Talk:VLC media player/Archive 1

Archive 1

proprietary codecs?

The issue I'm interested in doesn't seem to be covered here, namely, how does vlc support proprietary codecs? It's GPL, yes? So how does it deal? (The question is, can we rely on this and not have the rug yanked out under us later by some corporate maneuvering?)

Many codecs have been reverse engineered by ffmpeg folks or other VideoLAN folks, that is how. Code license and Codecs patents are not the same at all. 81.57.128.178 00:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

And in general, there's still a little too much "marketing" in this article: I'd suggest "highly portable" could just be "portable", and saying it "gained distinction" is a bit much, and so on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doom (talk • contribs) 16:43, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree on the highly portable, gained distinction does not strike me at all 81.57.128.178 00:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

"It also gained distinction as the first player to..." is pure marketing speak. "It was the first player to..." says the same thing without sounding like an advertisement. 72.251.91.151 (talk) 23:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

BBC Shrodinger

Unless I recall incorrectly, VLC supports the Dirac format used by the BBC for their *entire* archives. That's certainly worth including. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.122.209.106 (talk)

I think you recall incorrectly. I see no claim on the VLC features page that it supports Dirac, nor do I find any evidence that the BBC archives are available in Dirac format. —Mcoder 14:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, VLC wiki confirm that VLC can read Dirac. 164.129.1.42 12:27, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it was recently added.[1] It should be available in 0.9.0. —Mcoder 21:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Dirac was already supported in previous stable releases of VLC. 0.9.0 just features an update to the VLC module to support newer versions of libdirac (0.6.0 and newer if my memory serves me well). dionoea 13:02, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Purchase by Microsoft

(please forgive my untraditional post position, but I think this deserves attention)
I remember going to the videolan page at one point, only to find that it had been purchased by Microsoft for an undisclosed amount (although the web site still offered it for download; they simply stated that development would discontinue and features would be integrated into the next windows media player). That message has since disappeared, and I can't find any mention of it anywhere. Can someone research what happened and document it in this wikipedia article? Maybe that message on the homepage can be found on archive.org. I'll try to find it there in the mean time.

QUINTIX 02:58, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Nope this is wrong and has never been discussed anywhere in the project. I am on the project team. 86.194.189.77 22:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

They did post that as an April Fools joke. The message was later removed and replaced with another that claimed they were collaborating with Apple. --Mcoder 12:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

VLC and Ubuntu

> sudo gedit /etc/apt/sources.list

look for a line near the top like

deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu hoary main

and change it to

deb http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu hoary main restricted universe multiverse

(and the next one as well - you get the idea) this adds the universe, restricted and multiverse file repositories

vlc is in universe

save and then

>sudo apt-get update

>sudo apt-get install vlc

of course the site you use for update can vary, but the point is that the universe is usually missing from the parameters.

Erm, what the hell? Not relevant, at all, to this page... --Kiand 17:34, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Regarding: vlc is in universe. Well, I should certainly hope so- where else would it be? parallel universe? That would be nothing less than madness.

Origins of the Pylon logo?

Erm, why does VLC have a traffic cone for a logo? Does anybody know? Erm?

It has nothing to do with the product, I know. I think they just thought it looked cool. Why does Linux have a penguin? Why does Apple name Mac OS X releases after big cats? Who knows... Marketing, I guess.

I was about to ask the same question. I like the VLC media player, but I find the logo extremely out of place - even moreso than other nontechnicaly logos and nomenclature (Tux the Linux penguin, Apple's Tiger/Panther/etc. OS upgrades). Do traffic cones really encourage people to download something? It's downright baffling - then again, the program IS made by the French. 69.118.235.3 20:34, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

See [2] Apparently drunk college kids collected traffic cones & so VLC decided to adopt it. Someone should write this up in a trivia section if we can get additional confirmation - Karnesky 07:02, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Just to clarify what the forum post linked to states, the kids in question were members of VIA[3] which is an association which includes the club VideoLAN which of course makes VLC. Hobophobe 23:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that libdvdcss has the same icon. [4]

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.162.64.240 (talk • contribs)

That page is part of the VideoLAN Developers' Website, so has the VideoLAN cone. libdvdcss is one of many programs maintained by the VideoLAN team (it's used as part of VLC), so that's why it's there. developers.videolan.org is the place for the source code, plus information if you want to help with development. Also check out the Wiki. --h2g2bob 17:32, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

The logo is a lot similar to "the Kraftwerk cone" (http://static.rateyourmusic.com/album_images/5483.jpg). Worth mentioning? --87.61.171.21 (talk) 23:17, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Softy Award

Should it be noted that it won a Softy Award from Maximum PC in 2006? Just wondering what happens when something wins an award... --209.12.51.206 19:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

If we start adding awards, the article will get ten times longer ;-) --h2g2bob 15:03, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

VLC and the FIrefox plugin

Could somebody please provide a source or link for this comment (part of the article): On Windows, Linux, and some other platforms, VLC provides a Mozilla/Firefox plugin, which lets people view some QuickTime and Windows Media files embedded in websites without using Microsoft or Apple products. Thanks. --Ozzyprv 03:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Um, one just needs to look at the Windows & Linux versions. I can vouch for the Win version, as I have installed it on several computers. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 05:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

VideoLAN documentation has it: http://www.videolan.org/doc/play-howto/en/ch04.html#id293936 --H2g2bob 10:15, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you.--Ozzyprv 13:24, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

VLC and ISO files

VLC can play or access iso files? I think you can't say it can access iso files because it is not a iso editor. VLC handles a .iso file as a single media file.

VLC does do ISO files, using libcdio. I don't have an .iso to hand for me to check this on, but I'm pretty sure it's a case of just opening the .iso file, eg vlc dvd://the_iso.iso --h2g2bob 15:02, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Filled with inaccuracies

A lot of "features" that are "only in VLC" as stated on this article are also in Mplayer/xine/gstreamer or any project based on those. This article NEEDS some serious cleaning up. Liquidtenmillion 14:50, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome to ;)

I changed a lot the article lately, there is no "only in VLC".

Yes VLC can play ISO files' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.26.150.165 (talk) 08:11, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorting it out

If possible, please edit the Format support section to display the formats in a table, rather than an unsorted list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.0.136.63 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

My edits

I've had a go at editing bits of this article to fix it for the {{tone}} tag, which I've now removed. However, there's still a few bits where I'm not sure what to do:

• Interfaces - I moved that into Design Principles, but does it need it's own section, or to be moved? If so, where!?
• Readable formats - I have no idea what to do with this - is it OK as it is, should it be removed? Should it be made into a table or something? I don't know.

Any comments welcome. Also, feel free to fix these yourself :-) --h2g2bob 14:55, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

You should put the {{tone}} tag back in. It still reads like a big advertisement. 72.251.91.151 (talk) 23:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

self contradiction

"VLC supports all codecs and all file formats supported by ffmpeg. Notably, the codec pack built into VLC is so comprehensive that in some specific cases, such as Vorbis, DVD Video and DivX playback as well as parsers for Ogg and Matroska file formats, it is the only application that can play the video and audio files "out of the box". However, this feature is not unique to VLC, as any player, including MPlayer and Xine, using the ffmpeg libraries can play those formats without need for external codecs."

How can it be the *only* app to do this if the feature is not unique to this app? --Danny Rathjens 21:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that obviously doesn't make sense. I removed it from the article, but feel free to reword it. —J. M. 02:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

It's not a contradiction, It's misunderstanding the sentence. Maybe rephrasing can help. The point is that: MPlayer, Xine and VLC can handle a wide range of codecs, but the thing that makes it unique is that VLC can do this out of the box. For the same thing on Xine or MPlayer, you have to get a codec pack and install it, which contains codecs (usually a lot of DLL files) that may not be legal to distribute. VLC works with these codecs out of the box and it makes installation easier and safer. So, it's an important feature of VLC and I think it should be brought back to the article. --Wikiuserforfun (talk) 21:10, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

No. MPlayer and xine use built-in libavcodec, there is no need for any external codec pack.—J. M. (talk) 22:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Wrong changes

User:Arite commits from 25 april, 2007 are wrong.

