Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Media Open Source Software Windows Technology

VLC Running Kickstarter Campaign To Fund Native Windows 8 App 252

Posted by Soulskill
from the spreading-the-good-word dept.
New submitter aaron44126 writes "Some VLC developers have launched a Kickstarter campaign to fund the development of a native port of VLC as a Windows 8 app. The goal is to create an app with a UI that fits into the rest of the Windows 8 ecosystem that supports the playback of all of the types of files that VLC already supports. Playback of optical media (DVD/VCD/BD) is also on the list. They hope to use as much existing code as possible while doing whatever necessary to get VLC running in the 'Metro' environment and meet Microsoft's requirements for distribution through the Windows Store. Porting to ARM so that it can run on Windows RT devices will happen after the Windows 8 app is complete. The campaign has actually been going on for almost two weeks but they published their first update yesterday, in which they announced their intent to produce a Windows Phone 8 port as well."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

VLC Running Kickstarter Campaign To Fund Native Windows 8 App

Comments Filter:
  • Win 8 (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @10:37AM (#42250294)

    I'm not going to contribute. Not because I don't like VLC, I do. But because I don't support windows 8.

    • Re:Win 8 (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Seumas (6865) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @10:55AM (#42250441)

      My thought, exactly. I saw it almost immediately after it went life. I've backed more than 400 crowd-funded projects [goo.gl]. I dig VLC. I use VLC all the time. I understand the desire to spread VLC to everyone, everywhere. However, I can't bring myself to chip in even a few bucks to a project that just encourages Windows 8 and the Windows 8-style environment and presentation, which I'd like to see die as soon as possible, so they'll have more reason to get their sanity back for Windows 9, sooner.

      Maybe I'm being petulant, but at least I'm not contributing to Windows 8.

      • Re:Win 8 (Score:5, Funny)

        by Jeremiah Cornelius (137) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:18AM (#42250631) Homepage Journal

        Let's organise a kickstarter to pay VLC to NOT develop for Windows 8.

        I wonder if there's been anything like that before? Crowdsourced compensation for dropping an opportunity?

        • Nice and fast. But those full-screen, pastel-colored apps? No thanks. Don't bother, VLC. "How do I avoid these full-screen programs" is the first question I get when I'm helping someone with a new Windows 8 laptop.
          • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward

            I've been running Win8 for months now. I use classic shell and the most I see out of the tile interface is to click desktop.

            To me it looks like Win 7 with some improvements under the hood. I haven't had any trouble with it and I don't really get why people hate the built-in apps that they never have to see or use. After a while the complaints just start to look like "I don't like things that are different."

          • by X0563511 (793323)

            What do you offer up when they ask that?

            • The Windows 8 "native" apps are for things like email, media center, chat. I just show the new users how to access the same programs they had worked with previously on the Windows 7 desktop, or tell them to use their webmail client for email and chat. I would install VLC on the desktop for anyone who wanted to run media anyway. The full screen apps just seem too restrictive, as that's not really how the work flow is usually set up on a laptop. Even my Chromebook, which is "just a browser" (actually a specia
          • Re:Windows 8 is OK (Score:5, Insightful)

            by vux984 (928602) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @02:51PM (#42252867)

            "How do I avoid these full-screen programs" is the first question I get when I'm helping someone with a new Windows 8 laptop.

            And how do I get this video to play full screen without all the controls and bars and menus is the first question I get when I'm helping someone playback movies with VLC.

            Personally I'd love a VLC app for windows 8, which I'm using on my HTPC right now, where the large pastel tiles etc are a good user interface.

            I find it odd that the pro-linux crowd here is all about user choice... a thousand distros with mix and match desktops so everyone can have exactly what they want... but god forbid VLC release a windows 8 app that they don't even have to use.

      • by bondsbw (888959)

        so they'll have more reason to get their sanity back for Windows 9, sooner.

        Metro-style apps won't be going away. They will almost surely work better and integrate better over time. But Microsoft has committed its future to supporting tablets, phones, and PCs using the same operating system.

