Jump to content

Help talk:Media (audio and video)/Archives/2009

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Confusing

This page is too confusing. My mom could not follow the instructions. How can we make the instructions easy enough for my mom? --unforgettableid | talk to me 07:45, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

There's a new stable version: for standard Windows and for 64 bit Windows. It's highly recommended to update to those as there are a lot of bugs fixed, including but not limited to proper Vista support + 64 bit support.--Ivo talk / contribs (join Project Portugal) 13:34, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Ping! Would someone update this link? It's silly to have a link to the most stable version, anyway, since it will change; better to remove the link and just say "download the current stable version". You've already pointed them to the correct website. 76.19.197.209 (talk) 02:58, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Done -SCEhardT 04:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Can't play ogg files

Resolved
 – — TKD::{talk} 16:21, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Yet day ago I could normally play ogg files on wikipedia, but (as I guess) since I installed this new 3.0.7 firefox update, it doesn't work. Installing the lastest java version din't help. Please help, I'm frustrated. When I clik "play" button, onlu a "more..." button shows up and nothing happens for (literally) hours. After clicking "more..." it only shows that cortado player is selected. Thx 4 help in advance.--83.12.91.242 (talk) 19:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

I have the same exact problem. I also use run on Firefox 3.0.7 and just installed the newest Java version. However, I can play .Ogg files on Google Chrome, so I guess the problem must be with Firefox. Can someone more knowledgeable look into this. Thanks, Do U(knome)? yes...or no 23:52, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Confirming the problem. It is not my setup(s), because I can play .ogg files externally or with the VLC player; however, the default Cortado player does not work for me with Firefox 3.0.7 on either Windows XP 32-bit or Windows Vista 64-bit. It does work with IE7. — TKD::{talk} 12:12, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

This bug has been reported at bugzilla -SCEhardT 15:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Java not working in Opera...

Hm... for some reason, I can no longer play media on Java while using Opera (it gives me "Applet not found." where the media should be), although Internet Explorer and Firefox still work fine with Java. This only started happening recently. I also downloaded VLC recently... would this affect Java somehow? Xnux the Echidna 01:00, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Inline players vs. "out of line" players

The information does not indicate which player options allow media to play as if it were "embedded" within a page. Any discussion of "best" options to suggest should factor in this criterion.

The options I've tried so far cause an external program to be opened (and switched to) or cause the browser to navigate away from the page being viewed. Because of this, I avoid clicking on media in Wikipedia unless absolutely necessary because it forces me to break away from the text of the article I'm reading.

One of YouTube's usability strengths that many users are familiar with has been the ability to click and view a video without navigating away from the page that embedded it.

Which options give a similar usability boost to Wikipedia?

If you know whether a platform/browser/plug-in combination provides this, please share this information.

Lionel (talk) 17:50, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

In WinXP, FireFox, with Java, embedded audio files look like this at first and this when you click on them and they're playing. -SCEhardT 23:58, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

an ogg2mp3 guide is of unparalleled importance

mp3 players don't run oggs most of the time. --AaThinker (talk) 10:29, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


Given wikimedia's (wonderful) insistence on using free formats, it seems like this page should strongly recommend or maybe only recommend free software, especially when there are great options (Miro, VLC, Mplayer, Firefox). Thoughts on that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Disbooya (talk • contribs) 04:33, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Firefox 3.5

{{editprotected}}

Firefox 3.5 (still in beta) includes native support for Ogg (Theora and Vorbis). It should be added under the "all systems" section with a note about it still being in beta. Available for download here. --Yarnalgo talk to me 06:18, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Would it be better to wait until it is fully released? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:56, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Agreed; let's wait for a stable version. -SCEhardT 18:10, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Alright that's fine. --Yarnalgo talk to me 21:24, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} It's an official release now, can we add it? --Yarnalgo talk to me 05:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

plus Added. Hope my wording, largely copied from your initial sentence, is okay. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
That's fine thank you! --Yarnalgo talk to me 20:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually, sorry. Since it's now the official release that link is wrong. The correct link is here. Thanks --Yarnalgo talk to me 20:33, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

Link is currently at the end of this sentence: Firefox 3.5 includes native support for Ogg (Theora and Vorbis). Available for download here.

Firefox 3.5 is not in beta anymore. Best link is probably just www.getfirefox.com

Done. --- RockMFR 23:38, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Real player removed

Yes, RealPlayer stinks. But it's still some people's favourite media player. I reckon we should still list this as an OGG player on Wikipedia:Media help, even if we put a warning up there as to some of the criticisms. It's a fact that some people stick like glue to their choices of media player. I believe it's better to allow people to choose RealPlayer than lead them to believe that RealPlayer doesn't support OGG, which isn't true. I reckon that there may also be NPOV issues with leaving RealPlayer off there. TreveXtalk 15:46, 23 September 2005 (UTC) {Copied from user page User talk:Raul654 TreveXtalk 09:59, 26 September 2005 (UTC)}

I've removed Real Player from this list. TreveX asked me a couple days ago on my talk page about this, but (with the main page pruning) I've been distracted until now. Real player is a truely awful program. TreveX said he thought that making this subjective choice could be a violation of the NPOV policy, but he is incorrect - the NPOV policy applies to articles, not Wikipedia pages. I've gone ahead and removed it. →Raul654 22:04, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
Perhaps NPOV doesn't apply here, but this was an aside to my main argument. You evidently feel quite strongly that RealPlayer isn't very good. Other users may feel differently, however. The purpose of this page is to explain to users how they can play media on Wikipedia, a number of options are given in order that users can make the choice most appropriate to them. RealPlayer's presence on this page is simply about giving users of Wikipedia the opportunity to make a free choice based on the fact that RealPlayer is capable of handling Vorbis and Theora files. To leave RealPlayer off is extremely patronising to users: "we think RealPlayer is rubbish, so we're not going to tell you how to play OGG files using it". I happen to agree with you that RealPlayer isn't particularly great, but why force users who use RealPlayer and are happy with it to change to another player simply because we don't like it? Restored. TreveXtalk 09:59, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

I've used all available video players and Real is my favourite. Dan100 (Talk) 18:33, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Certainly Real is notable enough to have a wiki article, and NPOV/POV shoudguide content there. But in terms of putting together a 'help' guide that 'helps' viewers access audio information, pointing them towards RealPlayer is really at cross-purposes. The install has so many steps, and the subtle opt-out and registration steps at least skirt the line of malware. More advanced users can certainly search the web and find it for themselves, but in terms of Wikipedia guiding a basic user towards how to setup audio files. I'd recommend removing RealPlayer.Cander0000 (talk) 18:37, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Usability Task Force

The issue of Wikipedia's audio content being completely inaccessible to normal mortals has been around for far, far too long now. The gods of Wikipedia need to:

  • recruit a task force
  • consider providing server-side recoding to a choice of real-world formats

If it turns out that server-side format conversion is considered to be technically or economically unfeasible, which is a shame as the web was designed with content negotiation facility built in, then have the task force

  • have the task force review what amongst the currently recommended set software and delivery mechanisms actually works and what doesn't (is usable, does not crash and does not ruin anyone's o/s),
  • write an installation procedure for [insert name of os] and deliver code to make it happen, rather simply documenting the installation problem by published a list of manual instructions, which is completely intimidating for your pension-age aunt who just wants to listen to some Handel.

Note: If a reader should pretend not to be able to understand the exact meaning of the phrase "real-word" the proposed test is:

  • take one a normal user, who is not a sysadmin, and without a programming background
  • take one Microsoft box, one Apple box of your choice and n mobile phones
  • on each box the user does not install software or reconfigure the box. Why? Because the user does not own the box - examples: an employee, a child at school or student at a college, a user in a library, a user of a mobile phone,
  • the user goes to Wikipedia, reads an article and plays some audio in it, Just like in Youtube, a site that is designed to be functional in the world as it actually is. If the user fails, then you have failed in real-worldness.

Examples of the problem:

  • the illiminable WMP codecs finally - after several cycles of: test random version, give up, wait a year or so, retry - seem to work for me in my WMP11/Vista x64, after a fashion. Yet still my IE8/x64 needs registry surgery to associate the MIME types correctly. I have to go off and research this, and set up a test box rather than mess around with my main machine. Real people don't and can't do this.
  • The java thing doesn't work for me. My IE8/x64 under Vista passes the Do I have Java? test at java.com, yet I have no clue what the gods of wikipedia intend should happen. (Java is supposed to get directed to handle an <object;> element?).

Call to action:

This delivery pantomime should be brought to an end. People who just use computers, rather than being career software design engineers, should be regarded as first-class Wikipedia readers. Recruit taskforce volunteers from within Wikipedia's sysadmin and dev demigods. What about a forum for programmers to share experience in relevant areas (o/s-es, browsers, ogg delivery technologies) and to volunteer support to the taskforce leaders? I'm happy to volunteer to pitch in and write some of the code, and will try to get a patch written to install/integrate delivery technologies, WMP codecs etc into IE6/7/8, +n other browsers, say. CecilWard (talk) 21:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

amen... Is it possible to do any browser/plug-in detection on this page and perhaps echo back to the viewer what software they have and only show relevant instructions? (i.e. a viewer with IE7 on Windows Vista would see different instructions that a FireFox on Mac viewer) I agree the non-admin use case(student, net cafe, etc.) is an eventual issue, but it seems that there are enough people married to this 'ogg' format as to make that an unappealling battle. Perhaps as a first salvo, getting it down to clear, tailored instructions for people who do own their boxes (and are free to install the 'dShow' plug in, as long as they understand it enough)Cander0000 (talk) 05:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Proposed incremental change

Propose the following change to improve instructions for the typical, non-SysAdmin Wikipedia viewer: Replace steps 2-4 

2. Go to xiph.org/dshow.
3. Download the current stable version.
4. Wait for the setup program to download. This should take less than 2 minutes on a 56k modem.

with 

2. Download the latest DirectShow Filters
(renumber remaining steps down)

Rationale:

  • the current 'stable' version of these DirectShow filters has been published since 12/2008. Its unlikely that any event would cause it to spontaneously become 'unstable', even if a new version was published. This page appears to monitored/discussed enough that an update to the 'stable' version would be noticed by advanced wikipedia editors and the page updated. Likewise if this link was to become dead or a critical security risk discovered, this face would be noted and the link removed fairly quickly.
  • "Wait for the setup..." balancing helpful vs. patronizing - thoughts?
  • "This should take less than 2 minutes..." 'your results may vary' - this seems like more of a sales pitch than informational. With wikipedia's global reach, i'm more of the mindset that 'it will take as long as it takes'. Unless MediaWiki supports estimates of download times for a variety of file types and connection speeds based on a geographic location, what's the compelling reason to call out a particular network connection type, assumed location and time estimate here?

I know this isn't close to a complete solution to making audio/video accessible to mere mortals, but perhaps some little improvements like there can chip away! Cander0000 (talk) 06:00, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Looks like a good change to me. Can someone confirm that the 32 bit installer will work on a 64 bit machine? -SCEhardT 15:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I don't agree with this change; the 32-bit installer doesn't work on 64-bit Windows, and also the xiph page already has a clear, one-click link to the download; users would probably rather be able to read the homepage for details on what the filters are and what the installer modifies before randomly downloading and running installers. Tuxcantfly (talk) 22:10, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Agreed on the 32-bit and 64-bit distinction. Unless there is a way to detect the viewer's OS? Disagree on the '...rather be able to read the homepage for details...'. I'm thinking 90% or better viewers of this page (a subset excluding the ones that gave up before even reaching this page) are just trying to get the filter up and running. The sysadmin types can always visit xiph to learn more.

so how about: 

2. Download the latest DirectShow Filters for:
* 32 bit Windows
* 63 bit Windows
(renumber remaining steps down)

VLC

Can you tell me why is VLC the recommended player? I know, it is most likely the player available for most platforms but it does not play the OGG/Vorbis files well! It skips first second or two of the file and this means VLC is totally useless for short files like pronunciation examples. In VLC forum they say it's an internal issue of the player and it would be a "huge redesign to fix it". 89.176.252.135 (talk) 00:51, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

If you are part of the VLC community please insist as much as possible that they do redesign that part. Even the FSF is recommending the use of VLC to play Ogg video and audio so they better live up to everyone's expectations and deliver a good product. Why is VLC the recommended player? You have the answer: because it's available for pretty much every platform and also because a javascript library called mv_embed defaults to VLC if neither Java or HTML 5 <video> support are available. mv_embed is/will be used across the Wikimedia projects.--Ivo Emanuel Gonçalves talk / contribs (join WP:PT) 02:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

BUT IT DOES NOT WORK Installed "out of the box" VLC will not play ogg files for me! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.84.210.28 (talk) 17:02, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

SeaMonkey 2.0

SeaMonkey 2.0 has native support for Ogg, could that be included? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldlaptop321 (talk • contribs)

Downloading an entire software suite just to play media files seems excessive to me, so I would suggest not including it. -SCEhardT 19:57, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Winamp?

Where is Winamp? I can't tell how many use it, but there was a time that it was one of the most popular audio/media players. And it has native ogg support. — mark ✎ 14:08, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

"It is highly recommended that you use a program which is capable of playing both Ogg Vorbis and Ogg Theora files. The reason is that both types files use the same file extension, namely .ogg. Programs which can only play Ogg Vorbis files, such as Winamp, will still attempt to load video (Ogg Theora) files but will fail to play them." →Raul654 14:12, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Ah, I missed that one. — mark ✎ 14:27, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Currently Winamp is not limited to playing audio files. As far as I know it was possible to play video in Winamp for at least one year. --213.142.200.101 07:29, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
True, but it's not, insofar as we have been able to determine, capable of playing ogg theora files. →Raul654 17:25, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
We could always e-mail them and ask, and if the answer is no, we could send in a reply requesting that feature. Too bad AFAIK admins like Raul don't get @wikipedia.org email addresses, they should allow that :-) --unforgettableid | talk to me 07:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
Winamp play ogg Theora !!! http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Media_help --adrruiz \(talk) 13:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Winamp can't play wiki's .ogg files on my computer, even after installing xiph.org's ogg codec. don't know if it blamed to vista64 or something else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nekosp (talk • contribs) 16:30, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Help_talk:Media_(audio_and_video)/Archives/2009&oldid=1082445517"