A VLC media player developer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.129.1.42 (talk)

What exactly is wrong? https://trac.videolan.org/vlc/ticket/632 seems to indicate that Shorten does not work. RealVideo (RV40) is listed as a project for Summer 2007, meaning it's not done yet. --Mcoder 16:24, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

There was written that "Real Video 9 and 10 are not supported. VLC media player can only play the audio on some .rm files." Moreover, RV10, RV20 are realvideo and are correctly played. RealVideo is not RV40 only...

Moreover the Nut is supported, since libavformat uses it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.129.1.42 (talk)

"Real Video 9 and 10 and not supported." - True.
"RV10, RV20 are realvideo and are correctly played." - Also true, but these formats are rarely used.
"Moreover the Nut is supported, since libavformat uses it." - Does this actually work? Since VLC has many of its own demuxers, it doesn't always use libavformat, so I never assume VLC supports a format just because libavformat does. --Mcoder 13:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, yes, every format supported in libavformat should be usable in VLC.

VLC media player can set the playing video as wallpaper.

How can I do it? Wikifan21century 05:37, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

On Windows I have an option on my right-click menu called "Wallpaper". Selecting this sets the video track to be displayed as the wallpaper. I'm not sure how to achieve the same effect on a non-Windows OS because I use other media players under those. Everlone 14:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

It's not possible on other OSes (of course this kind of question would be better suited for the VideoLAN forums). dionoea 13:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Merge VLC and VideoLAN

I am against the merge since VideoLAN is a team project that host many software projects, and VLC is one of the most known one, but not the only one.

Agreed. However, the VideoLAN page needs to be expanded to mention more of those other projects (linking to their pages, of course). —Tom W.M. 06:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreeing with above - expand the VideoLAN page, but as the VLC media player is well known it should remain in its own article. Think outside the box 14:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with keeping the two articles separate. While VLC is a part of the VideoLAN project, I think that it is significant enough to warrant its own article. -JM, 29 July 2007, 22:17 PDT

I too am against this. I'm sure I represent a lot of people: I know little about security and less about video. In searching for spyware of the Flash kind, I came across VideoLAN, so I went to Wikip to find out about it. I had no idea it was connected with "VLC..." and know nothing about VLC. Not sure I've even heard of it.

So may I suggest that the Merge Suggestion be edited out of the main page now? Edetic (talk) 09:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Sources are not someone's opinion

VLC used to stand for "VideoLan Client", but that meaning is deprecated[1].

The source used to state this argument is just an opinion of a person. The way the sentence is written now is like it is a fact. A good source to state this sentence would be a web page from the developers/owners of VLC themselves.

The only thing I could find is that VideoLan server is decrapted - not the name VLC. And in my opinion, decrapted would mean it is no longer a client - in this case it still is a VideoLan client.

Nowadays, a lot of applications are hard to separate from client and server.

http://wiki.videolan.org/Intellectual_Properties states the official source. Moreover, the blog of this person belongs to a developer of VLC media player. Please revert your edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.129.1.42 (talk • contribs) 07:21, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Legality

I think the article needs a discussion of the legality of VLC in various jurisdictions, particularly pertaining to DeCSS and the provisions of the DMCA.80.175.118.157 09:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Isn't that already covered in the libdvdcss article? --Goldfndr 05:53, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