        If you are hoping Windows 9 will be Windows 7 with more polish, you are dreaming of something that will never happen.

      • by Patch86 (1465427)

        Notable, perhaps, that the Kickstarter campaign is almost halfway through its allotted time, and has raised less than half the required funds. For a project as huge and well supported as VLC, £40,000 should be easy. Maybe a Slashdot story will give them a boost (probably the reason it was submitted in the first place), but that's hardly certain considering the Slashdot crowd's opinion of "Metro" apps.

        Looking at its progress, it seems like it achieved almost all of its current funding on day one, stagn

    • by poetmatt (793785)

      that was the first thing I was thinking as well - this isn't even a benefit for anyone other than those in windows 8. Also, GPL (even V2) in windows for things that go in the actual windows store seems pretty much impossible.

    • by Sir_Sri (199544)

      This. A million times this.

      There two basic things wrong with the VLC plan.

      First, as a tech community we should not, in any way, be going along with turning Windows into a closed platform/walled garden/ whatever you want to call it. This 'you must receive MS approval' bullshit cannot and should not be supported. Absolutely no one who makes any popular software should be seeking approval from microsoft, ever. If you want to be an abused spouse Apple has room.

      Secondly. Even if Windows 8 was an open platfo

  • Source... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Niedi (1335165) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @10:39AM (#42250304)
    What is the situation with the source/GPL?
    "Any code touching the user interface created within this endeavor will be licensed under the GNU General Public License Version 2 or later (GPLv2+), possibly with an exception for the Windows Store if needed."
    I remember vaguely that there once was a VLC for iOS around before some internal debate about whether or not this sort of port was acceptable with the GPL caused apple to remove it. Exception for Windows Store? How should that work out then?
    • by jythie (914043)
      I had forgotten about that drama.... yeah, I imagine some of the same issues could come into play with the Win8 version unless they got with LGPL instead.. though it sounds like they are going with a 'behaves like LGPL in places where GPL compatibility issues stop us from posting to the store.'... which.. can they even do?
      • by Rich0 (548339)

        'behaves like LGPL in places where GPL compatibility issues stop us from posting to the store.'... which.. can they even do?

        They can do that for new code, or for code they hold the copyright to. They'd have to make up a new license. Whether LGPL is sufficient might be questionable.

        They would not be able to distribute GPL code linked or embedded in their software for which they do not own copyright.

        • by jythie (914043)
          The more that I think about it, the less likely I find that they can actually do this. Even with new code, they are linking to existing GPL code. Looking at their updates it appears they are trying to move over to LGPL but are not there yet, so the whole package is still GPL... thus I do not believe they can actually make a 'Windows Store' exception any more then they could have made an 'Apple Store' exception.. and looking at how the FSF treated the GNU Go port, even if the VLC team wants to do so, other
        • by jythie (914043)
          Hrm. Reread some of the drama... multiple developers (the ones who were pissed at being in the iOS store) have explicitly said they would not allow the project to re-lisence under LGPL anyway. So unless their code is being ripped out and replaced....
    • by Hatta (162192)

      VLC was removed from the Apple store because Apple's TOS are incompatible with the GPL. Whether it's appropriate on the Windows store depends on Microsoft.

    • by BitZtream (692029)

      There is absolutely nothing that prevents a GPLv2 application from showing up on the Apple iOS store other than 'I don't want my app there!!@#!@%#!@#%'

      GPLv3 code wouldnt' be able to be posted at all as it would required Apple/MS to give away their encryption/signing keys, which isn't going to happen.

      VLC came off the app store because one of the developers raised a stink and Apple didn't want to deal with him being a douche.

      You can publish VLC on the App store yourself as long as you also distribute the sour

      • by jythie (914043)
        While the person was legally entitled to do what they did.... yeah, they were a douche. As far a I can tell they did it specifically because they wanted users off iOS and onto Android.. so utilizing a legal technicality to try to force people onto a platform they liked better.
      • Re:Source... (Score:5, Informative)

        by hweimer (709734) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:25AM (#42250695) Homepage

        You can publish VLC on the App store yourself as long as you also distribute the source as it is GPLv2 which doesnt' do any silly things that prevent it from being put there.

