[Live-devel] Compile issue with 2004.02.09 code

Neil Schellenberger nschellenberger at espial.com
Thu Feb 12 12:21:21 PST 2004

Hi Ross et al.,

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know why xine doesn't (yet) use
live.com?  Is it just that noone has gotten around to porting it or is
there something more complex going on there?

I haven't looked closely at vlc yet, but the xine architecture seems
very nice and clean, especially compared to mplayer.  (In particular, it
doesn't assume that all of the audio is going to be internally passed
around as PCM data.  And it separates out timeline management from the
audio stream timeline in favour of an abstract timeline.)

Does anyone have an opinion on how mplayer, xine, and vlc stack up in
terms of the "gut feel" test for stability, speed, maintainability?


-----Original Message-----
From: live-devel-bounces at ns.live.com
[mailto:live-devel-bounces at ns.live.com]On Behalf Of Ross Finlayson
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 12:01 PM
To: LIVE.COM Streaming Media - development & use
Subject: Re: [Live-devel] Compile issue with 2004.02.09 code

>Woo, those two in combination have led to a compiled version that

FYI, I now recommend using the "vlc" media player - 
<http://www.videolan.org/vlc/> - instead of "MPlayer".  IMHO, "vlc" is 
better engineered, and performs more reliably.  Plus, they have
binary versions of the player available for downloading (so, unlike 
"MPlayer", you don't need to compile it yourself).

(In fact, I'm now even recommending "vlc" over "QuickTime Player".)

Both "vlc" and "MPlayer" use the "LIVE.COM Streaming Media" code for 
playing RTSP/RTP streams.  ("vlc" v0.7.0 uses an fairly old version of
LIVE.COM libraries; for a more up-to-date version, try "vlc" v0.7.1: 

	Ross Finlayson

live-devel mailing list
live-devel at lists.live.com

More information about the live-devel mailing list