You must have something wrong with your Mac because I've been using VLC since back in the day and I use it heavily watching 720p blu-ray movies on my slow 2007 Macbook. And everyone I know who has a Mac and TB HDs of blu-ray movies in mkv format uses it as well without a single crash.
I'm not the only one here who has noticed VLC's unreliability. Furthermore it's been buggy not just my 2008 Unibody Macbook, but on a titanium Powerbook G4, a G3 iBook, Windows XP and Mythbuntu 10.04. Whilst there's the probability of my being very unlucky with all these diverse systems over the past five years, a problem with VLC is a more rational deduction.
There's also the possibility of the media files being the issue.
The problem here is not Apple, The problem is the GPL, which is incompatible with pretty much any other license, open source or not.
I posted in another thread yesterday about this in regard to Adium/Pidgin, with the example that Pidgin doesn't work with OpenSSL because libpurple's GPL license is incompatible with OpenSSL's BSD-like license. Two open source products but developers are not free to use them together. So, if open source supposedly equals freedom, how can this be?
It's because, far from leading to freedom, the GPL actually limits freedom and choice: there's freedom only so long as everyone does what they are told and all software is licensed under the GPL's restrictive terms, and freedom only within the limits of the GPL.
EDIT: The succession plan demand is totally stupid. I think the group asking for this needs to find someone more intelligent to manage their money. Never a good idea to have idiots doing that for you.
Where did you read that nonsense? BSD's license is totally compatible with GPL regardless of version. Nothing prevents Pidgin from using openssl due to the GPL.
Edit: Just read said nonsense at their web site: Ridiculous. They can't be bothered to include one sentence.
But that's just being anal. FSF states this clearly "However, there is no reason not to use programs that have been released under the original BSD license."
"See my point?"
Yes.
In any case...
The GPL prevents people like apple from becoming freeloaders. They tried to be lazy with webkit and thankfully they made sure they did their duty and released their improvements back to the community.
The GPL prevents people like apple from becoming freeloaders. They tried to be lazy with webkit and thankfully they made sure they did their duty and released their improvements back to the community.
The troll is strong with this one.
Exactly when did Apple try to be lazy with WebKit and why weren?t they successful in their laziness? love to see some proof of this.
In actual tests, clang and company are not much faster than the GCC. Besides, both are standards that all can use, not just apple.
The performance, debugging robustness and much more will just continue to grow LLVM/Clang as time goes on.
GCC for OS X is terminal at 4.2 for GPLv3 reasons. You can MacPorts in gcc-current and not work with much of Cocoa all you want, or you can just use LLVM/Clang and be about your merry way.
C++Ox status is moving steadily along for C++ lovers, as well:
Exactly when did Apple try to be lazy with WebKit and why weren?t they successful in their laziness? love to see some proof of this.
Never mind that WebKit is a rewrite of any work by KDE and from it's inception was designed to work with both commercial and free projects w/o coercive licensing.
Exactly when did Apple try to be lazy with WebKit and why weren?t they successful in their laziness? love to see some proof of this.
Webkit is perfectly fine; it's the original work they did with KHTML. It wasn't the end of the world, but they weren't exactly forthcoming with their patches either.
Never mind that WebKit is a rewrite of any work by KDE and from it's inception was designed to work with both commercial and free projects w/o coercive licensing.
Webkit can't be licensed under anything but the GPL, *correction, LGPL*. It doesn't prevent Safari from being non-GPL either, but it does stop them from just taking it and not giving back to the KDE developers
This whole GPL stuff posted here is just a bunch of FUD.
Webkit can't be licensed under anything but the GPL. And notice how it doesn't prevent Safari from being non-GPL either.
This whole GPL stuff posted here is just a bunch of FUD.
Webkit is LGPL and BSD, not GPL. If it were GPL then Safari couldn't be proprietary and Webkit would have about a 0.5% market share.
