ActiveWin reports that on page 19 of Microsoft’s PDF response to Real’s allegations: “Microsoft has developed standalone applications called “Windows Media Player” for use with the Apple Macintosh and Linux operating systems“. Update: More info.
Microsoft Windows Media Player for Linux?
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Someone slap me? Is it for real or I’m I dreaming. Really, I haven’t slept in the last 24 hours
Mplayer plays these files now and works beautifully. Why would we need an “official” player from Microsoft? I LOVE the fact that I can play all files now, without my machine phoning home and reporting information to some corporation about what I may be watching.
If Microsoft has developed a media player for Linux, where is it?
Here it is: http://www.vnunet.com/News/1140128
Interesting article: MS is not making this available for download to end users. Instead it “will only be available to manufacturers for integration into their products. “
That article refers to the codecs which have been available since Windows Media 9 Series was launched. It only speculates about the possibility of a player.
The MS legal filing mentions specifically development of a version of Windows Media Player for Linux, not just the codecs.
I for one, am glad to see it. It is a step in the right direction.
Apple, why don’t you have one for Linux and Palm?
I think my meds are wearing off…. I see but dont believe…..
Hmmm…. What about the built in spyware for WMP. It calls a 3rd party to show info about the artist…. And there were enough security risks in WMP to make me think twice.
Now excsue me…. I have to find more meds…..
I heard that we started doing integration with this (for STBs) in October of last year. Microsoft is making a big push for WMV adoption for broadcast as an alternative to MPEG2 – it is only natural that this should follow.
What about the built in spyware for WMP. It calls a 3rd party to show info about the artist
That’s not spyware. It’s just like the CDDB capabilities of most media players, and it can be turned off.
if MS released WMP on Linux would you use it?
Personally I wouldnt, im very happy with mplayer and the browser plugin. It plays every video format known to man and is very low on the resources!
That’s old, I knew for years that M$ had their WMA and DRM crap working under Linux.
And it’s been announced months ago that they would licence it to companies using Linux (on http://linuxfr.org IIRC)
Btw, the real name is *WiMP*
I’m personally excited. I hope it turns out to be true. Like MS or hate them….one application they did right was with their Media Player.
I wonder if they’ll change it’s name to Microsoft Media Player.
The reason why they don’t release it to the general public is that it most likely contains DRM/TCPA stuff. This may make it impossible to recompile things like the Linux kernel and still have a working wmp application.
But by having wmp for other platforms than windows, Microsoft strengthens its position among contents providers, preventing open standards to evolve.
This is really a bad thing.
I think ’99 was when I tried MS’ media player for linux. It sucked back then and I haven’t tried it since.
What’s the fuzz?
Come on..we are talking about microsoft after all. They are NOT going to do something for you for nothing. If the string isn’t attach now, it will be later. So BEWARE!!!!
>Mplayer plays these files now and works beautifully.
Either you are trying a different version to the one I am using or you are wrong. MPlayer does not play WMV9 AFAIK, and of those websites releasing new videos in WMV, how many a do not use WMV9?
WMP for OS X with WMV9 support was a nice addition to our software library. The point is not if the player sucks or not, as most people usually focus this dialog. The point is weather you can or cannot watch a video. Now, in Mac OS X, we can.
MPlayer can use windows codecs to play wmv9
videocodec wmv9dmo
info “Windows Media Video 9 DMO”
status working
fourcc WMV3
driver dmo
dll “wmv9dmod.dll”
guid 0x724bb6a4, 0xe526, 0x450f, 0xaf, 0xfa, 0xab, 0x9b, 0x45, 0x12, 0x91, 0x11
out YV12 ;,I420,IYUV
out YUY2,UYVY
out BGR32,BGR24,BGR16 ;,BGR15
videocodec wmvdmo
info “Windows Media Video DMO”
status working
fourcc WMV1
fourcc WMV2
fourcc WMV3
driver dmo
dll “wmvdmod.dll”
guid 0x82d353df, 0x90bd, 0x4382, 0x8b, 0xc2, 0x3f, 0x61, 0x92, 0xb7, 0x6e, 0x34
out YV12 ;,I420,IYUV
out YUY2,UYVY
out BGR32,BGR24,BGR16 ;,BGR15
I have media player on my mac, dont use it though.
The linux one was developed either for or by a 3rd party to use. I believe it was for use with an embedded version of linux that they wanted it for. I have no idea where I read this but it is definitely old news.
I will post with a link later if i can find it.
http://www.vnunet.com/News/1140128
This is so unusual. I am having hard time to believe it. I don’t think it is true.
Its hard for me to say this, cause i have always taken for granted all of my iLife app will beat anything that comes out of redmond anytime … but, WMP 9 is actually very good as a music libary organizer.
I have yet to see any MP3 organiser rival the ease of WMP when it comes to cataloging music. It is very fast, scorlling through the All songs is very quick, unlike iTunes Mac or windows version. It has the normal star ratings feature (as does iTunes). But where it really kicks some is the tag editing features. You can multiple select songs and edit a tag (say album , artitst or genre) and they will all change. You can even drag one or multiple songs from the right pane into the left tree pane to edit the tags! This is infinitely useful … i just expand the by Artist branch in the tree and drag all the files i want to a partcular artist, and hey presto, the tags are changed too … this is the ease of use that Apple has been touting all this while, in this particular app, Microsoft wins.
