf repository and installing the codecs, the files that could not play in Windows magically played flawlessly on Mandriva. Those users are still using Linux to this day. Oh BTW, at the time, their Windows had a problem (they could not see some files anymore, crashes, …). I said I don’t do Windows support anymore, they said they’d fix it later. 4 years later, their Windows desktop is still in the same state, untouched, unusable.
Have a good laugh …
video codecs are way different from audio codecs for a start. there are dozens more commonly used video codecs than audio codecs.
Divx/Xvid became widely adopted after XP was released.
and VLC (windows) plays divx/xvid without any other codecs being installed.
VLC plays mp3 in linux without any other codecs being installed too. In fact, it plays exactly the same files in both linux and windows. So don’t try to make it your champion that proves Windows > Linux.
Besides, I don’t think Video codecs really are that much different than audio. You’ve got wmv, divx, real, and quicktime as major codecs. Audio has wma, mp3, real, and apple codecs. Sure there are tons of others, but these are the major ones.
video codecs are way different from audio codecs for a start. there are dozens more commonly used video codecs than audio codecs
To me they are the same : signal processing. The specs of the signal change of course, and some codecs are not real codecs (as the data in and the data out is not the same for all lossy codecs).
The only problem with multimedia on Linux is legal attacks from “competitors”. You see, businesses apparently can’t compete against a bunch of coders, so they stifle innovation and the coders with legal things, stifling Linux advances in the process.
Divx/Xvid became widely adopted after XP was released
I rather think divx, and mostly xvid was widely adopted after doom9 made some reviews of codecs, and P2P became widely used.
First time I saw loads of Xvid files was on BitTorrent for fansubs.
and VLC (windows) plays divx/xvid without any other codecs being installed
You don’t understand the problem. VLC actually installs codecs, in the same way that FFMPeg/MPlayer does. But they are embedded in the libraries, or in the app.
So you don’t see lots of codec files like in win32codecs. But sure enough, VLC won’t play any XVid without the Xvid libs installed (these are the codec), so they must be installed before you can play XVid files correctly. I doubt they are included in the Windows VLC package, as VLC coders put themselves at risk if they provide binaries of XVid.
Win32codecs is actually there for the few codecs (like MS WM* latest versions) that are still not reverse engineered, and work only on x86. I’m very impressed with what the FFMPeg-MPlayer/Xine guys have done, it’s no trivial thing to reverse engineer such things.
I remember before MPlayer appeared, multimedia was sh*t on Linux, and some heart breaking articles were pulling heavily on this fact. 6 months later, MPlayer appeared, and broke all these articles : MPlayer put Linux ahead of Windows for video/audio playing compatibility, a major feat !
I remember pushing fansubs that I made on Windows at the time, that worked perfectly on my Linux box, but were unreadable on most of other people Windows boxes.
It is surprising to note digital music is only six percent of total music sales in 2005. So digital music is just starting and its a good time to come out of the hype see what professionals use.
Everybody now days use mp3. Is that the only music format available? No. There are other music formats available which are far more superior to mp3 but not widely known yet.
Ogg (http://www.vorbis.com/) is similar to mp3, but its a completely open and free format. That is, if you want to create audio (eg. Music, podcasts, etc) create in Ogg. You are not breaking the law. The mp3 is a patented technology.
If you are an audiophile, its shame to play mp3 in your HiFi. Consider FLAC (http://flac.sourceforge.net/). The FLAC is the ultimate audio format, its loose less, high definition and again completely open and free format. There are FLAC players in the market like iAUDIO X5.
I have evaluated the Tomahawk Desktop (http://www.tomahawkcomputers.com/), its Linux based multimedia OS, you can use it to convert your CDs to either Ogg or FLAC. Its amazing, its just drag and drop! To transfer to your Ogg or FLAC player, its again just drag and drop!
Another advantage of Linux is you can play without getting hit by viruses and worms.
The dichotomy of Linux…
“They said it’s easy, but I couldn’t get it to work”
-You’re a clueless newb who has no business with Linux
“I guess Linux is hard and only for geeks”
-No it’s not, it’s so simple!
It becomes a circular argument, and it’s embarassing. There’s every excuse and personal attack in the world. It’s shoot the messenger. Personal attacks and flame wars are the chosen battle instead of merits.
It’s certainly understandable why the author thought the way he did. Ubuntu is an easy distro, yet getting to the point where you can watch and listen to a variety of formats is a lot more complicated and involved than it is in Windows or OS X.
Don’t they? Then how come even in windows land, so many people succeed in installing xvid or divx codecs? Then how do people isntall flashplayers? Besides the reason some programs didn’t play all faults isn’t the players fault, it’s because non-free media is not supported in ubuntu, it’s a choice they made, you can call it ignorance, but it doesn’t affect the fact that ubuntu is a great distro, if you want more media support, go for mepis, it uses the same repositotires but has more stuff installed default (too much if you ask me).