OpenSSL is not licensed under BSD but dual licensed under Apache 1.0 and SSLeay license. The Apache 1.0 has an advertising clause and is incompatible with the GPL without an explicit exception.
The rabid FSF folks are the worst kind of freeloaders with RMS demanding folks call Linux GNU/Linux. Especially given that open source code sharing with GPL projects is almost completely one way into GPL and not back out to the rest of the OSS community. The nice thing is that permissive license users don't really care about "freeloading". They just like it when their code is useful.
The best kind of freetards are the kind that don't even understand GPL but flame others anyway.
The article says "Apple has pulled the VLC video player app from the App Store", nothing about iOS. Try readiing the article again.
Wrong again. The article is referring to the mobile version of VLC. The Mac version is not and never has been available on the Mac AppStore since the Mac store has only been open for a couple of days now. VLC has been removed from the iOS AppStore. You are mistaken.
Who needs a "App Store" to get VLC anyway? And VLC works great on my 2006 matte iMac.
Jeez, reading comprehension please! This report is referring to the iOS AppStore, NOT the OS X AppStore. VLC is not and never has been on the OS X AppStore.
btw I already have VLC on my iPhone and I expect the developer to continue supporting any issues I have under the agreement I entered into at the time I downloaded the software.
This is a piece of GPL software.
Therefore, unless the MobileVLC team added their own serarate supplemnetary support agreement (which I strongly doubt), your agreement with the developer goes something along these lines: The program is provided "... “AS IS” WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION."
Even in light of the app being pulled from the App Store, the developers will have absolutely no difficulty whatsoever in continuing to honour their end of that agreement.
If, however, as the license states, you wish to continue supporting yourself, just ask the MobileVLC developers for access to the source code (it is your right to make this request, since the software is GPL after all). Then purchase a membership in the iOS developer's program, and use your own copy of XCode to make the necessray modifications and install it on your own iDevice.
Aside: I suspect it should be fairly easy for this software to enjoy a second incarnation as a piece of software that is distributed to specifically target either:
1) Jailbroken iOS devices, which do not have the DRM restriction, or
2) The iOS simulator (wink, wink, nudge, nudge), which also does not have any DRM restriction and hence cannot fall afoul of the GPL's restrictions.
(Coincidentally, option 2 could also be installed on any real iOS device if the owner happens to have a membership in the iOS developer's program. This second step could be accomplished with minimal modification, but without involving any redistribution, and therefore would not bring up any of the GPL's requirements regarding DRM because that only applies for redistribution.)
Jeez, reading comprehension please! This report is referring to the iOS AppStore, NOT the OS X AppStore. VLC is not and never has been on the OS X AppStore.
Well why would anyone ever bother in the first place with VLC on an iOs device? Sounds like way too much trouble to begin with- just accept the fact that Apple only wants you to buy from iTunes in the first place or simply switch to a Droid.
Well why would anyone ever bother in the first place with VLC on an iOs device? Sounds like way too much trouble to begin with- just accept the fact that Apple only wants you to buy from iTunes in the first place or simply switch to a Droid.
Apple was actually perfectly happy to host VLC -- Apple only removed it after a dissenter from within the VLC camp objected to other members of the VLC development team making use of his contributed code, contrary to the terms under which he had released it, without obtaining his permission.
Webkit is LGPL and BSD, not GPL. If it were GPL then Safari couldn't be proprietary and Webkit would have about a 0.5% market share.
It still prevents them from free loading, LGPL or not.
Quote:
OpenSSL is not licensed under BSD but dual licensed under Apache 1.0 and SSLeay license. The Apache 1.0 has an advertising clause and is incompatible with the GPL without an explicit exception.
Which is exactly the same reason for the BSD issue. No difference.
Quote:
The rabid FSF folks are the worst kind of freeloaders with RMS demanding folks call Linux GNU/Linux. Especially given that open source code sharing with GPL projects is almost completely one way into GPL and not back out to the rest of the OSS community. The nice thing is that permissive license users don't really care about "freeloading". They just like it when their code is useful.