Too bad WMP cant burn MP3’s tho, the major bummer …
they do it for set-top boxes. these are usually linux based, and don’t support mplayer natively (using mplayer may give them troubles with ms). so ms is addressing this issue imho with the manufacturers.
But if you do, go for it.
Just be aware of the following:
DRM (+ statistics on what is played) has been included in WMP since june or july 2001, as part of a patch which secured a vulnerability in WMP, and was also included in XP SP1.
This version will include that feature as well unless it’s a _really_ old and unsecure port. Which is unlikely.
The port itself won’t be opensource, at least that’s my wild guess, and if it indeed ain’t, most distributions are not including it. Why would they anyway when there’s other fine programs which can do much more than WMP? Like MPlayer.
So i’m wondering why Microsoft does this. Perhaps to evade claims about that WMP and it’s codecs only run on Microsoft Windows, that’s what i’m thinking about first, but i have no proof to back that up. Perhaps it has to do with EU’s claims regarding WMP…
I don’t think that’s it.
By untying WMP from Windows, they might be trying to prove that they’re two different products after all.
But that would actually be a bad move: if they’re different, they should not be bundled, and Microsoft is indeed abusing their OS-“we’re not a monopoly” to choke off competitors.
I think it’s not a legal move, just business. They’re trying to attack video codec alternatives with this first, then when that’s succeeded, they’ll release an updated, better, windows-only version to force WMV users back to Windows. If the second part fails, they’ll still be the world’s DRM provider. (The current MPlayer plugin probably isn’t DRM-aware, and will fail as soon as DRM content becomes available.)
“So i’m wondering why Microsoft does this. Perhaps to evade claims about that WMP and it’s codecs only run on Microsoft Windows, that’s what i’m thinking about first, but i have no proof to back that up. Perhaps it has to do with EU’s claims regarding WMP…”
Nope. This allows Microsoft to further extend the reach of their DRM into other products, like digital media centers, while keeping it off of the Linux desktop.
If this is accurate then this is a very positive turn of events. In the past Microsoft has gone from acting as if Linux does not exist to openly attacking and insulting the Linux community. This could mean MS has finally started to see Linux as a viable platform worth developing for due to it’s increasing popularity. They now see Linux as a strong competitor. In the past Microsoft behaved as if it were the only choice. Mow that they realize it is not they must work with it or lose a market share in some areas. In the near future look to see Office ported to Linux. If MS sees Linux as a viable platform then other software companies will follow. I hate MS, but this is a positive thing. They must start seeing Windows as a member of a community of many operating systems instead of seeing themselves alone at the top. If this happens MS will once again start to be the innovative company that rose to market dominance in the 1980s instead of what they are now…a dinosaur.
Obligatory: I hope this isn’t WMP9. That interface with its horrible skins–oh, so ugly–and even the classic takes up too much screen. It’s so bloated… Ooohh so bloated.
I’ve got XP right here and 6.4 comes installed. It’s perfect, except that some codecs only work for 9. The universe conspires against me. (That or Microsoft.)
And I would want a Microsoft product on my linux box WHY?
stanalone word, excel, powerpoint viewers for mac and linux ?!
z1xq – you took the words out of my mouth. I think that MS finally realizes that Linux is not going away, and like IBM, HP, Sun etc….. They can either fight it and watch their markets crumble becuase a GPL verions of what they produce will eventually replace the commercial products; or they can take support and take advatage of the platform by providing applications that people use on a daily bases. Although I do think that they are doing it backwards, most companies QT, Borland, Oracle are producing Linux apps for free, and making people pay for them on other platforms.
I think that Linux is a wonderful marketing tool, if you can make a version of your product to run on Linux and you get tones of people using it for free, then you know that thoes who prefer other platforms will be willing to pay to have the same product run on their systems.
Can’t wait to compile this one optemized for my machine!
I personally have never liked WMP. It’s too flashy, and centered around making your computer another vessle for commerce and advertizing. If all it did was show me the media content I want to see (ie, had a simple interface to find a music vid or just open a file), I’d like it better.
The winner? Mplayer.
It doesn’t matter whether you want WMP on your box or not. Taking such a step would convince other software companies to quit ignoring Linux. Personally, I’m tired of messing around with WineX, I want to see a few Linux video games come my way. WineX is a fine product, but it is only a hack until we can get the real deal.
If they announced a Quicktime producer for Linux I’d spontaneously defecate, those codecs I can use, mpeg4 I can’t.
For me it is a good deal i like linux and windows, my
personal boxes are linux, but right now i am using a
windows box and it is just fine with me. i dont care
about the Ford VS Chevy war going on among software users
if i like the product, i will use it.
@ tc & anonymous
Good point, i think my reasoning was wrong.
But the EU point still makes me wondering because today it has also been announced that Frits Bolkenstein will not be sueing MS like has been said earlier
http://www.webwereld.nl/nieuws/17845.phtml (no English link yet)
“If they announced a Quicktime producer for Linux I’d spontaneously defecate, those codecs I can use, mpeg4 I can’t.”