        Wrong [fsf.org].

      • Apple removed it because legally the developer has the right whatever his intentions. This is one problem with code from multiple contributors like open source in a gardened wall ecosystem.
    • by caseih (160668)

      It's very simple. Since the VLC developers own the copyright on their code (for this Windows 8 version), and presumably would require all contributors to turn over copyright of patches to them, then they can license it however they want. They are promising to dual-license it, meaning the GPLv2+ for anyone that wants it, and some "proprietary" license for the version downloaded from the app store. I'm sure MS will find some excuse to say this violates the spirit of their app store licensing rules, but fro

    • Re:Source... (Score:4, Informative)

      by shutdown -p now (807394) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @02:57PM (#42252925) Journal

      Unlike iOS app store developer agreement, the one for Windows Store [microsoft.com] has an explicit exemption for OSI-approved FOSS licenses, including GPL:

      Your license terms must also not conflict with the Standard Application License Terms, in any way, except if you include FOSS, your license terms may conflict with the limitations set forth in Section 3 of those Terms, but only to the extent required by the FOSS that you use. "FOSS" means any software licensed under an Open Source Initiative Approved License.

      And section 3 is as follows:

      3. SCOPE OF LICENSE. The application is licensed, not sold. This agreement only gives you some rights to use the application. Application developer reserves all other rights. Unless applicable law gives you more rights despite this limitation, you may use the application only as expressly permitted in this agreement. You may not work around any technical limitations in the application; reverse engineer, decompile or disassemble the application, except and only to the extent that applicable law expressly permits, despite this limitation; make more copies of the application than specified in this agreement or allowed by applicable law, despite this limitation; publish or otherwise make the application available for others to copy; or rent, lease or lend the application.

      So I don't think there's any issues with it being in the store. I mean, it would still be in a walled garden, but at that point, with the clause above rescinded, it would be purely a technical limitation that users can legally work around if they can, not a legal one.

  • Have Microsoft Pay (Score:4, Interesting)

    by tvlinux (867035) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @10:47AM (#42250367)
    Why would any sane person donate to have VLC ported to Windows8? If MS wants windows8 to succeed have them pay for the development.
    • If Microsoft paid them, wouldn't other major software brands want funding to port to Windows 8 too? And after that, what if other OSes wanted popular software ported to their platform? Sets a terrible precedent IMO.

      However, they could either A) make a substantial anonymous donation to the Kickstarter fund or B) outright buy VLC and internalize the development team.
  • yeah right (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Like I would give money to improve that POS OS.

  • a VLC streamer app that lets me stream videos to my iOS devices from my home PCs. I'm sure it's possible through some technical hacks, but the VLC server that I have right now by default works or is said to work that I can only stream on my local network.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Why?

    Oh I see. The kickstarter money is compensation for the people that try to use VLC on Windows 8.

  • I am a big fan of VLC. I've been using Linux for about 10 years and when other things fail to play videos, VLC succeeds.

    When I am on a Windows box, there is plenty of software to play anything.

    What benefit is there, for end users, for porting VLC to Windows?

    • I'm using VLC on Windows 7 right now - because I'm at work. I use it at home on linux and mac boxes.

      I prefer it to any other media player I've seen on windows. I'm not a fan of windows 8 by any means, but it's obvious why someone would want it there.

    • Re:Why? (Score:5, Informative)

      by leuk_he (194174) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:17AM (#42250609) Homepage Journal

      There are 100 media players on windows. 97 of them depend on the decoding drivers of mediaplayer to decode videos. So if some video is dong badly ( Bad image quality/ high cpu usage/ unsupported file type), then your options to play that file become limited. VLC has all the demuxers and video decoders build -in , so that is one of your options left then.

    • by Ellis D. Tripp (755736) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:17AM (#42250621) Homepage

      It plays anything I have thrown at it, takes up less resources and disc space, and isn't constantly loading updates and security patches.

    • by Seumas (6865)

      Okay, wait . . . what? VLC is already ported to Windows. People have been using it on Windows for years (and there really isn't anything comparable on Windows, Linux, or OSX in my experience). I'm pretty certain it works on Windows 8, too. They're just looking to "Metro-ify" it so it buys-into the whole Windows 8 manner of using apps and the whole Windows 8/Metro interface and design. As well as making it available through the Microsoft App Store thing.

      So, even less reason for me to feel compelled to donate

  • Not for me (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kelemvor4 (1980226) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @10:54AM (#42250435)
    I'm a long time user of VLC. I use it on windows 8 currently. I don't want to see a metro version because metro apps are full screen only, and that's not for me. The regular VLC works just fine in win8 so basically they're raising money to more or less create a VLC skin...

    On the other hand it could end up being the first metro app that's worth a flip. Every one I've tried so far has serious technical problems (for example Netflix and Skype).

    As an aside, it's worth noting that even MS doesn't take metro seriously when it comes to actually selling applications. Office 2013 apps are desktop mode. Visio 2013 is desktop mode. Visual Studio 2012 is desktop mode. See a pattern here?
    • by Trintech (1137007)

      The regular VLC works just fine in win8 so basically they're raising money to more or less create a VLC skin...

      If you read the kickstarter page, you will see it is much more than a skin for windows 8. They are planning a native ARM port for tablets as well and, as they note on the page, there is currently no toolchain available that supports all the feature they need for that port so it will be quite a bit of work. Plus, they also expect to run into problems with Windows RT's new sandboxing system.

    • Re:Not for me (Score:4, Insightful)

      by gparent (1242548) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:54AM (#42250983)

      I'm a long time user of VLC. I use it on windows 8 currently. I don't want to see a metro version because metro apps are full screen only, and that's not for me. The regular VLC works just fine in win8 so basically they're raising money to more or less create a VLC skin...

      There's obviously a market for Windows 8 apps, and over 1200 people currently want that app to be produced. I do agree with you that Win8 apps shouldn't -replace- regular apps, but they have their (limited) use. For instance, I hardly ever use my video player non-fullscreen, so I can see the idea here.

      This is a great example of Open Source working as intended. Some people want a feature, they realize people may not work for free for it, and funds are raised so those interested can be the ones giving the money to get it produced. Then, once it's done, the entire world benefits from the software and its source code.

      I don't even use VLC, but even if I hate Windows 8 as much as the next guy (yes, I tested it..), I can't see anything wrong with this.

      • by Carrot007 (37198)

        > For instance, I hardly ever use my video player non-fullscreen, so I can see the idea here.

        This has got me thinking.

        Can someone please clarify something for me?

        Can you run a "metro" all (for instance VLC) on one screen and run the desktop and associated apps on another. I usually have vlc full screen, but on a second monitor.

    • Re:Not for me (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Barlo_Mung_42 (411228) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @12:11PM (#42251119) Homepage

      I would really like to have a metro version that I can snap to the side while working on other things. So yeah, I'll kick in a few bucks.
      Oh, and I'd also like to have the RT version to run on my Surface.

    • How is it that Ms can tell dev's that they are not allowed to use system 32 libraries on metro and rt but they do so themselves? Didn't. They get in trouble for using secret api's to make office better than the competitors products (word perfect) back in the anti trust suits? If it was an illegal anticompetative abuse of monopoly then why is it okay now?

    • I use it on windows 8 currently. I don't want to see a metro version because metro apps are full screen only, and that's not for me. The regular VLC works just fine in win8 so basically they're raising money to more or less create a VLC skin...

      You forget about ARM tablets running Windows RT. The only thing that'll run there is the Metro version, since you can't install third-party desktop apps on them.