No. It isn't already covered in the libdvdcss article. That article only mentions the legal issues in passing while explaining why some Linux distributions do not include libdvdcss. In addition, if libdvdcss is installed when VLC is installed, libdvdcss and VLC are from the same developers, and VLC does not work without libdvdcss, then libdvdcss is a part of VLC (and possibly other programs) and thus legal issues should be discussed in the VLC article. Plus it would help to make this aricle read less like a sales brochure... 72.251.91.151 (talk) 23:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

This is 100% wrong. VLC can work without libdvdcss. Not to mention that this legality part is totally centered on the US law, and doesn't link to the recent ruling of the US copyright office. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.225.157.164 (talk) 10:25, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the legal status of VLC needs to be mentioned in this article. It is borderline misinformation not to. --74.59.117.9 (talk) 12:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Promotional wording?

I'm concerned about the wording of certain pieces such as "It is one of the most platform-independent players available" which sounds like advertising. Perhaps a change to "VLC is platform independent" to say the same thing without sounding like a promotion. Reading just the first few paragraphs of the article I have found a few examples of this type of wording. Certainly not a big deal, it just sounds less professional the way it's currently written. Efeinberg 19:20, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with your reasoning (if it is indeed one of the most platform-independent players available, that's a fact, not an advertisement). The comment is sourced in the article. If you take issue with the source, I'd look into that. Again, however, it's not as if the article reads "It's great software in virtue of its platform-independence". If an article on a type of car included the fact that said car was the fastest in the world, I wouldn't read that as advertising. If accepted guidelines are against me here, however, feel free to press on; I don't care if the article is changed or not, but maybe my thoughts may influence how you take the sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.18.17 (talk) 18:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

That's a bad analogy. A Wikipedia article shouldn't say that a car is "the fastest in the world." It should describe said car as being capable of XXXX MPH (with a reference from a reliable source establishing that) and possibly note the speed of the next-fastest car or an average of all cars. Likewise, this article would be improved by saying that it runs on N platforms and listing them. "One of the most platform-independent players available" sounds like an advertising claim. Granted, it isn't a false or unsourced advertising claim, but the tone is still way out of line with the tone of other Wikipedia articles about other products. Also, by focusing on the one example given, you missed the main point, which i that the article is full of wording that makes it sound like advertising.

Use of computer resources

This is a self-interested question, but I believe it is of wide significance as well. The reason I mostly use Winamp is that it doesn't eat up much of my resources while playing music (this changes with video, I guess). So, how power-hungry is VLC relative to other players? Will my 256MB laptop be able to execute its Web browsing and document-editing well while playing a video clip on VLC? --Cryout (talk) 21:17, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

It is usually less consuming for MPEG2, 4 and MP3, but higher for H264.

Wow

To finally know the person behind the media player, how cool is that!

Rianon Burnet has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Have a wonderful day, God Bless...........

Rianon Burnet 14:37, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

VLC player uses a rootkit?

When playing back xvid bicubic encoded 720x576x25fps content, VLC Player consistently shows 3-4% CPU usage on 800/1800MHz AMD Mobile Sempron CPU laptop, according to several measurement tools I tried. This is objectively impossible on this kind of low-end CPU machine for simple lack of computing power (by the way MS's WMP10 uses 65%, DivX player uses 45%).

Therefore VLC player must use some kind of hidden process for the actual decoding and render-to-display work, a hidden process whose existance and resource comsumption is not visible in any task manager or rootkit discovering utility I tried (so it must be a very sophisticated code).

Maybe VLC Player is a well-intended software, but the use of process hiding (rootkit-like) techniques is inherently dangerous and risky, because such invisible processes can be hijacked by the hackers to spread actual malware in stealth mode (see the Sony rootkit scandal).

This hazard should be mentioned in the WP article for the sake of security-conscious users. 91.83.23.150 (talk) 11:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I am a VLC developer and I trust the guy making the binary releases for not putting rootkit in it, and the FFmpeg developers for writing highly optimized code. Feel free to download the source code, check it, run it, and compare the speed. --funman —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.171.216.191 (talk) 18:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

There are no rootkits in VLC, the source is opened and you can check it by yourself and rebuilding it. The fact that VLC uses overlay and highly optimised DivX decoders can explain it. Moreover, if you enable postprocessing on VLC, you will see the CPU usage go up.

