Re: Safe Alternatives to Real Player

[Jay T. Blocksom]

On Sun, 10 Aug 2003 06:37:34 GMT, in <alt.privacy.spyware>, "Richard
Steinfeld" <rgsteinBUTREMOVETHIS@sonic.net> wrote:
>
> I'm looking for a good alternative to Real Player.
>
[snip]

There is no such animal, really. This is by the deliberate design of the
various Real Media formats, which are heavily protected, legally.

> I've heard two players mentioned recently. These are:
> 1. "Real Alternative"/"Media Player Classic" and
> 2. "JetAudio."
>
[snip]

Actually, those are three separate programs, IIUC.

"Real Alternative" is pointless, since the ONLY correct answer to Real Media
content is to do your best Nancy Reagan imitation: "Just Say NO!"

I've heard some assorted good things about "Media Player Classic"; but I've
not yet tried it out.

I have tried "JetAudio"; but I'm not doing handstands. Its user interface
tries much too hard to be "kewl", at the expense of simple usability.
Whomever wrote it is obviously very young. Having said that, it is a
passable alternative to Apple's QuickTime for viewing .MOV files, especially
on older/slower systems where the QT player tends to act like a 5,000-lb.
elephant. For most of the other formats it handles (and there are quite a
few), there are generally better alternatives, especially for the more
popular formats like .MP3 and such.

> I miss the non-commercial radio content that I used to get
> with Real. I found Real just too abusive to have on my
> machine, so I ripped it out, removed all the fishhooks,
> which took some doing. My computer runs a lot more reliably
> now. I won't belabor Real's uncivilized behavior here;
> others have done that nicely, and will continue to do so.
[snip]

I understand, and sympathize. But you're bemoning this to the wrong crowd.
You *should* be making precisely these points to your local NPR Station
Manager, *and* indelibly impressing upon him that a "public" broadcaster
should be offering their content in generic NON-PROPRIETARY formats, such as
..MP3, .MPEG, etc.

> I tracked Real Player's changes when I installed it. It made
> more than 5,000 changes to my system.
> Ahem. I said, Five Thousand Changes to My System! (The
> printout of these changes took 46 close-spaced pages! They
> kept emerging from my printer as my jaw dropped).
> Good God! Is this electronic Satan or what?
>
[snip]

Pretty close. Real Networks *IS* fundamentally Evil.

--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net


"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOTE: E-Mail address in "From:" line is INVALID! Remove +SPAMBLOCK to mail.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is expressly prohibited
under USC Title 47, Section 227. Violators are subject to charge of up to
$1,500 per incident or treble actual costs, whichever is greater.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[Richard Steinfeld]

> There is no such animal, really. This is by the
deliberate design of the
> various Real Media formats, which are heavily protected,
legally.
>

I've read at times that Real was making their technology
available in the open. However, there's gotta be a catch...


> > I've heard two players mentioned recently. These are:
> > 1. "Real Alternative"/"Media Player Classic" and
> > 2. "JetAudio."
> >
> [snip]
>
> Actually, those are three separate programs, IIUC.
>
> "Real Alternative" is pointless, since the ONLY correct
answer to Real Media
> content is to do your best Nancy Reagan imitation: "Just
Say NO!"
>
A fat lot of good she did.

> I've heard some assorted good things about "Media Player
Classic"; but I've
> not yet tried it out.
>

It appears that "Media Player Classic" and "Real
Alternative" are the same thing.

> I have tried "JetAudio"; but I'm not doing handstands.
Its user interface
> tries much too hard to be "kewl", at the expense of simple
usability.
> Whomever wrote it is obviously very young. Having said
that, it is a
> passable alternative to Apple's QuickTime for viewing .MOV
files, especially
> on older/slower systems where the QT player tends to act
like a 5,000-lb.
> elephant. For most of the other formats it handles (and
there are quite a
> few), there are generally better alternatives, especially
for the more
> popular formats like .MP3 and such.
>

Well, it is OK if it is klutzy so long as it works without
the abuse. At this point, all I want is some usable way to
listen to the .ra audio.

> > I miss the non-commercial radio content that I used to
get
> > with Real. I found Real just too abusive to have on my
> > machine, so I ripped it out, removed all the fishhooks,
> > which took some doing. My computer runs a lot more
reliably
> > now. I won't belabor Real's uncivilized behavior here;
> > others have done that nicely, and will continue to do
so.
> [snip]
>
> I understand, and sympathize. But you're bemoning this to
the wrong crowd.
> You *should* be making precisely these points to your
local NPR Station
> Manager, *and* indelibly impressing upon him that a
"public" broadcaster
> should be offering their content in generic
NON-PROPRIETARY formats, such as
> .MP3, .MPEG, etc.
>

You know, I have made this point to them over and over.
Their response is unsettling. They don't answer at all. For
example, I have emailed "On The Media" repeatedly about this
issue. They'll answer about other topics. About this one,
all I get is silence, and it is an issue that they should be
covering as a five-alarm fire. But I get silence.