You are making no sense, as GNU/LINUX is the right name to call it. It's the GNU software + Linux kernel, neither of each would be anywhere without the other. Linux happens to be GPL v2. because Linus doesn't care about the whole GPL 3 clause about patents and is more pragmatic (ie a compromiser).
Why are you saying it is one way? With just about every project depending on another (like Handbrake on FFMPEG and x264, work done by VLC), you need to clairfy.
Quote:
The best kind of freetards are the kind that don't even understand GPL but flame others anyway.
The licensing discrepancy was apparently brought to Apple's attention by VLC developer Rémi Denis-Courmon.
"At last, Apple has removed VLC media player from its application store. Thus the incompatibility between the GNU General Public License and the AppStore terms of use is resolved - the hard way," Denis-Courmon is reported as saying in a blog post. "I am not going to pity the owners of iDevices, and not even the MobileVLC developers who doubtless wasted a lot of their time. This end should not have come to a surprise to anyone."
Considering it was Denis-Courmo that made the stink about it, they call that cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Apple was actually perfectly happy to host VLC -- Apple only removed it after a dissenter from within the VLC camp objected to other members of the VLC development team making use of his contributed code, contrary to the terms under which he had released it, without obtaining his permission.
It's a legal issue, as in, Apple isn't going to change its TOS for GPL software by removing the one clause that means nothing to the end user: The limit of 5 unique downloads for different computers.
Aside from that, the only issue Apple would have is that they could be sued, and since lawyers rule the earth, they rather not host the app. Simple as that.
Comments
You must have something wrong with your Mac because I've been using VLC since back in the day and I use it heavily watching 720p blu-ray movies on my slow 2007 Macbook. And everyone I know who has a Mac and TB HDs of blu-ray movies in mkv format uses it as well without a single crash.
I'm not the only one here who has noticed VLC's unreliability. Furthermore it's been buggy not just my 2008 Unibody Macbook, but on a titanium Powerbook G4, a G3 iBook, Windows XP and Mythbuntu 10.04. Whilst there's the probability of my being very unlucky with all these diverse systems over the past five years, a problem with VLC is a more rational deduction.
There's also the possibility of the media files being the issue.
You think a free app like VLC is somehow going to convince Apple to change their licensing structure and deal with GPLv3. You're dreaming.
In a year from now not one piece of Apple software will be built with GCC. It will all be LLVM/Clang and libc++ will eventually supersede libstdc++.
In actual tests, clang and company are not much faster than the GCC. Besides, both are standards that all can use, not just apple.
The problem here is not Apple, The problem is the GPL, which is incompatible with pretty much any other license, open source or not.
I posted in another thread yesterday about this in regard to Adium/Pidgin, with the example that Pidgin doesn't work with OpenSSL because libpurple's GPL license is incompatible with OpenSSL's BSD-like license. Two open source products but developers are not free to use them together. So, if open source supposedly equals freedom, how can this be?
It's because, far from leading to freedom, the GPL actually limits freedom and choice: there's freedom only so long as everyone does what they are told and all software is licensed under the GPL's restrictive terms, and freedom only within the limits of the GPL.
EDIT: The succession plan demand is totally stupid. I think the group asking for this needs to find someone more intelligent to manage their money. Never a good idea to have idiots doing that for you.
Where did you read that nonsense? BSD's license is totally compatible with GPL regardless of version. Nothing prevents Pidgin from using openssl due to the GPL.
Edit: Just read said nonsense at their web site: Ridiculous. They can't be bothered to include one sentence.
Yes, yes, I read this:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html
But that's just being anal. FSF states this clearly "However, there is no reason not to use programs that have been released under the original BSD license."
"See my point?"
Yes.
In any case...
The GPL prevents people like apple from becoming freeloaders. They tried to be lazy with webkit and thankfully they made sure they did their duty and released their improvements back to the community.
The GPL prevents people like apple from becoming freeloaders. They tried to be lazy with webkit and thankfully they made sure they did their duty and released their improvements back to the community.
The troll is strong with this one.
Exactly when did Apple try to be lazy with WebKit and why weren?t they successful in their laziness? love to see some proof of this.
In actual tests, clang and company are not much faster than the GCC. Besides, both are standards that all can use, not just apple.
The performance, debugging robustness and much more will just continue to grow LLVM/Clang as time goes on.
GCC for OS X is terminal at 4.2 for GPLv3 reasons. You can MacPorts in gcc-current and not work with much of Cocoa all you want, or you can just use LLVM/Clang and be about your merry way.
C++Ox status is moving steadily along for C++ lovers, as well:
http://clang.llvm.org/cxx_status.html
For myself, I can use LLVM/Clang/libc++ with libstdc++ on Linux or OS X and not panic about the GPLv3.
The troll is strong with this one.
Exactly when did Apple try to be lazy with WebKit and why weren?t they successful in their laziness? love to see some proof of this.
Never mind that WebKit is a rewrite of any work by KDE and from it's inception was designed to work with both commercial and free projects w/o coercive licensing.
The troll is strong with this one.
Exactly when did Apple try to be lazy with WebKit and why weren?t they successful in their laziness? love to see some proof of this.
Webkit is perfectly fine; it's the original work they did with KHTML. It wasn't the end of the world, but they weren't exactly forthcoming with their patches either.
http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/1001
Never mind that WebKit is a rewrite of any work by KDE and from it's inception was designed to work with both commercial and free projects w/o coercive licensing.
Webkit can't be licensed under anything but the GPL, *correction, LGPL*. It doesn't prevent Safari from being non-GPL either, but it does stop them from just taking it and not giving back to the KDE developers
This whole GPL stuff posted here is just a bunch of FUD.
Webkit can't be licensed under anything but the GPL. And notice how it doesn't prevent Safari from being non-GPL either.
This whole GPL stuff posted here is just a bunch of FUD.
Webkit is LGPL and BSD, not GPL. If it were GPL then Safari couldn't be proprietary and Webkit would have about a 0.5% market share.
OpenSSL is not licensed under BSD but dual licensed under Apache 1.0 and SSLeay license. The Apache 1.0 has an advertising clause and is incompatible with the GPL without an explicit exception.
The rabid FSF folks are the worst kind of freeloaders with RMS demanding folks call Linux GNU/Linux. Especially given that open source code sharing with GPL projects is almost completely one way into GPL and not back out to the rest of the OSS community. The nice thing is that permissive license users don't really care about "freeloading". They just like it when their code is useful.
The best kind of freetards are the kind that don't even understand GPL but flame others anyway.
The article says "Apple has pulled the VLC video player app from the App Store", nothing about iOS. Try readiing the article again.
Wrong again. The article is referring to the mobile version of VLC. The Mac version is not and never has been available on the Mac AppStore since the Mac store has only been open for a couple of days now. VLC has been removed from the iOS AppStore. You are mistaken.
Who needs a "App Store" to get VLC anyway? And VLC works great on my 2006 matte iMac.
Jeez, reading comprehension please! This report is referring to the iOS AppStore, NOT the OS X AppStore. VLC is not and never has been on the OS X AppStore.
btw I already have VLC on my iPhone and I expect the developer to continue supporting any issues I have under the agreement I entered into at the time I downloaded the software.
This is a piece of GPL software.
Therefore, unless the MobileVLC team added their own serarate supplemnetary support agreement (which I strongly doubt), your agreement with the developer goes something along these lines: The program is provided "... “AS IS” WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION."
Even in light of the app being pulled from the App Store, the developers will have absolutely no difficulty whatsoever in continuing to honour their end of that agreement.
If, however, as the license states, you wish to continue supporting yourself, just ask the MobileVLC developers for access to the source code (it is your right to make this request, since the software is GPL after all). Then purchase a membership in the iOS developer's program, and use your own copy of XCode to make the necessray modifications and install it on your own iDevice.
Aside: I suspect it should be fairly easy for this software to enjoy a second incarnation as a piece of software that is distributed to specifically target either:
1) Jailbroken iOS devices, which do not have the DRM restriction, or
2) The iOS simulator (wink, wink, nudge, nudge), which also does not have any DRM restriction and hence cannot fall afoul of the GPL's restrictions.
(Coincidentally, option 2 could also be installed on any real iOS device if the owner happens to have a membership in the iOS developer's program. This second step could be accomplished with minimal modification, but without involving any redistribution, and therefore would not bring up any of the GPL's requirements regarding DRM because that only applies for redistribution.)
Jeez, reading comprehension please! This report is referring to the iOS AppStore, NOT the OS X AppStore. VLC is not and never has been on the OS X AppStore.
Well why would anyone ever bother in the first place with VLC on an iOs device? Sounds like way too much trouble to begin with- just accept the fact that Apple only wants you to buy from iTunes in the first place or simply switch to a Droid.
Well why would anyone ever bother in the first place with VLC on an iOs device? Sounds like way too much trouble to begin with- just accept the fact that Apple only wants you to buy from iTunes in the first place or simply switch to a Droid.
Apple was actually perfectly happy to host VLC -- Apple only removed it after a dissenter from within the VLC camp objected to other members of the VLC development team making use of his contributed code, contrary to the terms under which he had released it, without obtaining his permission.
Webkit is LGPL and BSD, not GPL. If it were GPL then Safari couldn't be proprietary and Webkit would have about a 0.5% market share.
It still prevents them from free loading, LGPL or not.
OpenSSL is not licensed under BSD but dual licensed under Apache 1.0 and SSLeay license. The Apache 1.0 has an advertising clause and is incompatible with the GPL without an explicit exception.
Which is exactly the same reason for the BSD issue. No difference.
The rabid FSF folks are the worst kind of freeloaders with RMS demanding folks call Linux GNU/Linux. Especially given that open source code sharing with GPL projects is almost completely one way into GPL and not back out to the rest of the OSS community. The nice thing is that permissive license users don't really care about "freeloading". They just like it when their code is useful.
You are making no sense, as GNU/LINUX is the right name to call it. It's the GNU software + Linux kernel, neither of each would be anywhere without the other. Linux happens to be GPL v2. because Linus doesn't care about the whole GPL 3 clause about patents and is more pragmatic (ie a compromiser).
Why are you saying it is one way? With just about every project depending on another (like Handbrake on FFMPEG and x264, work done by VLC), you need to clairfy.
The best kind of freetards are the kind that don't even understand GPL but flame others anyway.
Looks like you fall into that category.
"At last, Apple has removed VLC media player from its application store. Thus the incompatibility between the GNU General Public License and the AppStore terms of use is resolved - the hard way," Denis-Courmon is reported as saying in a blog post. "I am not going to pity the owners of iDevices, and not even the MobileVLC developers who doubtless wasted a lot of their time. This end should not have come to a surprise to anyone."
Considering it was Denis-Courmo that made the stink about it, they call that cutting off your nose to spite your face.
He f*cked a lot of people out of a great app.
Apple was actually perfectly happy to host VLC -- Apple only removed it after a dissenter from within the VLC camp objected to other members of the VLC development team making use of his contributed code, contrary to the terms under which he had released it, without obtaining his permission.
It's a legal issue, as in, Apple isn't going to change its TOS for GPL software by removing the one clause that means nothing to the end user: The limit of 5 unique downloads for different computers.
Aside from that, the only issue Apple would have is that they could be sued, and since lawyers rule the earth, they rather not host the app. Simple as that.