Screenshot of VLC

Regarding "Screenshot of VLC (GUI in French)" -- why is this in French? am I reading the French Wikipedia here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.252.24 (talk) 02:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to add another one. VLC having originated from a French school, and France being the most represented country among its developers (since some students of this school have a project to work on VLC) I just find that cool.

Looks like someone's already changed it... Nuwewsco (talk) 19:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Version history

Wouldn't it make more sense to simply remove this section? atm there's almost no information for versions prior to 0.8.6e - it's just a relatively large, blank table; and even if it was filled in, it would hardly be encyclopedic (WP:NOTE)?

If there's no objections...? Nuwewsco (talk) 19:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if the table has more contents than it had in March, but I don't see the point of it. Really, even if it had all the fields with question marks filled in, it wouldn't serve any good purpose in the article. Why have this in an encyclopedia? — Marvin ^talk 18:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd agree with that (now removed). ISTM that this is the sort of information that really ought to be on the VLC WWW site, rather than here anyway Nuwewsco (talk) 19:38, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Clarify abilities

I use and like VLC but am also aware of its limitations, however this article has claims for what VLC can do that might apply to versions from 2006 and 2007 and no longer apply due to various factors.

For what it's worth here are my thoughts:

There are several APIs that can connect to VLC and use its functionality:

Should this clarify that APIs are for programmers and not ordinary users?

APIs are for programming 76.103.251.45 (talk) 03:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

On Windows, Linux, and some other platforms, VLC provides a NPAPI plugin

Isn't this a plugin for use by programmers and not users? Also is it still true in May 2008? I read the cited source and the part up to "The Mozilla plugin" could be considered OK for an advanced user, but what follows is either out of date, or for a script writer or webmaster, certainly not for an ordinary user. The plugin alone does not allow the user to view contents, the user must write some detailed JavaScript calls to access the VLC objects. Also the advice for the Windows Mozilla plugin does not work for 0.8.6f on Vista, and maybe not for other Windows systems.

This is wrong, VLC Mozilla plugin can play based on mime types not only for special pages designed for it 76.103.251.45 (talk) 03:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

VLC can read several formats, depending on the operating system VLC is running on.

I feel the article should qualify what is meant by "can read", as I know that this depends on more than just the operating system, it depends on the media server too.

I just noticed that the first MMS wikilinks to Multimedia Messaging Service - I suspect it should link to Microsoft Media Services, i.e. the "MMS:" protocol. VLC includes MMS in its list of protocols in its File / Open Network Stream / dialog.

RTSP is missing from the input protocols - is this correct? I have managed to get VLC to start playing a RTSP stream (BBC Radio 1 with Real Audio ".ra" extension), although it breaks up after a minute or so. In fact why are all the "UDP, HTTP, RTP, RTSP, MMS," protocols listed under output? Doesn't VLC use them on input?

-84.222.3.119 (talk) 23:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

You are partly right (MMS and RTSP can be used on input), but output is also very important 76.103.251.45 (talk) 03:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

tv tuners without an audio out put jack

It should also be noted that vlc can't capture audio or stream audio from tv tuners that do not have an audio output to send the audio to the sound card's line in. the reason it does not work is vlc will only let you select your sound card as the audio source. the VLC team has yet to fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.102.211.132 (talk) 18:28, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Latest Version

• 2008-10-11: 0.9.4 is the latest: Who the f*ck keeps converting it back to 0.9.3? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.35.167.28 (talk) 13:38, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

• 2010-01-26: The info box shows v1.0.4 as the current version, however the Video LAN website still shows v1.0.3 as the latest version for download. There is no obvious place on the Video LAN website where v1.0.4 can be download, however on the download statistics, a very small number of downloads of v1.0.4 is shown. Perhaps v1.0.4 is a beta?