It is as if Real is giving the webmasters payola. A problem
here is that RN is now giving non-profits free use of their
technology, even cross-promoting with them. The BBC has
adopted Real as their worldwide net technology.
Simultaneously, the BBC gave up their shortwave
transmissions to North America. Real is a juggernaut that I
don't know how to stop. In most of the US, for example,
programs that I listen to routinely from various public
radio sources and foundations can only be heard via Real
formatting over a computer.

I don't know...I have a similar dislike for Microsoft, and
they get steadily more brazen. But we use their stuff, don't
we? In my work, it is buy Microsoft products or starve.
That's the choice. This is the world as it is presently.
Obviously, Real has done its best to become the Microsoft of
streaming media.

Richard

[Jay T. Blocksom]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 10:06:09 GMT, in <alt.privacy.spyware>, "Richard
Steinfeld" <rgsteinBUTREMOVETHIS@sonic.net> wrote:
>
[snip]
>
> I've read at times that Real was making their technology
> available in the open.
[snip]

I'll believe that when I see it. And I would expect a Genie to pop up from
my keyboard in a puff of pink smoke and offer an unending supply of
unconditional wishes, before that happens.

> > "Real Alternative" is pointless, since the ONLY correct answer to
> > Real Media content is to do your best Nancy Reagan imitation: "Just
> > Say NO!"
> >
> A fat lot of good she did.
>
[snip]

Agreed, but that's not the point.

> It appears that "Media Player Classic" and "Real
> Alternative" are the same thing.
>
[snip]

Maybe; but my understanding is that MPC is/was a pre-existing stand-alone
product that RealAlt is in part based on (i.e., it "calls" certain parts of
MPC in the course of its operation). Yes, you need to have MPC installed
for RealAlt to work; but that doesn't mean they're the same thing.

> > I have tried "JetAudio"; but I'm not doing handstands.
[snip]

> Well, it is OK if it is klutzy so long as it works without
> the abuse. At this point, all I want is some usable way to
> listen to the .ra audio.
>
[snip]

"Klutzy" would be one good description. Others would be, "Form over
function", or "Sizzle, over substance".

To be fair, it *does* work (at least for the formats I've tried -- that list
does not include .RA, tho'); it just doesn't work all that *well*, IMCO.

> > I understand, and sympathize. But you're bemoning this to
> the wrong crowd.
[snip]
>
> You know, I have made this point to them over and over.
> Their response is unsettling. They don't answer at all. For
> example, I have emailed "On The Media" repeatedly about this
> issue. They'll answer about other topics. About this one,
> all I get is silence, and it is an issue that they should be
> covering as a five-alarm fire. But I get silence.
>
[snip]

Well, no one I know has ever claimed that PBS/NPR were ethically managed.

Have you called or written your local Station Manager, directly? Perhaps
the latter, followed up by the former after about two weeks if you don't get
an answer -- the point of the call being "WHY have you not even had the
professionalism and courtesy to respond to my letter?"

If even that fails, perhaps try other media -- i.e., embarass them into
addressing the issue.

> It is as if Real is giving the webmasters payola.
[snip]

What makes you think they're not?

> Real is a juggernaut that I
> don't know how to stop.
[snip]

One [ex-]user at a time.

> I don't know...I have a similar dislike for Microsoft, and
> they get steadily more brazen. But we use their stuff, don't
> we? In my work, it is buy Microsoft products or starve.
> That's the choice.
[snip]

Not necessarily. Offhand, I can't think of *anything* MS currently produces
which cannot be effectively replaced by something else -- and usually
multiple choices of "something else", all demonstrably superior to the MS
corresponding product. And yes, this includes those applications that some
folks think are "must haves" for effective interaction with the mainstream
business world, like Word, Excel, etc. -- it's just not so, at least in the
VAST majority of cases.

(Tho' I acknowledge that corporate inertia and office politics can be very
large impediments to rational decision-making.)

--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net


"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOTE: E-Mail address in "From:" line is INVALID! Remove +SPAMBLOCK to mail.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is expressly prohibited
under USC Title 47, Section 227. Violators are subject to charge of up to
$1,500 per incident or treble actual costs, whichever is greater.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -