PLEASE IV50 Support!

[Guest]

There was another idea.

Just write a wrapper to USE the codec. You don't distribute the Codec. You may specify a codec-folder where the user puts the DLLs.

There already is one: http://www.mplayerhq.hu/

This sort of thing really isn't the goal of the VLC developers.

[lemmi]

There already is one: http://www.mplayerhq.hu/

Thanks. Id like to stay with vlc.

This sort of thing really isn't the goal of the VLC developers.

realy? why not? what is the goal?

[Guest]

Look, if you want to use this sort of hack then go ahead. But you have to understand that it is a kludgey hack, and one that won't work well for many people. So don't be surprised when people are less than enthusiastic about it.

[lemmi]

Why is this a hack? Many open source projects take libraries and wrap a gui around them. And I do not understand why you are against this.

Please don't give here any statements without any explanation.

[The DJ]

Because it will only work on x86 PCs.
Besides. It's against the license under which VLC is distributed. It doesn't allow to link against proprietary code that isn't part of the OS.

[lemmi]

Because it will only work on x86 PCs.

This is a good point. But aren't the most users, windows user?

It's against the license under which VLC is distributed. It doesn't allow to link against proprietary code that isn't part of the OS.

I thought, that the license doesn't forbid this. Just haven't the time now to look further to the license.

[tonsofpcs]

This is a good point. But aren't the most users, windows user?

Judging by the posts on the forum, no.

[The DJ]

It's against the license under which VLC is distributed. It doesn't allow to link against proprietary code that isn't part of the OS.

I thought, that the license doesn't forbid this. Just haven't the time now to look further to the license.

It is one of the many discussion points of the GPL, but if you read it well enough it definetly says this. It's just that some people don't read it well enough or choose to overlook it because of the convenience the proprietary code delivers to them.

[thenikola]

This is not the point. The point is that reverse engineering a codec is a TON of work. The kind of work a single person might spent a year of his time on.
Now if someone was getting PAID, then that might happen, but if they are not, then you can just HOPE that someone needs it enough to do by himself.

This is purely curriosity I don't mean to imply that you should do it heh. But could you shed some light on how it's done? (lamens terms please)

And just a suggestion about people asking the same crap over and over... winamp's site has a "Wishlist" page which is monitored by an admin and no one can post to it... sticky all that jazz. But anyways its broken up by areas of concern and says their status by each linking to old threads and what not when necessary. I'm well aware that this shouldn't be necessary and would take someone a few hours to set up. But once it's set up you will probably get so many less repeat questions just because your giving people one less reason to be lazy.