Should WIkipedia show such pre-releases as the "latest version" when the related website is still showing a prior version as the current version? 64.180.45.114 (talk) 02:18, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

• 2010-01-26: recovered from VideoLAN News archive

VLC 1.0.4, 2009-12-10

The VLC development team is quite happy to introduce a new version of its 'Goldeneye' branch. This release is targetted at fixing bugs on the x11 platforms, fixing bugs especially for KDE, cairo-dock, XCB, v4l and FreeBSD compatibility. Binaries for Windows and Mac OS are not yet on the pipe.

From this, it appears that v1.0.4 currently is solely to fix bugs on the release for the x11 platform X Window System. Mac OS X and Windows is still on v1.0.3 ... which was released first for Windows on 2009-10-31 and then next for Max OS X on 2009-11-10. If v1.0.4 is a bug fix for only the x11 platform, quite possibly, the next official release for the other OS' could be v1.0.5 (skipping over v1.0.4, since that was a bug fix for only one OS).

So should the article give the latest release for only one OS?!? Since versions are released for different OS on different dates, who decides which one to show in the latest release item in the info-box ... and how do they decide?!?64.180.45.114 (talk) 02:47, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Download statistics misleading?

I'm not sure how to best resolve this issue, but quoting the downloads of a previous version of the software seems misleading to me. Also, isn't it probable that he total number of downloads of one version is in some ways proportional to time time between it's release and the subsequent release?

Perhaps mentioning that the current version is averaging 4.5 downloads per second would be constructive? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DomesDKG (talk • contribs) 00:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Blu-Ray support

Does this program support BluRay play? 83.108.202.186 (talk) 01:31, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Santa icon image

Anyone want to make a screenshot of the "About" screen in VLC and replace this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:VLC-Santa.png . And the image under design principles on the right. Fastilysock's edit has removed the point of the image, which was to highlight the icon on the top-left of the screen. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.154.16.31 (talk) 04:24, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

How about I take an image the same as the original, but on linux? Besides, is the WinXP appearance even non-free in this case? I mean, the Windows interface uses Qt, doesn't it? Does anyone know if such an interface is non-free? -- Jalanpalmer (talk) 13:55, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Uploaded. I considered using the About screen, but that thing is huge. -- Jalanpalmer (talk) 13:59, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Someone has anonymously replaced mine with another Windows version. Way to miss the point and the discussion, anonymous asshole. -- Jalanpalmer (talk) 02:53, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

There's no way to know for sure it's on Windows. That could just be someone's theme in GNOME for we you could know.--toehead2001 (talk) 05:46, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Haiku

VLC now has a version for Haiku. That should get added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chalbersma (talk • contribs) 16:23, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Re-enabling video playback in Debian (after removing multimedia repository)

The following order:

0. apt-get update

1. apt-get remove vlc

2. apt-get remove ffmpeg

3. rm -rf ~/.vlc

4. apt-get install ffmpeg

5. apt-get install vlc

After several hours of troubleshooting, this was the only solution that helped.

Arpadapo (talk) 05:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Acquisition by RealNetworks

I have reverted the information that VLC was aquired by RealNetworks:

• Very unlikely thing to happen to one of THE most popular open-source projects with a long track of caring about cross-platform compatibility and open-source code
• VLC is still 100% free to download, one day after the announcement
• Neither real.com, nor realnetworks.com, nor their press page says anything about this
• Softpedia has strong beliefs this is an April Fools joke: http://news.softpedia.com/news/VLC-Picks-April-1st-to-Announce-Acquisition-by-RealNetworks-138949.shtml
• Despite the news being on the Official website, I will pull from "Ignore all rules" and remove the info anyway, if further information comes up confirming this, then feel free to add that to the article. --SF007 (talk) 15:07, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

