Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Windows Media Player 11 Released 365

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the progress-without-forward-progress dept.
filenavigator writes "Microsoft issued a press release today publicizing the release of Windows Media Player 11. Looks like the major updates in this version are for the Microsoft marketing engine. Features boasted by Microsoft include better integration with media players sanctioned by them, and integration with their new URGE music service. Additionally, and more importantly, this version contains the latest in Microsoft DRM software. Interested parties can download a free copy"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Windows Media Player 11 Released

Comments Filter:
  • Can't we wait? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mingot (665080) on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:39PM (#16652937)
    Hey, can we wait until the comments before the anti-MS vitrol and fud? Does it have to start right in the article itself? Sheesh.
    • by 0racle (667029) on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:42PM (#16652953)
      Some of us are busy people, we have to get right to the bashing.
    • by robogun (466062)
      That was Submitter's point. The "features" that MS gets so excited about (i.e. stock will rise) are the same that make vomit rise in the throats of Slashdotters.

      As for me WMP9 is more than enough.
      • by cptgrudge (177113)

        As for me WMP9 is more than enough.

        Same here, but I don't have a choice; I'm still using Win 2000. Guess I'm just old fashioned.

        • I think the best player in the market is currently AlShow, if you dont watch mkv there is no codecs needed. It's free and that same company also makes the free AlZip, perhaps the best decompressor I have ever seen.

          If anyone has anything better please share some ideas.
    • Re:Can't we wait? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Dahamma (304068) on Tuesday October 31, 2006 @01:12AM (#16653683)
      Yeah, it's amazing. Everyone raves about iPod/iTunes but WMP is EVIL!!

      better integration with media players sanctioned by them

      iPod vs 100+ WMA devices...

      integration with their new URGE music service

      iTunes Store vs URGE...

      more importantly, this version contains the latest in Microsoft DRM software

      Fairplay vs WMDRM... one is supported on dozens of devices, the other on 2 (oh, don't forget the crippled Razr, 3!)

      Hey, I have an iPod, but why shouldn't Microsoft be able to add the same "features" Apple has to their media player? (they do that with so many other parts of their OS ;)
      • Could it be that you're somehow annnoyed that Plays for Sure[TM] isn't so sure to play any more?

        There's no doubt that DRM is evil; no matter if it's provided by Apple or Microsoft (alas I hear that Apples cripling system is more lenient towards the buyer), but remarks like this are just rediculous:

        iPod vs 100+ WMA devices...

        Have you ever considered market share between 1 iPod and 100+ of WMA devices? I'd wager that if you insist on buying DRMd crap, your chances are far better that you can still play the

    • by Greyfox (87712)
      It's all part of the Fair and Balanced(tm) reporting you get on Slashdot. Anyway, for those keeping score:

      Theoretical Mathmatician: $160,000...
      Security Engineering Team: $500,000...
      Marketing to make DRM sound like a good thing: $1.2 Million...

      Having $660,000 worth of security engineering subverted by some wise-ass kid in Sweden the day before your product is released: Priceless.

  • Additionally, and more importantly, this version contains the latest in Microsoft DRM software. Interested parties can download a free copy"

    You're saying it like DRM is a feature.
    • Digital restrictions management is a feature for residential end users only because it is a feature for the publishers: it makes publishers more likely to consider publishing works in the format.

    • by FooAtWFU (699187)
      On the contrary. I think he was banking on us all knowing exactly how much DRM sucks (doubly so when it doesn't even work right [flickr.com] ): and highlighting it in such a manner was a bit of subtle irony.

      Weep with me now for the funeral of subtlety.

  • Apt (Score:5, Funny)

    by Jello B. (950817) <jellobmello AT gmail DOT com> on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:42PM (#16652959) Homepage
    I tried apt, but it didn't work. Does anybody have the source packages so I can compile it myself?
  • Slick interface (Score:2, Interesting)

    by BadAnalogyGuy (945258)
    The big problem is that all the videos that I'm interested in are already uploaded to YouTube.

    All the audio I'm interested in is uploaded to BitTorrent.