..except that Quicktime is Apple’s work. It works in WINE, additionaly non-streaming works with Heroinewarrior’s implementation and streaming works (sometimes?) with MPlayer + QT libraries.
i;d also like to mention that i cant use wm9 in mplayer, as my mplayer is compiled as 64bit and cant use 32bit plugins. if they release a 64bit wmp for linux… i’d end up using it sometimes, if only as a plugin for mplayer.
mplayer depends on the realplayer release for linux to play realmedia… no reason why we couldn’t use a linux wmp the same way. (however, real is a 32bit app and i cant use it with 64bit mplayer. bah)
Why are you using 64 bit userland anyway? You could use a VM or emulator for this purpose but it wouldn’t speed it up just like 64 bit userland isn’t faster than 32 bit.
I mean why not? It would help linux.
This is probably not the right place to ask but I’d like to know if anyone notice the amount of memory that Slackware 9.1 uses when running Gnome 2.4. I mean it uses a big chunk of memory. In my setup (with almost everything except KDE), it uses about 360 meg of my 386 meg of RAM. And I notice that it is significantly slower than Windows XP Pro which is installed on the same machine. Is this because of the amount of memory that Slackware 9.1 with Gnome 2.4 use or it is something else?
Codeweavers crossover plugin windows media player works fine with SUSE 9.0.
It gets me streaming radio stations that don’t use RealPlayer.
Why do we need Microsoft to port there apps to Linux? WMP has worked on Linux for more then a year, Office XP works too, does it really matter what Microsoft does? If we really need this crap, we already have it…
I don’t use WMP at all on my Windows XP machine. I use InterVideo’s WinRip. Of course, if something is not availble to view without WMP, it most likely is not worth viewing IMO.
This statement from MS sounds only like something to cover themselves with. It is not specific and implies that WMP is available like other players to users. Maybe some lawyer will take note of it and ask them to specify what, exactly they provide to the users.
I wonder what is the point of that?…. I don’t think Linux users would use such thing anyway… I wouldn’t
LOL I swear someone asks that atleast once a day at justlinux.com
The reason is linux allocates your RAM to increases system perforamce. When you open up an app, the memory will be diverted from that pool.
uummm.. maybe the hardcore linux only user wouldn’t, but i would.
and i just talked to a retailer about wine rack, and it is selling very well, some of us do use windows in linux.
“will only be available to manufacturers for integration into their products.”
So its basically the same thing as with intervideos own “linDVD”: They claim it exists, they say its only for OEMs bundling linux with their products, almost noone has actually seen it, and when you download and try the leaked version you found on kazaa, it sucks ass so big, you return to MPlayer / xine without hestitation…
I don’t really have much to comment. I just liked that subject line.
Honestly to say, I’m a bit sick of messy and non-system ordered softwares in Linux. I think some commercial should jump in to create a commercial distro for normal users who can’t understand Linux thoroughly. WiMP for Linux is revolutionary step of MS, I think. I will be very happy if MS or IBM or any commercial company create a Linux for real pro and real normal users.
” I think some commercial should jump in to create a commercial distro for normal users who can’t (or don’t want to) understand Linux thoroughly.”
now that is a great idea
I would like it if MS declared there codecs free to use on Linux, so that there are no legal issues with Mplayer or Xine.
Also I would love it if someone takes the Mplayer backend and make an Media Player Classic frontend for it.
MPlayer is far more flexible, has the best navigation keys I’ve ever seen, and comes w/ no strings attached yet reads far more media types than WMP. I use MPlayer on my Mac, Linux, and Windows boxes.
Linux users don’t need anything from MS. Mplayer can be built to play any popular media format.
iTunes makes it quite easy to quickly mass-edit tags, actually. Simply select a number of songs, right-click, and select “Get Info”.
Should it rather be called Linux Media Player?
I have mixed feeling about this. It’s good that even the arch-enemy of Linux is considering the platform but I fear they want to use the “embrase, extend, extinguish” tactic. Anyway, I’ll wait until it’s officially out before making a definitive judgement on it. Hopefully, other software companies will see this news and will begin to consider Linux as a viable platform.
Btw, I think some people are overhyping Mplayer. It’s good but they still have some work to do with user friendliness and DVD support before being the ultimate player.
Now that is the nice thing about this, if you only want to
to use linux (or Mac) use it. if there were no market for
people using windows on linux WINE-X,wine, or codeweavers
would be a joke. BRING IT ON!!!!!! MS
I wrote:
>> MPlayer does not play WMV9 AFAIK […]
>> The point is weather you can or cannot watch a video. Now, in Mac OS X, we can.
zakon wrote:
> MPlayer can use windows codecs to play wmv9
Aha… Didn’t know that. So, let me get this straight… people are bitching about not needing a new Microsoft software like a Windows Media Player, because they already are able to use Microsoft Codecs, no?
Yes, MS is developing WMP for Linux but is only developed for some company that strike deal with Ms to run WMP on their devices running embedded Linux. As far as I know for now there is no plan to have version for average users.