Yep.
hmhm, I wonder, if you pick windows-xp N you don’t have to complain you can’t play any mp3 or wma file. If you know a bit about Ubuntu, you know it doesn’t support it, Mepis for example supports every codec available (or almost). Before you choose a distro better look through some reviews I’d say. what’s the harm in reading easy stuff? And besides it’s the number one comment made on Ubuntu, so really the reviewer didn’t have clew, if he had had mepis installed he would have said that linuxmedia was far superior than windows, now it’s the other way around, funny he, choice, every one can find his distro that’ll suite him/her. (PS, don’t expect people to integrate patented stuff for free, if you want it, go and buy you an OS, it will still cost less than windows xp/vista/… or OS X xx.x.x), If you want your pc to work out of the box, buy an AOpen-linspire, I’m sure everything works there
.
It seems a popular suggestion, but installing another distro just doesn’t seem like a solution to me. I’m sure the suggested distro will solve X problem, but every distro has its strengths and weaknesses, and if one re-installed every time one encountered a particular weakness, one wouldn’t be doing much else than installing distros.
mhm, if you’re so addicted to commercial software, then why don’t you compare to commercial linux? (linspire, xandros, Novell, red hat, mepis). They have all these codecs installed, they even play dvd out of the box (ok, when you buy a pc from an OEM, you’ll get that too, but hey it’s not because of windows you’ll be able to play it). What you get with free/for free linux distros is more then you get with a pirated windows xp version. The same goes for OS X, Linux distros are bound by laws too, some breake them, some try not to. Fact remains that it’s easy to find how to get them enabled: http://wiki.ubuntu.com/RestrictedFormats. Don’t expect to get everything for free.
Not likely to happen, amarok tries to focus on audio, and it succeeds wonderfull in it. Allthough watching music videos can be nice, there are other programs for video: kaffeine for example. two programs for multimedia, how many multimedia programs are installed on a windows machine to play all media files? (vlc plays them all yes, but it doesnt make wmp play them too, for the rest, a DVD-player, a realplayer, a quicktime player, a divx/xvidplayer) some codecs can be in stalled without the player, but well
, it’s easier to know that a videofile is played by kaffeine, and an audiofile is played by amarok, than to know wich media type is played by what media player and ending up with five or more MULTImedia players 
. Besides, you have to pay for some support anyway, if you want patent-encumbered codecs installed, pay for it.
No it’s not a solution but well, even in Linux-land it’s true that if you want things to be easy, you pay for it. The free distro’s are great if you want to learn, and aren’t even that hard ( I haven’t encountered any problem anymore since I use Kubuntu). But if you want to be sure everything works, well pay for support, at least you get some when you do, if you buy windows and it doesn’t play a file, and windows doesn’t know what’s needed to play it, you’ll get stuck, or have to ask for support, if you really refuse to find it on google or …
I liked the article. For me it was a nice synopsis of features without having to go through everyone of the programs myself. There are thousands of programs out there and I for one get quite confused by what does what, and how well. Maybe it wasnt as in depth as some would like but in absence of anything else, it is a good effort he put forth regarding his experiences and his opinions. He took the time to do it. Yes, windows requires codecs in some instances. Yes, linux requires codecs in some instances. To me, its about functionality. If I put the time in to make it work, will it do what I want it to and the way I want to? I liked it. More of the same please!!!
I liked the article
So the damage is done.
For me it was a nice synopsis of features without having to go through everyone of the programs myself
It’s not, this review does not talk of ANY of the features of these programs, and is wrong on lots of things. If you believe that, you have the wrong picture.
Maybe it wasnt as in depth as some would like but in absence of anything else, it is a good effort he put forth regarding his experiences and his opinions. He took the time to do it
I still wonder how someone that does not understand sth can tell if another person took time to do it.
I can tell you he did not took any time to do this article.
Yes, windows requires codecs in some instances. Yes, linux requires codecs in some instances
You’re wrong. Every OS need codecs everytime for playing any video or audio, to make the conversion from bits to a signal your soundcard understand.
If I put the time in to make it work, will it do what I want it to and the way I want to? I liked it. More of the same please!!!
You liked it so the damage is done.
You don’t have any work to do for these things to work, except to install some apps that distros can’t install legally out of the box on a free distro.
Or do you plan on using a development distro too ??!!
All the work the work you talk about is the distro’s work, not yours.
Edited 2006-04-04 16:02
“So the damage is done.”?
I guess I didnt follow that.
“All the work the work you talk about is the distro’s work, not yours.”
I never said I did any of the work. I wouldnt even know how to begin on half of that. I liked the article. See, now that you told me i’m wrong, and shouldn’t like the article, I am enlightened. Thank you.
If you would send me a post of your articles, I would be pleased to read those too! I am sure they set a high standard.