    I prefer to live offline, away from my computer, so all the slickness in the world doesn't mean squat when I'm not going to be sitting in front of the monitor anyway.
  • by nighty5 (615965) on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:45PM (#16652983)
    Features boasted by Microsoft include better integration with media players sanctioned by them

    I think these guys have got this one covered: http://www.apple.com/itunes/ [apple.com]
  • Free? (Score:2, Funny)

    by JoshJ (1009085)
    "Interested parties can download a free copy" Richard Stallman has a word to say to the submitter.
    • by debilo (612116)
      "Interested parties can download a free copy" Richard Stallman has a word to say to the submitter.
      "Shave me" is actually two words, silly!
    • Microsoft keeps using that word. I do not think it means what they think it means.
      • by kjart (941720)

        I approve of the reference, but no, I do think they know what it means:

        free /fri/ adjective, freer, freest, adverb, verb, freed, freeing.-adjective
        ...
        11. provided without, or not subject to, a charge or payment: free parking; a free sample.

        (dictionary.com)

  • by carlmenezes (204187) on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:50PM (#16653015) Homepage
    Save the world from WMP 11.
    • by wizrd_nml (661928)
      Please do! I just installed it and got a core dump....twice! Quickly uninstalled and things are back to normal.
  • What's with the GUI? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Frogbert (589961) <frogbert@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:50PM (#16653017)
    Can someone tell me what the deal is with WMP's GUI? I noticed around WMP 7 that they started breaking every Windows convention in the book. I stuck with Mplayer2 for a long time until I discovered Media player classic. Has the GUI improved? Does it blend in well with Vista's way of doing things and that's why its different? Or is it just poorly designed and confusingly implemented like I expect it is?
    • by XoXus (12014) on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:54PM (#16653065)
      I guess they're doing much the same thing that Apple did with iTunes on Mac OS X. It blends in, but it's full of widgets that simply aren't found anywhere in any other application.
    • by springbox (853816)
      I wouldn't complain about that. There are a lot of examples of applications on other OSes that don't use standard controls to build their interface. Besides, I like UIs that at least look interesting. This is the reason that I'm still using Winamp instead of Foobar2000.
      • by Lehk228 (705449)
        there are ways of making foobar look very interesting, you can move controls around and change what information is displayed, and how.
        foobar looks very simple but is probably one of the most moddable music players out there
    • by stickyc (38756)
      Agreed - it took me several dozen seconds to figure out how to play a CD I'd inserted via WMP. Then another 60 or so to figure out how to get rid of the visualization and make it a smaller profile player.
  • by quokkapox (847798) <quokkapox@gmail.com> on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:50PM (#16653019)
    If it's as bad as Windows Media Player 10, don't bother. What kind of crappy media player doesn't allow you to jump back and forth in the video/audio with keyboard controls? Whose stupid idea was it to make pause be CTRL-P? VLC's controls are the best, you can zip around with CTRL, ALT, or SHIFT- arrow keys to skip one minute, ten seconds, or one second respectively. Plus the space bar pauses and resumes.

    Or maybe you'd rather try to slide a tiny dark slider along a tiny dark track and skip around that way.

    Didn't *anyone* at microsoft take an HCI class in college?

  • Priorities (Score:3, Interesting)

    by debilo (612116) on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:56PM (#16653077)
    So I have to go through an annoying and possibly bogus WGA check and pray it doesn't result in a false positive if I want to download Windows Defender, you know, a security tool, but I they impose no such checks if I want to download a simple DRM-infested media player? Nice priorities there, Microsoft.
  • Get it for codecs (Score:2, Insightful)

    by GFree (853379)
    I might install it just to keep things up-to-date with the WMV support. I use Media Player Classic and VLC for most videos anyway, but I still installed previous versions of WMP so that the codecs it installed were complete, and I assume this will have newer codec versions too.

    In other words, it's a back-end update for me. It sure as shit doesn't have the functionality/ease of use that something like MPC has.
    • by RareButSeriousSideEf (968810) on Tuesday October 31, 2006 @01:39AM (#16653889) Homepage Journal
      Not only should you not get WMP11 intentionally, the fact that there's a RTM for it should make you think about turning off Windows Update (if you haven't already). At least make sure you have a disk-image backup before installing it, or you'll probably be kicking yourself down the road.

      From http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/play er/11/readme.aspx [microsoft.com]:
      "Windows Media Player 11 does not permit you to back up your media usage rights (previously known as licenses)."
      "Digital media files must be in stored in monitored folders for media sharing to work properly in Windows Media Player 11."
      "Content that is protected with media usage rights cannot be played in Windows Media Player 10 if a computer already has the Windows Media Format 11 Runtime installed."

