Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32

Thread: Features Coming For The VLC 2.1 Media Player

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Seattle, WA, US
    Posts
    122

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mark45 View Post
    Don't hold your breath, from what I read a while ago and even today on the forum - vdpau support in vlc is gonna require a lot more CPU for some (most?) people for unknown (to me) reasons, which screws the whole point of using vdpau.
    That's why I stay with Gnome Mplayer, its vdpau support is better than in SMplayer and consumes almost no CPU when video is paused, unlike SMplayer.

    I just use plain mplayer, or these days mplayer2

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    525

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mark45 View Post
    You can quickly fix the bug by declaring it a feature, like corporations do.
    There you go! Problem solved for Videolan. They are a Non-Profit Corporation.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    353

    Default

    new 2.1 feature. sort by album title for mac. it's ridiculous that in 2013 I can't order my music by album name.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    571

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shnatsel View Post
    Hmm, color conversions with GLSL. Am I the only one who want to show it to that Xvideo-on-GLAMOR guy? He had writing exactly that on the agenda.
    Color space conversion isn't exactly rocket science.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    I'm aware Awesomeness, I was more directing my comment to the linked post where the user stated the VLC has ALWAYS used more CPU than other movie player-- regardless of hardware acceleration or not. That its idling was just higher than others. Maybe its a generic bug, maybe its a bug due to architectural design of VLC, who knows.
    Disclaimer - i'm not a vlc or video expert, but my understanding is this:

    Most video players are rather dumb - they just decode the file and display it on the screen. Hardware decoding is perfectly suited to this task, as it can be done completely on the GPU.

    VLC, on the other hand, has an entire pipeline that it sends the video down. That's where the "LAN" in VLC comes from, and it allows them to do random post-processing effects, etc. on the videos. However, at least some of that can only be done on the CPU, which means that after VDPAU finishes decoding on the GPU, it gets sent back to the CPU, the rest of the processing is done there, and then it gets sent back to the GPU again to finally be displayed on the screen.

    Which means it is completely expected that you'd see higher CPU usage in VLC. Now, presumably they should be able to optimize that out - see if any further processing is necessary and in the common case just display directly on the screen like other players do. But i'm guessing that isn't easy given the architecture they have written into VLC.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mark45 View Post
    Don't hold your breath, from what I read a while ago and even today on the forum - vdpau support in vlc is gonna require a lot more CPU for some (most?) people for unknown (to me) reasons, which screws the whole point of using vdpau.
    That's why I stay with Gnome Mplayer, its vdpau support is better than in SMplayer and consumes almost no CPU when video is paused, unlike SMplayer.
    unfortunately, Gnome Mplayer always crashes for me

    Code:
    MPlayer interrupted by signal 11 in module: vo_check_events
    SMplayer works neat, though it consumes additional 2 - 4% of CPU... and I agree largely about VLC's CPU consumption

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    in front of my box :p
    Posts
    841

    Default

    Finally VDPAU!
    I was so shocked when I discovered that VLC did not support it after I got VDPAU on UVD to run...
    Of course all other improvements are also welcome.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,333

    Default

    As smitty explained, it's the architecture. This is exactly why you use mplayer and not VLC (or god forbid, gstreamer).

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,666

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chewi View Post
    You're saying Blu-ray is already perfect or you've tried a pre-release and didn't notice much difference? I hope it's better than mplayer at least. Although the framerate holds up with low CPU usage, I get some tearing, which I thought VDPAU was supposed to eliminate. The audio sync isn't terrible but it could be better. Finding the right episode can be a challenge and it often starts playing with the wrong language. Not much fun when you're trying to chill out in front of the TV.
    I'm saying that VLC cannot play Blu-ray and will never be able to, due to Blu-ray inherent DRM. Sure, you can sometimes crack it, but then what's the point of owning a Blu-ray video disc to begin with?

    Quote Originally Posted by smitty3268 View Post
    VLC, on the other hand, has an entire pipeline that it sends the video down. That's where the "LAN" in VLC comes from
    I'm pretty sure the LAN comes from the same place where Client does. As in, Video LAN Client and Video LAN Server were originally created for streaming video over LAN on a campus. Now the name is completely deprecated and thus the VLC acronym has no actual meaning.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    I'm saying that VLC cannot play Blu-ray and will never be able to, due to Blu-ray inherent DRM. Sure, you can sometimes crack it, but then what's the point of owning a Blu-ray video disc to begin with?
    I don't think it's that bad in practise. My optical drive packed up recently so I did some research to determine whether it was worth buying a Blu-ray drive now. I concluded that it was. Only BD+ titles, which are currently limited to Fox, pose a significant problem, and even those can be played with a little more effort. The rest just work, more or less. I don't buy many films as I don't tend to rewatch so I rent them by post instead. If there's one title I want that I know to be problematic, I'll just choose DVD instead, but that hasn't happened yet.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •