On Aug 24, 06 22:49:48 +0200, Clayton wrote:
is a perfectly legitamate answer. What I have a MAJOR issue with is that there are NO LEGAL avenues or alternatives. To get that much demanded multimedia playback the user has the choice of.... a 3rd party repository that is clearly at the minimum a grey area in terms of legality in most parts of the world.
We (Marcus and I) are not lawyers. Lawyers have checked the alternatives, and that's what we stand now.
I'm not saying that SUSE is at fault here... I know the whole issue... I understand it... and I hate it.
AOL (read: me too).
Ubuntu users can use (unofficial!) Debian packages - so can SUSE users with Pakman.
BUT.... Ubuntu provides an easy way for users to add in those extras.
Good point. I have never (personally) installed Ubunto, so I don't know that much. But if they do, they are doing at great risk getting sued.
I am fully aware of the legal implications... but as an end user I find it unacceptable that the solution is to not have a solution.
Windows doesn't have one. Users accept this, and install XVid, DivX, Vorbis, etc. themselves. Why isn't this accepted in the Linux world?!?
You're missing the point. Windows users do have a solution. They have easy to find and single click install applications. You take
Well, with a well configured system (I hope SUSE is like this) you should be able to click on an rpm and it gets installed. I consider this pretty much the same. You are right in that Linux is still lacking a general installer mechanism (with GUI, text or graphic) for complex packages that need to be configured.
want to do the same in SUSE... and I have to take them to the back room (figuratively speaking) and tell them that there is no legal way
Actually, you would have to do that if they want to install XVid or one of the zillion codec packs. I know more people that had issues with playing certain files on Windows than I know people having difficulties with installing xine or mplayer on linux. Well, probably the linux guys are better in computer use, so the comparison isn't fair, I admit.
to do it... but if they go over here... add a repository (following cryptic info on the openSUSE Wiki)... at this point their eyes glaze over...
If the info on the openSUSE Wiki is cryptic, please, PLEASE improve it. It has probably been created by a technical guy (like us), who do not remember/know any more what a less skilled person can stumble upon.
Tell me... what's the difference between telling people how to add the repositories on the openSUSE Wiki, and doing the Ubuntu thing and including them (disabled) in the packagemanager of choice?
This is a big legal difference. Do ask me for details (I'm not a lawyer), but basically you get deeper involved, if you (officially) advertize a repository. Also, there are some issues with the packages e.g. on pakman (e.g. the xine pakage is completely different, even though it could be created with all codecs from the same source), so you cannot easily add the repository additinonally.
You now, as I think of it, maybe the reason thsi isn't accepted in teh Linux world is that when someone gets the SUSE distro, they get what appears to be a complete solution. They get all the apps.. they get Openoffice, The Gimp, GAIM, Kopete, video players, browsers... everything.. except the bit the really want... the elusive multimedia.
That's a good point!
As much as I detest Real Player.... what about the announcement that they are licensing the Windows media codecs including WMV... like they did with MP3. While I will continue to use Guru and Packman solutions... the Real Media way would probably work fine for the new users.
We'll see. The idea sounds reasonable to me.
Matthias
--
Matthias Hopf