This is the same thing as the bulldozer logo they announced last year on April 1. Despite it being an obvious April Fools joke, several people were convinced it was true and kept re-adding the fake info to this article (or arguing about it) even weeks or months later. And of course the announced logo change never happened. So, people, please, next time you read shocking news on April 1, please do not hurry up to add them to Wikipedia, at least not in the VLC article. Please realize that April Fools' Day is traditionally a very special day for news on many websites, including the VLC one. Just have a good laugh (the RealNetworks announcement is funny in many ways), or simply ignore it. Thank you.—J. M. (talk) 23:00, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Intro Paragraph

Here are a list of the changes made to the intro section on 11 May, and their reasonings:

1. An entire list of OSs is unnecessary for the Infobox, and only serves to clutter it.
2. There is no citation for the supported OSs, so I shortened the list in the intro paragraph to what is on the official support page. If the rest are to be included, then they need citations.
3. The 400 million download statistic is misleading; that figure includes every single version, and therefore, irrelevant/outdated statistics. Even the web page itself says at the top: "These stats were started at the end of February 2005 and are likely to be inaccurate." It might be notable to add something about its popularity in terms of raw download numbers, but it will have to have an accurate source, and have neutral (careful) phrasing.

–Cosmopolitan (talk) 22:58, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

About 3. being the one managing the stats on videolan.org, I really think you are right. Those stats are really inaccurate (and maybe not over-estimating, but under-estimating). 78.225.157.164 (talk) 14:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

The only file I found it unable to play

It will not play asx files. I tried to use it to play the following stream: http://wfuv.streamguys.us/archive/10104.asx This is a stream from WFUV radio. It will play on both Realplayer and Windows Media Player.1archie99 (talk) 19:06, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

The file redirects to mms://main.str3am.com/wfuv-od/supportWFUV.asf (with RP and WMP too), suggesting that the problem is at the other end. It might also be a paid link.--Auric (talk) 19:40, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Claim that damaged files are played well by VLC is contestable.

It seems to me, that from personal experience, the following claim is false: "VLC is popular for its ability to play the video content of incomplete, unfinished, or damaged video downloads before the files have been fully downloaded." While it is true that such videos play, when the playhead reaches the part of the file that is damaged or missing, there are often audio gaps that persist, even after the playhead has moved to undamaged parts of the file. Just my experience. (Of course, I don't know where/how to source this)206.75.198.6 (talk) 15:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, yes, i have to agree that depending on file and format the ability to play incomplete files is pretty limited (and shared by most other players like mpcl.). From jumping to the next avail. part, to desynchronizing a/v, to stop playing, to plain freezing the whole app, everything's possible. OTOH, the real sucky players like WMP, QT and RP can't do that at all/refuse. The index repair feature is also pretty useless, read: not working. --92.202.62.239 (talk) 02:23, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

While it doesn't work perfect it definitely works for playing files in the process of downloading. --ben_b (talk) 05:14, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

I personally have never seen the "play incomplete files" aspect of VLC work. Even for files 90% complete, it reports a broken AVI file, asking whether you want to repair it or not (Repairing does work in some cases, but if I'm downloading a file, I obviously don't want VLC tampering with the file), if you click Don't Repair, it simply doesn't play the file. Try seeking anywhere in the video, and it just jumps back to the beginning (black screen). I have seen it play partially broken files, just not incomplete ones. LiamSP (talk) 04:01, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Have you tried an AVI file? On the repair select cancel and then click the play button. Don't try and seek as that will not work. Plays for me every time. --ben_b (talk) 07:36, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

The article talks about incomplete etc. video files in general, not only AVIs. In any case, VLC needs the header of the file with info how the file is structured (which codecs are used etc.). VLC can play some broken/inomplete content but it cant's do magic. If you are referring to AVI files from P2P networks, the usually available option to download first and last parts of the files first, should be activated. As the article does not claim to play back all incomplete files or even AVI files, the sentence is good as it is. --KAMiKAZOW (talk) 11:28, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