  • Useful Software (Score:4, Informative)

    by AnotherAnonymousUser (972204) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @10:58AM (#42250465)
    VLC is one of those must-haves on any newly reformatted system. They've done an excellent job of making a player that Just Works, for every single format I could encounter in the field. I use it as a simple video player, but in the many years that I've been using it, I've only encountered one format ever that even VLC threw up its hands and refused to play. They're constantly updating performance, threading capability, offering all kinds of new features and options well beyond what I use VLC for. Since Windows stopped bundling a lot of DVD software natively, they've been the go-to software of choice for close to a decade, and they deserve to have their efforts and their project rewarded with solid backing, since they've managed to navigate through the morass of codecs and incompatible formats, while remaining lightweight, intuitive, and universally functional. Good luck guys =)!
    • by jader3rd (2222716)

      Since Windows stopped bundling a lot of DVD software natively, they've been the go-to software of choice for close to a decade

      I'm having trouble following you here. Windows first put DVD codecs into Windows Vista (released Jan 2007). Windows stopped putting codecs in Windows 8 (released Oct 2012). Given that it isn't 2022, I find it hard to follow that the reason VLC has been the go-to choice for close to a decade is because Windows stopped bundling DVD software for about two months.

      • It's two seperate thoughts, VLC has been the go-to software of choice for close to a decade (source: anecdotal including my own opinion, ymmv). That Windows stopped putting codecs in Windows 8 (circa Oct 2012) leads to AnotherAnonymousUser's point that those who rely on VLC for convenience can continue to rely on VLC for convenience.
    • What about Media Player Classic Home Cinema [sourceforge.net]? I use both. I use MPC-HC more than VLC. Both are great.

      • Re:MPC-HC! (Score:4, Insightful)

        by gman003 (1693318) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @12:19PM (#42251197)

        Both are indeed great.

        Normally, I prefer MPC. It's faster and lighter, or at least it feels like it. But VLC has a few features MPC doesn't:

        * Streaming. The main thing I used VLC for was streaming to an AirPort without installing iTunes, because iTunes is evil. A recent update unfortunately broke this, but I haven't checked if they fixed recently.
        * Blu-Ray. There's probably some way to do this in MPC, but I can't figure it out.

        Both of them are in my "immediate install" pack, along with other useful things like Notepad++ and 7zip. I wonder how hard it would be to get Microsoft to just bundle them in. It's not like Notepad makes them much money.

  • No. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ledow (319597) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:13AM (#42250579) Homepage

    1) Fix VLC first. There are still a lot of outstanding issues and I encounter DVD's every day that PowerDVD will play but VLC will just crash on. Usually, literally, in the first moments. We're not talking obscure movies, either, but current new DVD releases.

    I remember an almighty-long wait for VLC to put back in functionality to ignore keyboard hotkeys after committing code that made pressing the volume button on your computer adjust both system volume and VLC volume and it was possible to get to a state where it was impossible to unmute both. The unofficial patch that circulated took forever to make its way into the client stables.

    I also get a lot of random crashes and hangs when viewing content that, after killing the process, will work fine. I also have found it almost impossible to stream things properly without having to know a myriad technical details about what I'm streaming from / to, a large part of which VLC could automate for me. I spent an hour yesterday figuring out the command-line (yep, I gave up on the GUI quite quickly after several tests resulted in nothing) to stream my desktop (via VLC's built-in "screen" source) and local Stereo Mix audio to a network-accessible stream to a VLC player on a remote machine. I gave up in the end and did things another way.

    Don't get me started on things like DVD navigation (easy to "go in circles" on a lot of DVD menus), obscure formats that still error, playlist management, etc. Do I hate VLC? No, it's the only media player I install and one of the first things I do on any fresh machine, and I often give people Portable VLC for when they just want to play an obscure video file once (e.g. CCTV recordings, etc.). Which makes it even MORE annoying that these things are still present.

    2) VLC works on Windows 8. What you mean is "Metro", and nobody cares about that.

    3) The delivery promises are rubbish. I wouldn't touch it even if it was something I wanted - they don't even know if the license is compatible, the toolchain can exist, the app would ever be accepted, the API's exposed are enough, or whether the performance wouldn't suffer atrociously - but the kickstarter doesn't mean you'll get your money back if they can't.

    You could pay a fortune, still not see any app, and not see any money back. (Some would say that's par-for-the-course on Kickstarter, but if you use your brain and support only those people who make particular promises and are likely to deliver on them, it's no worse than doing the same anywhere else).

    Sorry, I'd rather donate GBP20 to VLC itself and get some of my bugbears fixed, thanks. Still can't quite believe that I can pretty reliably crash the client just by turning on certain visualisations when I get *ZERO* problems in any other program, media-player, game or anything else.

    • Re:No. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by blueg3 (192743) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:33AM (#42250757)

      2) VLC works on Windows 8. What you mean is "Metro", and nobody cares about that.

      Ostensibly, almost 1200 people care about it so far.

      • by Patch86 (1465427)

        Would that be the same 1200 people who have bought and are enjoying using Windows 8 so far?

    • by gravis777 (123605)

      I don't see many of the issues you are complaining about. I am not saying they don't exist, I've just never seen them. I have seen a couple of obscure codecs that VLC doesn't work, but they play just fine in Media Player with KLite installed. I've never seen the point of network streaming with VLC - I either share the folder or use Windows Media Center to share the folders, and pull up the files on my laptop or XBox. Seems to be much less trouble. Menu support for DVDs does suck, but I normally have VLC set

    • by Ksevio (865461)
      Why don't you start a kickstarter to fix those issues then?
  • by Dunge (922521) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:29AM (#42250727)
    Windows8 desktop is still the same old desktop and works just fine. Metro applications are useless.
  • by PCM2 (4486) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:33AM (#42250761) Homepage

    I'm somewhat familiar with the terms and conditions involved w/Windows Store apps, and my first reaction was, "Is this even possible?"

    Assuming you think having VLC run in TIFKAM (The Interface Formerly Known As Metro) is an important/necessary thing (I guess some people want that), they're talking about having people pledge thousands of dollars for what is essentially a shot in the dark. The Kickstarter page lists many of my own concerns:

    A goal of this port is the inclusion in the Windows Store. While we think it is feasible, there is a significant number of forbidden API calls, so in theory, VLC for Windows 8 might not be applicable for the store. We will do our best to achieve a successful publication on the store, so side loading isn't needed.
    VLC for Windows 8 will be licensed under both the GPLv2+ and the LGPL2.1+ depending on the respective code functionality. It is still subject to thorough checks whether these licenses are compatible with the Windows Store's terms of service. Publication on the store depends on the results of this investigation.

    Note that the new "official" name for TIFKAM apps is "Windows Store Apps." You're meant to load them from the Windows Store. That's supposed to be part of what makes TIFKAM apps "so great." All of the apps in the Windows Store have been vetted by Microsoft, thus they're guaranteed to have met a lot of conditions. An app that doesn't meet these conditions doesn't get to be in the Store.

    These conditions include UI and performance standards. From what I've seen of the VLC UI, there is no way that it will be accepted by Microsoft if it wants to include all of its current features and settings. Even apps that do comply seem to have a hard time [theregister.co.uk] getting approved. The VLC guys say they're using "forbidden API calls" -- forget about it. They will not get that app running on Windows RT, and I doubt there's a snowball's chance in hell of getting it approved for the Windows Store.

    No approval, no Windows Store. No Windows Store, no Windows Store app. There are ways to sideload TIFKAM apps, but they're designed for enterprise customers. As I understand it, to make it possible to sideload apps on a Windows 8 machine, you need to install a special product key on each client machine to allow that. Regular customers can't sideload apps -- or, if there's a way to do it, it involves some elaborate hack.

    So in a nutshell, if the VLC group can't get its TIFKAM app into the Windows Store, it's basically dead in the water. They can develop it, but the only people who will be able to deploy it will be the 5% of users who are willing to do whatever ugly, dangerous hacks are necessary to sideload apps onto their Windows 8 machines. Microsoft has cautioned that it might get even harder to sideload apps in future versions of Windows, too.

