Windows Media Codec to be open sourced

zozo
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
In case anyone cares to know, the Windows Media codec (9) will be opensourced (or at least should be) very very soon.



Cant say how I got the news, but was from a top MS video person... and they didint mention anything about it being confidential info, so....



I didnt see any mainstream news about it so I figured I'd drop the news here. Make of it what you will.



At least it will get QuickTime to improve (hopefully) and get WindowsMedia 9 on Mac and Linux FINALLY.



Aside that its a friggen resource hog, Windows Media 9 codec aint too damn bad

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 13
    stupider...likeafoxstupider...likeafox Posts: 1,618member
    If you have any more info then it would be good to know if it will actually be an OSI approved licence or some BS MSFT shared-source scam like they've pulled with other products.



    Also, I'm not familiar with the codec, is it audio, video or what? Is it a competitor for mpeg4 or DVD? I'd heard of Windows Media Audio and WMA Pro, but what's the Windows Media codec? Any links to info would be appreciated.
  • Reply 2 of 13
    leonisleonis Posts: 3,427member
    As for WM on Linux



    A month ago (or two) I read an article which talked about M$ licenses the WM 9 codecs and code to one Linux app developer to work on a Linux-only media player that plays WM 9 files.



    Can't remember where I saw that
  • Reply 3 of 13
    xmogerxmoger Posts: 242member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by stupider...likeafox

    Also, I'm not familiar with the codec, is it audio, video or what? Is it a competitor for mpeg4 or DVD? I'd heard of Windows Media Audio and WMA Pro, but what's the Windows Media codec? Any links to info would be appreciated.



    Windows media has audio and video codecs (each with different modes).



    http://www.microsoft.com/windows/win...es/codecs.aspx

    They're aimed at producing good results for high and low bandwidth streams, so it competes with mpeg4. Doom9 or somebody did a comparison recently among several recent codecs including WMV, transcoding DVDs. Microsoft performed only fairly but I haven't been able to get divx5 or xvid to match the WMVs on straight encodes.
  • Reply 4 of 13
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Sorry, this just doesn't make any sense.
  • Reply 5 of 13
    chris cuillachris cuilla Posts: 4,825member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by wmf

    Sorry, this just doesn't make any sense.



    Of course it does. Typical monopolistic, predatory behavior. They are dumping. They are going to put MPEG-4 and AAC out of business (or at least force them to open source or drop their license fees to zero.) Machiavelli (sp?) would be proud.
  • Reply 6 of 13
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Chris Cuilla

    Typical monopolistic, predatory behavior. They are dumping. They are going to put MPEG-4 and AAC out of business (or at least force them to open source or drop their license fees to zero.) Machiavelli (sp?) would be proud.



    But what would MS gain? Open-sourcing stuff doesn't lock people into Windows.
  • Reply 7 of 13
    drumbug1drumbug1 Posts: 155member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by wmf

    But what would MS gain? Open-sourcing stuff doesn't lock people into Windows.



    In a way it does. More people can/will use it and that will "let" it easily become the standard. This reminds me of an article I read where Microsoft knew that Win9x and Office97 were being pirated, but didn't do anything about it because it helped spread their product and make it "standard."



    So it may not force people to use windows, but it promotes their software which will only help windows.
  • Reply 8 of 13
    chris cuillachris cuilla Posts: 4,825member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by drumbug1

    In a way it does. More people can/will use it and that will "let" it easily become the standard. This reminds me of an article I read where Microsoft knew that Win9x and Office97 were being pirated, but didn't do anything about it because it helped spread their product and make it "standard."



    So it may not force people to use windows, but it promotes their software which will only help windows.



    And...perhaps more importantly...it prevents another standard (which they do not control) from drawing anyone away from Windows. Plus, Microsoft already knows that victory goes to the cheapest.
  • Reply 9 of 13
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Chris Cuilla:

    Typical monopolistic, predatory behavior. They are dumping. They are going to put MPEG-4 and AAC out of business (or at least force them to open source or drop their license fees to zero.) Machiavelli (sp?) would be proud.



    MPEG-4 deserves to be put out of business. The greed they displayed by charging fees to Net broadcasters probably set independent Net Media back a decade or more.



    It would have been fine to keep the standard practice of charging a royalty on hardware and software broadcast tools like encoders and media players like Quicktime. Apple, for one, was willing to cut a check for millions. But no, they had to put a per-stream tax on every download. By the time they came to their senses and capped it. The goodwill for the format was gone. And MS had a foothold in yet another market due, not to superiority, but the stupidity of their rivals.
  • Reply 10 of 13
    chris cuillachris cuilla Posts: 4,825member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Frank777

    MPEG-4 deserves to be put out of business. The greed they displayed by charging fees to Net broadcasters probably set independent Net Media back a decade or more.



    It would have been fine to keep the standard practice of charging a royalty on hardware and software broadcast tools like encoders and media players like Quicktime. Apple, for one, was willing to cut a check for millions. But no, they had to put a per-stream tax on every download. By the time they came to their senses and capped it. The goodwill for the format was gone. And MS had a foothold in yet another market due, not to superiority, but the stupidity of their rivals.



    Would not be the first time. Sadly.
  • Reply 11 of 13
    jlljll Posts: 2,713member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by wmf

    Sorry, this just doesn't make any sense.



    Who says that WM10 will be open sourced?
  • Reply 12 of 13
    bluesignsbluesigns Posts: 315member
    if i remember correctly it was samsung, microsoft and and another player on that board that pushed for the MPEG4 licensing fees to be so high.



    then MS came out 6 months later with licensing fees for WMV that were half that of MPEG4.



    a classic screw job.



    i doubt they would fully open source it now.



    perhaps a partial open-sourcing and or a further lowering of licensing fees to really phuck the MPEG4 movement.



    MPEG4 was supposed to be free.



    at least that was the smoke they were blowing up our asses all throughout it's development...right up until it was time to implement.



    it makes me so angry.
  • Reply 13 of 13
    henriokhenriok Posts: 537member
    Even if the codec is free, MS would still charge major money out of server sorftware, stream tax, content making software and the hardware needed to play the codec in embedded applications. It is very good business for Microsoft to do so.



    It won't however have to hurt Apple though since it'd be just another codec for them to include in QuickTime, which will prevail as a free server platform with no stream tax, and a framework for a multitude of content making software.



    MPEG4 needs to be free anyway though.
Sign In or Register to comment.