A new error message seems to have been added that should clear this up some now: "Because this AVI file index is broken or missing, seeking will not work correctly. VLC won't repair your file but can temporary fix this problem by building an index in memory. This step might take a long time on a large file. What do you want to do?" <do not play> <play as is> <build index then play> --ben_b (talk) 10:44, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Talking solely about AVIs is still wrong in this context. --KAMiKAZOW (talk) 08:40, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

It may give the same message for other file types, I however haven't had any to try. Point is the text in the article has been even further updated to show it only works sometimes. --ben_b (talk) 08:49, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Advert

I don't think the article is written like an advert... Although I glanced at it briefly and it's late at night. If I don't see any feedback in a few days I guess I'll remove it. Devourer09 (t·c) 09:54, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I also wonder why this is tagged as sounding like an advertisement--it is merely stating facts. Perhaps it could use a re-write from a style standpoint (the Features and Format support just seem bulky to me), but that has nothing to do with advertising. SovereignGFC (talk) 23:10, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

VLC on Apple iThingies grants access to FLAC, etc ?

Given there is now a version of VLC available for the Apple iThingies - iPhone; iPod touch; iPad; - and VLC on other platforms plays media formats not normally playable on those devices - notably FLAC - does installing VLC on an iThingie allow one to play those formats ? If so, is this not a significant point worth mentioning in the article ?
86.25.120.130 (talk) 18:23, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I have used VLC on my iPod touch to play .avi, but I can't speak for other formats. However, the app was pulled from the store, so I don't know if it's relevant anymore. DanielDPeterson (talk) 04:24, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

That app was never approved by the VideoLAN team, it was someone else that released it to the Apple App store. Apple pulled it because it was in violation of the App Store's rules. It's doubtful that Apple will ever let a media player like VLC on the App store. There is however a version of VLC being developed for Android by the VideoLAN team. Beano311 (talk) 1:46, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

License

vlc is now licensed with both gpl and lgpl , the core engine is lgpl though, here are my sources search for lgpl on the page and you will see the announcement — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123465421jhytwretpo98721654 (talk • contribs) 12:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

So? The infobox already states that. --KAMiKAZOW (talk) 10:05, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Suggested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: article no moved Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{WrestleMania XXVIII} _{The Undertaker 20–0} 01:55, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

---

VLC media player → VLC Media Player – Per capitalization norms, I don't find anything obstructive for this move, and if the move takes place we have redo the article. extra999 (talk) 05:02, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose - What capitalization norms? If your referring to MOS:CAPS, the lede of that guideline would suggest not capitalizing the title; "Wikipedia relies on sources to determine what is a proper name" and the VideoLAN website uses "VLC media player". WP:TITLEFORMAT also says "Use lower case, except for proper names". - SudoGhost 05:44, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose - The windows version displays lower case in the title bar itself. - Shiftchange (talk) 05:53, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

The Linux version does as well, in the title and the about dialog. - SudoGhost 05:59, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. When I tried searching the internet, the results always come up as "VLC media player" not "VLC Media Player"; it is not the official title of VLC media player; it is not a proper noun. Angelica (talk to me?) 15:49, 08 July 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

VLC Metro

VLC is listed as a 'Windows Component' giving the impression that is an OFFICIAL part of Microsoft Windows, which it most certainly is not. 115.187.246.202 (talk) 17:26, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Christmas Hat

For why is the Christmas Hat on the Traffic Cone until 2nd January only? Perhaps more appropriate until 6th January (terminating just before midnight on 5th January (twelfth night). 109.148.166.13 (talk) 10:39, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

It is because designation, e.g if you are Muslim you can make a Ramadan theme to the VLC.5.47.30.81 (talk) 22:23, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

MorphOS

VLC is not compatible with MorphOS. I searched and MorphOS is not listed ANYWHERE on the VLC website. Perhaps VLC stopped development on MorphOS and so no current version of VLC is available for MorphOS. The citations given do not mention MorphOS. I am deleting MorphOS from VLC article. In Correct (talk) 05:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)