    So remind me again what we're paying for, here? For a total blind gamble?

  • They see a vulnerable market segment of enthusiastic users who are grasping at straws, and they know they can rake in a little cash from it. It's smart, and it will probably work out pretty well. Knowing VLC's cross-platform habit, I'm imagining the work that comes out of this will benefit other phone/tablet platforms that use metro-like mechanics more effectively than windows 8...ahem...android/ios.
  • by JDG1980 (2438906) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:50AM (#42250939)

    I don't see how this helps average Windows users in any way. Most people who have a choice will be staying with Windows 7, and even those who are stuck with Windows 8 for whatever reason can still run VLC just fine on the Desktop. (Like all other x86 software it won't run on WinRT, but WinRT is dead on arrival.) Metro needs to be killed quickly, and it's baffling as to why an open source project would try to prop it up.

    If VLC wants to fund a Kickstarter, putting more resources into Blu-Ray menu support would be a much better choice. This is one thing that open-source software still can't do, and is one of the remaining barriers to a truly competitive open-source media player.

    • by 21mhz (443080)

      I don't see how this helps average Windows users in any way. Most people who have a choice will be staying with Windows 7, and even those who are stuck with Windows 8 for whatever reason can still run VLC just fine on the Desktop. (Like all other x86 software it won't run on WinRT, but WinRT is dead on arrival.) Metro needs to be killed quickly, and it's baffling as to why an open source project would try to prop it up.

      You are delusional. VLC is popular because it's a free player available on Windows that Just Plays Anything. On open source platforms, there are many others. Without it, Metro users will just use something else. Yes, there will be Metro users regardless of you and your ridiculous intent to kill it.

      If VLC wants to fund a Kickstarter, putting more resources into Blu-Ray menu support would be a much better choice.

      You mean like paying royalties to whoever owns the patents?

  • by roc97007 (608802) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:54AM (#42250971) Journal

    ...and I wish them the best, really, but as I won't be using Windows 8 either at home or at work, I don't see how this affects me.

  • Why? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by michealPW (1294746) on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @12:00PM (#42251025)
    This has never made any sense to me whatsoever

    Why do FOSS developers waste their time porting their hard work to Windows, of all platforms? Windows use have access to anything they want whereas Linux and UNIX-like users do not. Even if they wanted the proprietary crap offered to Windows users, in many cases it's not an option for us.

    So... Lets make Windows even more appealing by porting the good FOSS applications to Windows? Brilliant...

    Here's a crazy idea.. Why don't we just work on making VLC better for the Linux users? You know, it's firefox pluggin is a unkept POS... But yea, lets divert our attention to porting to Windows 8 (rolls eyes)
    • by Microlith (54737)

      Why do FOSS developers waste their time porting their hard work to Windows, of all platforms?

      FOSS in more places is good, regardless. Proving out that there are good FOSS applications, and getting people using them, reduces the barriers to transitioning to a FOSS platform in time.

      Why don't we just work on making VLC better for the Linux users?

      If it's written properly, improving VLC should apply to all platforms.

      Did you react in a similar manner towards Steam coming to Linux?

    • Good will. One of the weird things I've noticed about the aforementioned FOSS developers is a tendency to want to make computing better in general. Plus there's a certain hipster appeal of using FOSS software on Windows ironically.
    • Because many developers of FOSS software don't share your perspective of it being some kind of "united front" where it's all for one and one for all, and everyone who's not with us is against us - and just want to make good software, release it under permissive license, and make it available to the widest possible audience?

  • They haven't got the media library and playlists working at all well in the normal app so its not a good advert for what they might achieve in windows 8...yes sure I could just fix the code instead of moaning...if I ever get any time...

  • Only contribution I have made on Kickstarter is for Leisure Suit Larry Cums Again.
  • Have MS pay them to do this. As it is, they are paying other app builders to move to Windows. So they can do this as well.

Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurence of the improbable. - H. L. Mencken

Working...