      The following issue from the Beta release isn't mentioned in the official release notes, but the fact that it appeared in the beta indicates that MS was preparing their DRM platform for a new time-limit "feature" that can be applied to recorded TV on their Media Center products (at the request of broadcasters, of course):
      "Recorded TV shows that are protected with media usage rights, such as some TV content recorded on premium channels, will not play back after 3 days when Windows Media Player 11 Beta 2 for Windows XP is installed on Windows XP Media Center Edition 2005. No known workaround to resolve this issue exists at this time."

      At time of posting, this could still be found at:
      http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:Eah4zybQy4sJ:w ww.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/player/11/re adme.aspx [72.14.203.104]

      I'm not pulling that speculation out of my butt, either. They already add more restrictions to DVD playback than any other software or consumer DVD player does. DVD playback is prohibitied in Media Center Edition when your display device is set to > 640 x 480 resolution (as is the case for HDTV use):
      http://support.microsoft.com/kb/894323 [microsoft.com]

      Even today, as of Rollup 2, Media Center Edition renders recorded TV unplayable after two weeks when the broadcaster requests it:
      http://thegreenbutton.com/forums/rss.aspx?ForumID= 49&PostID=144193 [thegreenbutton.com]

      I would be extremely surprised if down the road a bit we don't discover that WMP11 is a trojan horse for a slew of previously unheard of content restrictions.

      By day I'm a developer on the Microsoft platform. By night I'm an XP Media Center Edition user who's scared & angry enough to invest research time I don't have into MythTV & [Ubuntu || Mandriva || Fedora]. As far as home usage goes, I'm sorry, but this former Redmond fanboy / apologist is done with MS.
  • OK, but ... (Score:4, Funny)

    by rlp (11898) on Monday October 30, 2006 @11:56PM (#16653091)
    I'll wait for the Linux version.
  • From TFA:
    Does anyone out there know of a media player that just plays MP3s, and Wav files without in-your-face advertising for the media companies?

    Its a fair question. Does anyone know of a simple player
    that just plays the music and gets the heck out of the way.
    It just keeps a list of your MP3s and will play and then minimise?

    And for you apple fanboys, itunes is no better than WMP in this regard.
    • by FSWKU (551325)
      It's a fair question. Does anyone know of a simple player
      that just plays the music and gets the heck out of the way.
      It just keeps a list of your MP3s and will play and then minimise?
      For Windows: Winamp
      For Linux: XMMS

      Sure, there's stuff out there like Amarok, SnackAmp, and whatnot. But the two I mentioned are by far the best at just playing music, storing playlists, and staying the hell out of the way.
      • by B2382F29 (742174)

        please don't advertise xmms, it is a piece of gtk1-shit, you just give fuel to linux-bashers ("see, it looks like shit and can't display unicode titles").

        As a drop-in replacement use Audacious [audacious-...player.org]

    • by paganizer (566360)
      winamp 2.91 for audio
      MediaPlayer Classic for Video
      can't really think of any other products needed.
      query: does the WMP11 break your recorded videos after 2 days, like the beta did?
    • by JustNiz (692889)
      winamp. Small, neat, full-featured. Non-intrusive.
    • Freeamp (Score:5, Informative)

      by Animats (122034) on Tuesday October 31, 2006 @12:34AM (#16653425) Homepage

      Freeamp, which is now called Zinf [zinf.org] due to complaints from the Winamp people, is what you want. No ads. No phoning home. No DRM. No nonsense. Open source. Runs on Windows and Linux.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Bacon Bits (926911)

      Foobar 2000 [foobar2000.org]

      It's FOSS, so the GUI is generally crap (it's as unitiuitive as other media players while still being ugly and unskinnable by default) but it's very lightweight and unobtrusive. It's been in development a long time and is quite mature.

      • by jmorris42 (1458) *
        > Foobar 2000

        > It's FOSS,....

        Dude! Go read the fscking website again and tell me it is FOSS! It is no more Free Software (or Open Source) than WMP is.

        From the license link:

        "Redistribution of modified binaries or modified setup packages allowed only with prior written permission of the author."

        The lack of downloadable source should have been your other big clue. It's freeware. As soon as the principle author tires it will stagnate, die and be forgotten.
        • I could have sworn it was BSD or Apache at some point. Meh.
        • by @madeus (24818)
          It's freeware. As soon as the principle author tires it will stagnate, die and be forgotten.

          Freeware is not distinct in that regard, plenty of half decent FOSS projects are abandoned and die too (despite interest in the software from the userbase).
    • by miro f (944325)
      I use rhythmbox on linux. it has every feature I want out of a media player and no feature I don't want.

      of course, if you're on windows it won't help ;)
    • by Frogbert (589961)
      Winamp 2.8 was the pinnacle of sound player technology. Anything more is just a waste of space.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by trezor (555230)

      I've found foobar2000 [foobar2000.org] to be very nice. It's a typical hacker-player that can be mod'ed to do anything you want it to, but the base is just a simple, lightweight music player with a library, superb format-support (except iTunes MPEG4 lossless) and otherwise no fuzz.

      I ditched Winamp5 for Foobar when I saw Winamp using 200MBs+ of RAM with my current music-library. Plus Winamp is shit and doesn't support unicode.
  • Is syncing fixed? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Mike_K (138858) on Tuesday October 31, 2006 @12:19AM (#16653289)
    I have a Sandisk Sansa e270. For some reason, I just don't want to buy an iPod Nano. Guess I'm just cheap? This is the next best thing - 6gb of flash, small, similar interface, half the price.

    I used to use WMP10 to sync my files. It wasn't the most convenient method, but it beat doing the sync by turning the Sansa into a USB drive (it reboots forever, updating some databases). Selecting which files to sync up was fairly simple, and the syncing was fast. The biggest complaint I had was that it didn't really understand the concept of syncing on multiple computers (home and office). One has to become the main computer and the other... I dunno.

    I installed the WMP11 beta, because I was hoping that that part of syncing would have been fixed. Well, I regret that decision now. Luckily, I'm going to reinstall this computer soon anyway.

    Basically, syncing is incredibly slow now, the interface much less intuitive and for some reason it keeps uploading copies of the same files. I gave up on getting that sync right. I'm downloading the final version, I'll install it probably tomorrow.

    m
    • by JFMulder (59706)
      I have the same Sansa model as you (270, 6 gigs, love it!) and I've been frustrated with syncing it with WMP11Beta too. Basically, everytime I would unplug it and plug it back in, WMP would say that there was no media on the device and that I could start filing it up, even tough it reported that the Sansa has only like 50 megs left on it. When I use Yahoo's software (god forbid... the Interface is horrible, but at least it works), it properly scans my Sansa and everything. I haven't trying syncing yet becau
    • So I installed it tonight, and after a reboot tried syncing. For some reason, I had a couple of bad crashes. Might be the fact that there is also a new firmware available and the update software was interfering with WMP11. So I installed the update and now it all works!

      The files that I copied onto the Sansa were correctly recognized and marked as "already on device". The rest of them copied very very quickly. Adding more files to the list works exactly as it should. It didn't remove any files or anything li
  • What's up with the made up terms like 'Reverse sync', 'gas gauge', 'visual navigation' to describe what are very basic features.

    Should we start applying them to general computer use too?

    'Hey Bob, I need you to reverse sync that report to my computer, so you don't run out of gas, check the gas gauge, and you'll receive a great sync experience.'

  • Winamp? Hello? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by NineNine (235196) on Tuesday October 31, 2006 @12:22AM (#16653315)
    Sorry, but I think that the PC media player was perfected win Winamp 2.8. Literally. I think it's about as easy to use and powerful as you can ever get. iTunes is impossibly bloated and buggy. Windows Media Player is the most confusing interface I could ever imagine. Winamp is tiny, very powerful (if you want it to be), and *very* easy to use. I don't care how many shiny buttons MS MP and ITunes add, they both just get continueally worse with every version (and admittedly, so did the early Winamp 5.x versions). And really, how many different possible ways do you need to play music? How many iterations of "play" ans "stop" can there possibly be?
    • by strider44 (650833)
      I used to think that until I tried Amarok. It took a little getting used to (about 10 mins) but now a lack of a good enough player on Windows now is another reason I don't want to go back. Amarok is the biggest reason I want kdelib for Windows.

      That said, if anyone *does* know of a player as good as Amarok on Windows then I'll be *very* interested.
      • by xtracto (837672)
        Amarok is a little piece of crap that crashes every 5 minutes along with whatever sound system you use (alsa, esd, etc, via xine engine or other).

        I liked the idea and the nice features as lyrics and all that, but it is completely unusable at least for Ubuntu 6.06 (no I wont upgrade to 6.10 after reading theres a 33% chance to get my system ruined).

        I use Xmms all the time, it is not as fancy as amarok or all that but it just works.
        • by strider44 (650833)
          Perhaps if it crashes every five minutes it's not the fault of Amarok but the fault of the sound system, your sound card or the software you're using alongside it. I use amarok on debian unstable and have been for years (since before its 1.0 days...) and have never *ever* actually had it crash. I use the xine engine. I've also never had it crash on Ubuntu. Not on normal or Kubuntu, not on Dapper, Breezy or Edgy (I used it as my main system for a while and I use it for my laptop now).

          In other words, i
    • by dcapel (913969)
      Winamp was kinda the crux of media players; It was one of the last good ones that was partially just a player and partially a music manager. Some programs were taken to the extreme of being just a player (mpg123 anyone?), while other were focused more on the cohesive collection management in the program (useful when you have 10k songs).

      Personally, [mpg|ogg|flac]123 is my favorite player, while Amarok is my favorite collection manager.
    • by Medgur (172679)
      One app: foobar 2000
    • by Kaenneth (82978)
      Last time I tried to install Winamp, the installation failed because Windows media Player wasn't installed...

      I had stopped using it previously because it didn't seem to like my Dual Core machine, and kept crashing out, I was trying to install a newer version to see it that was fixed...
      • Sounds more like a problem with your system than winamp, i've got a dual core system here and I can't even remember the last time winamp crashed on me.
        As to windows media player, I think on installation all it requires is you have the latest windows media codecs installed, not the player itself.
    • In my experience Winamp5 sucks incredible amounts of memory when you have a decent music library. I'm talking over 200 megabytes just to have a music player running. Hint: Check VM usage and Peak memory usage aside from the seemingly compete "memory usage" in task manager.

      Not to mention Winamp still doesn't do unicode. Basicly, the developers said they couldn't add unicode support without breaking the plugins back in the 2.0 days. Then they changed the model, broke the plugins and still refused to add u

  • WMP (Score:3, Interesting)

    by JustNiz (692889) on Tuesday October 31, 2006 @12:32AM (#16653405)
    Why is it microsoft can't make a gui that doesn't take more screen space than the actual content?
    • by kjart (941720)

      Why is it microsoft can't make a gui that doesn't take more screen space than the actual content?

      FYI, you can actually minimize WMP to be a set of buttons on the taskbar - it's actually pretty neat. If I didn't have Foobar that's probably what I would use.

  • .ogg anyone? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by bogaboga (793279) on Tuesday October 31, 2006 @01:03AM (#16653631)
    Can anyone tell me whether this new version will play .ogg files by default? If not where can one grab a plug-in? Thanx.
  • How about - in the link about the new features - actually talking about the new features? Instead of just a blogger bashing Media Player?

    How about someone try it out and see if the "audio fingerprinting" works? That seems like a VERY useful feature, IMO!
  • I just tried installing the new media player, and i want to remove it before it causes any more damage. It seemed to want to eat all the metadata tags from my mp3 files and replace it with something else. For some reason, it wants to change all the artist and title info from a correctly labeled Al Green album and wants to replace it with Connie Francis. If i relabel it correctly and have it rescan the files it tries to label it incorrectly again, even though i have the option to only add missing informat
  • Can they now? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by knewter (62953)
    I can certainly download something that claim to be a copy of WMP11, but all I get is a pop-up complaining about WGA. Now, mind, I've got a license of windows. I can't find it. So I downloaded Windows XP. HELO Fair Use. Of course MS doesn't want me to see Media Player 11 because other people have stolen Windows from them.

    In fairness, let me say that I have one Windows machine, and it exists almost entirely for Yahoo Music Player streaming into my living room, and for Counter-Strike on occasion. My oth
  • by Crabbyass (867531) on Tuesday October 31, 2006 @02:14AM (#16654059)
    I consider myself pretty adept at figuring out things for myself, especially when it comes to new software, especially when it comes to audio software. After a short ammount of time, I have been able to get advanced, professional audio programs up and running (mind you, on a basic level), even with such daunting software as Pro Tools, Cubase, Sibelius, Finale, etc.

    So I downloaded WMP11, and I suddenly found myself staring at the screen, not having a friggin' clue where to even begin. It was literally the first time I felt like I had been stumped by a seemingly simplistic piece of software. Yes, there were all sorts of pretty buttons, some of which I REEEEEEEALY wanted to press - but all I actually wanted to do was play some fucking Zeppelin. Clicking on those fancy buttons only made things worse...I got lost and actually gave up. This has to be the worst GUI I have ever seen. I can't WAIT for my father to download this, a man who has to be reminded every time he touches the remote to press the CBL button, or he'll change the channel on the TV rather than the Cable Box.

    It brought back a memory I thought I had repressed, when after almost 20 years of piano training, I began playing the organ which includes a four-octave keyboard to be played by your feet. I felt like a 5 year old all over again, my co-ordination just vanishing. My ego took a huge beating then, and it's taken another one just now.

    I stick with iTunes because I like the "browser", which filters the songs by Genre, then Artist, then album. Yes, I know it's bloated, but I've managed to forgive them for that. Meanwhile, I found JetAudio to be a pretty good plyaer, and am downloading Media Player Classic as I type.

    I'm still searching for the one player that "gets it right". Any more ideas? Send'em my way...
    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by locokamil (850008)
      Agree with you 100%. Just downloaded it and have been playing around with it for the last 20 minutes or so. First, the bad:
      • Confusing interface to start with
      • Doesn't quite fit in with the rest of XP.

      The organization nightmare you can pretty much sidestep by simply hitting "Organize By Song"-- it'll just revert to what is basically the WMP10 organization scheme that we've all come to love and/or hate. The GUI problem is understandable, given that I am running XP in classic mode. I'll give it this though: it'll

    • That's what Bender said in the Robo-Were-Car episode of Futurama, the episode tonight. And ironically, it's true today!
  • I'm not a microsoft fanboy at all but WMP11 is a hell of a lot better than your article makes out, and certainly a lot better than WMP10. Stop with the bias already! Is it too hard for Slashdot to be unbiased about product??? Honestly, I've enjoyed Slashdot in the past, but it really sucks quality wise at the moment.
  • this version contains the latest in Microsoft DRM software. Interested parties can download a free copy

    Why does that sound so much like "here, take a free sniff of this crack line" to me?
  • Is it just me? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Qbertino (265505) on Tuesday October 31, 2006 @03:50AM (#16654437)
    Is it just me or do other people also consider the WMP one of the shittiest pieces of Bundleware we still have to put up with? A bloated memory and performance hog, long outrun by it's free and shareware equivalents, a relic of the nineties with features bolted on left, right and center and a performance as bad as ever, despite computer power having increased ten-fold since back in the days.
    WinAmp and VLC could do things years ago that this sorry excuse of 'convienienceware' will ever be able to do. No?
    • by Tim C (15259)
      A bloated memory and performance hog

      Compared to what, iTunes with its service and executable that run whether iTunes itself is running or not?

      a performance as bad as ever, despite computer power having increased ten-fold since back in the days.

      I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at here. In an extremely unscientific test, I just double-clicked an mp3 file and timed how long it took WMP to start up and start playing it. Perhaps sub-2 seconds is too slow for you, but that's fine for me. CPU usage is hov
    • by glwtta (532858)
      WinAmp and VLC could do things years ago that this sorry excuse of 'convienienceware' will ever be able to do. No?

      By far, my favorite video player is Windows Media Player 6 - it's tiny, does just what it's supposed to, and nothing else. Of course ffmpeg does all the heavy lifting, but WMP6 just has a very clean and snappy interface.

      I tried VLC - its interface is somewhat haphazard, but more annoyingly, extremely slow and unresponsive (plus its scaling looks kinda weird, but that could be just me).
      • by ardor (673957)
        So, while WMP7+ is horrid, horrid software, I wouldn't say that the clear winner on Windows is a Free alternative.

        It is: search for Media Player Classic, Real Alternative, Quicktime Alternative.
        Media Player Classic is an excellent player in an improved WMP6-style. Very responsive, slick interface, extensive functionality. Real & Quicktime Alternative are MPC-backends for playing Real/Quicktime streams *without* the need for Real and/or Quicktime player. These backends do not play all rm/mov files, but m
  • by Bob[Bob] (60151) on Tuesday October 31, 2006 @08:35AM (#16655985) Journal
    WMP11 does have at least one useful feature, which is that it will stream video to an Xbox 360... up till now you'd need to have a Windows Media Centre to do this.

Assembly language experience is [important] for the maturity and understanding of how computers work that it provides. -- D. Gries

Working...