-Author knows that he has to install plugins for Gstreamer yet he doesn’t do the same with xine (extracodecs/w32codecs).
-He calssified amaroK as iTunes-like while tree-view on a side pane is hardly like iTunes. I like Artist / Year – Album view and I don’t know how to get in other players.
-Feature comparison is very limited, where’s the cover display (and fetching)? Where’s last.fm support or some other form of statistics? Wikipedia, lyrics?
-No mention of support for generic mp3 players, not everybody uses iPod (afaik amaroK can do that)
-No mention of plugins (in amaroK, Quod Libet and Muine for example)
-Unique interface of Muine was not mentioned. MPD with it’s clients deservers big review of it’s own.
-He missed the newcomer which is probably going to gain some popularity – Listen. Altough it has pretty crappy interface it’s almost as feature-rich as amaroK. It’s not in default Ubuntu repositories but author provides his own apt repo.
He could have missed that amaroK can use Gstreamer though. Amarok-gstreamer dissapeared from Dapper repositories recently o_O I’m a Gnome user but let’s face it – Rhythmbox sucks and amaroK rocks.
Author knows that he has to install plugins for Gstreamer yet he doesn’t do the same with xine (extracodecs/w32codecs)
Actually, as the win32 codecs are those of MPlayer/FFMPeg, if they were installed and worked in MPlayer, they should have worked in Xine too.
Every distro does it the same. He didn’t seem to have gstreamer-ffmpeg plugin though. But I’m not surprised, using an experimental distro is bound to give some hassles.
He calssified amaroK as iTunes-like while tree-view on a side pane is hardly like iTunes. I like Artist / Year – Album view and I don’t know how to get in other players.
…
I actually had the same expectations as you from this article, and worse …
Unique interface of Muine was not mentioned. MPD with it’s clients deservers big review of it’s own
-He missed the newcomer which is probably going to gain some popularity – Listen. Altough it has pretty crappy interface it’s almost as feature-rich as amaroK. It’s not in default Ubuntu repositories but author provides his own apt repo.
… I learnt more with these few lines than with the BS in the article.
He could have missed that amaroK can use Gstreamer though. Amarok-gstreamer dissapeared from Dapper repositories recently o_O I’m a Gnome user but let’s face it – Rhythmbox sucks and amaroK rocks
I would not say that Rhythmbox sucks. It’s just more iTunes like, which is well suited for disorganized collections.
Unfortunately, I don’t like it as mine is pretty neatly organised, and I want sth more like BMP/WinAmp.
Even if they removed Amarok-gstreamer, Xine should have read all his audio files.
Back on topic : I was hoping to see a true review there, but obviously it’s not.
I was searching for a XMMS like player, or rather a Beep Media Player like player.
I erased BMP thinking BMPx was the latest version. I discovered it’s not.
I’m searching for an uptodate Gnome audio player that you can just throw a directory at (like the content of a CDROM) and it will play every file in alphanumeric order, by directory (like many MP3 playrs do).
I can’t seem to do that with any of the recent Gnome players (BMPx, Rhythmbox), but it worked in BMP. Is there sth I missed with these apps ?
Freshmeat notified me of XMMS 2, perhaps I could install that ?
try audacious
http://audacious-media-player.org/Main_Page
granted that linux distributions can be sometimes confusing … shyeah … dude get you story straight. First of all wtf is the point of this review? What exactly type of a media player are you loking for? One that can play every stream that you give it or what? Also if you are going to discuss mp3 playback where the heck is the part about 24bit sound reproduction … oh wait you have an cheap onboard codec … nm them dude first off get a decent soundcard and 2nd read some documentation. XMMS is old … yeah but it’s a damn good player. Not the only one but yet works better than anything based on gstreamer. But then again I actually have an echo indigo with perfect 24bit support in my notebook nad you … well you’ve got shit … excuse my French. Seriously man if you are going to write a review stick to what you know or you will get flamed. (like you did)
I must thank the article author for the Wikipedia link for BMP. Now I know the evolution of BMP is called Audacious.
Well, it does not support gstreamer apparently, but my collection is mostly MP3.
So I will remove BMPx and go Audacious.
The article author should have talked about these 2 apps (BMPx and Audacious) instead of talking about BMP which is not developed anymore and so will be killed in most distros. Oh well …
Ubuntu is an easy distro, yet getting to the point where you can watch and listen to a variety of formats is a lot more complicated and involved than it is in Windows or OS X.
No it isn’t. Just run EasyUbuntu and all the codecs you want will be automatically installed.
Apps like Automatix and EasyUbuntu make Ubuntu easier to setup than Windows or OS X.
You can play almost anything playable via amarok if you use xine or gstreamer plugins and HAVE THE CODECS.
He needs to setup xine with his codecs, which he has installed as they’re working with mplayer.
I expect a minimum level of expertise from reviewers, and he’s about ten steps below it in this subject area.