Ultima

Hrm I guess I'll join the test. Should I explain myself, or is my track record on the forums enough? lol whatever, I'll list the browsers I have access to for testing anyway... Opera 9.0 Build 8333 Mozilla Firefox 1.5.0.1 Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 (SP2) Apple Safari (don't remember what version, since I only get access to my sister's iBook every now and then, but I'll post it if I do get to test) Basically, access to Windows XP SP2 and Mac OS X 10.4.something (sometimes).

Did you, by any chance, disable JavaScript (maybe using NoScript or whatever)?

The link works. I just tested it right now.

USSR == CCCP USSR flag is red/yellow, much like how CCCP Project's website is. That's what Alpha-Toxic is referring to.

Dead projects on SourceForge are great as well? Going open source doesn't magically make something great. Not magically, you might say, then in what way does open source software suddenly attain greatness? The sudden "community" factor? For all we know, ludde might prefer working on his own baby. Which brings something else up in my head now... if two caring parents have a baby, should they just give the baby up to the community to tinker around with? If you say that babies have influences from their community, and that that's the open source factor in that context, then what about this community? Is this community not giving input on how µTorrent should develop, and where it should go? In that hypothetical situation I made up, the parents are the people who (at least in the baby's young age) determine how the baby should develop. Granted, living things have minds of their own, but that's not the point of my argument. At the end of the day, ludde is the one who's controlling where and how the project goes, and outside hands muddling in his code doesn't help his cause. ludde's still helping the BitTorrent community with this great client. Heck, he's shared his ideas for PE and Azureus' (possibly) forthcoming Enhanced Messaging Protocol, contributed back to the community in that way as well. ludde wants to keep the client as compact as possible, and if other people come in and code differently than he would, that goal is lost instantly. That's my take on it, but don't take it as the final word. I'm not ludde, but that's the way I see the whole discussion. In the end, ludde has stated that he might consider releasing the source if he feels he is unable to maintain µTorrent any longer. As for whether I'd make any software I write open source? Depends on what it is.

@Odium: I'm not sure how that analogy with the scientists really applies. The scientists are out looking for a cure or vaccine for AIDS for the sole purpose of saving people by sharing what they learn. ludde is writing µTorrent (1) as a hobby project, and (2) to make a great, low-resource BitTorrent application. They both reach their goals. I don't see why going open source is something ludde has to do if it doesn't help him reach his goal.

Yep, it is =P And um, the CCCP installer will try to remove traces of other codec packs before installing.

But there's a half-an-hour difference in our original posting times O.O Not to mention I was jumping between threads and responding to others while I was formulating my cheap response xP

50MB only? I can remember ACE Mega CoDecS Pack being bigger, like 70MB ;P

Better downloading more along the way than dumping a massive amount on your computer. If you suddenly have a problem with your media, which one is easier to troubleshoot? 1) Uninstalling 500 codecs and filters and attempting to figure out what might be causing the problem 2) Uninstalling some codec you just installed recently?

Heh don't worry about your post being a flame, it most certainly isn't. I'm sorta getting tired of this discussion, but I'll semi-respond (don't feel like thinking of too many arguments xD)... I get the feeling my counter-response will be destroyed, but we'll see =P Like many other debates about ideals, there isn't really a right or wrong to open source vs closed source, contrary to what you say. It's a philosophy, and even though it may seem greedy, if one wants to keep his ideas private, so be it. He did create it, and it's his choice, beneficial for the community as a whole or not. Even if leaving the source closed doesn't benefit the community in terms of knowledge of implementation and whatnot, the creator would still have contributed in some way or another by developing what he did. Opening the source does not necessarily guarantee security either. For all we know, (hypothetically) someone could just release their "source" to put on a facade and look like a "good guy," then release a binary compiled version of a malicious version, knowing that a majority of people are too lazy or don't know how to compile on their own. While there is a very low chance of this happening (if ever, and if it does, someone can fork), it just shows that there are exceptions to things, including developing closed source software... No matter how unsuspicious/suspicious something may be, you never know where the exceptions are. Open source? Might be a facade. Closed source? Person might just want to protect his work in whatever way he wants, without any malicious intent whatsoever. As a sidenote, people can easily monitor closed source applications and their behaviors, and it might possibly be easier than scanning through and understanding the entire source code, especially if the open source software's code is extremely large. Heck, if the "open source" coder's good, he can probably hide malicious code in a bunch of unlikely places. If there's some suspicious, unintended, or unwanted activity happening in the closed source software, then its integrity can be called into question, right? My last argument is this one product: Microsoft Windows. While it's probably my weakest argument, it's still a valid one, to a large scale. Closed source. Best? Probably not. Trustworthy? Yes, Microsoft is (and has to be), no matter how many security issues it may have, since those issues are not coded intentionally. If they were, they'd be under plenty of fire. In the end, I'm neither biased toward closed or open source software. I use what works best, which, in my opnion, is more sensible than purely using open source softwares whenever the chance lends itself. If the open source software is less functional than its closed source (but as of yet unproved, safe) counterpart, and you need the functionality that's missing, you're just limiting yourself and your productivity by choosing the open source software, which is worse (the decision, that is), if you ask me.

Huge codec packs are prone to issues, due to conflicts (causing crashes or whatever), or incorrect settings (causing playback errors). More likely than not, you're not going to need all 7 bajillion codecs and filters included with the pack, so why bother installing them in the first place?

Yep, MPlayer is self-contained.

No... MPlayer doesn't use codecs. @Pwnage: It's probably an unsupported video compression. Some people actually include Real video in their audio-video containers.

That's because MPlayer can't either. No one's written a(n open source) decoder for Real Media (or Quicktime, for that matter), so naturally, it's not included in MPlayer. Even though I don't play either media types, the extensibility is what draws me to MPC + DirectShow codecs/filters.

Then you should probably stick to MPUI if you really want to use MPlayer.

http://www.mplayerhq.hu/design7/projects.html#windows

MPlayer's just great all around -- a lot of multimedia applications are based around it for a reason ;P Too bad it's basically a CLI program. I'm sure there are GUIs for it, but I don't know of any. I've experienced playback problems with VLC, like stuttering sound (among other things). If it works perfectly for you, you can probably stick to it, since there isn't much other reason to switch.

Yeah it works fine, but some people's net connections get screwed over without the patch, or without lowering net.max_halfopen (which would decrease connection rate even further).

A patch for a system file should never be included in µTorrent, in my opinion.

Heh the logo contest is pretty much done with, since BSH already won ;P Looks like CyberChaos was only providing a dock icon... which, in retrospect, should be posted in a separate thread.

Wowwwww O.O (lol that response is enough indication of my opinion xD)

VLC has a lot of bugs (especially playback problems). @Firon: Hm... if mplayer indeed does have a GUI (I recalled something like this, but wasn't too sure), I doubt it's very functional or friendly, otherwise it would probably be used over VLC =P

Build 438 is µTorrent 1.5. Either way, unless it's a publically released beta, don't bother asking about it. If it isn't posted on the main page, chances are, it's not meant for public consumption, whatever the reason may be.

Isn't it command-line based? Either way, it uses FFmpeg like FFDshow and VLC, so why not use one of those?