• Blizzard
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    36
    ·
    4 months ago

    plans to support ad-supported online media streams

    Why are they saying it like it’s something good and exciting?

    rewriting the whole core of VLC for the 4.0 release which will see a new interface

    Where have we see it before? It’s basically the classic scenario where popular software/service makes a complete chnage of design nobody asked for and it fails miserably. I recommend everyone to make a backup of the installer of the last version before this release…

    • federalreverse-old@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      76
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I really don’t see the what the fuss is in this thread. The source does make it seem a bit nefarious, but even so, it appears the changes in VLC amount to adding support for a streaming format and adding a channel listing of some sort.

      FAST is simply a streaming format. Whether to run ads is an individual decision of each channel.

      If I can have a streaming client that can play certain streams versus one that can’t, I’ll obviously pick the former. (Unless they employ a DRM scheme which does weird things to my devices but it doesn’t appear that’s part of the discussion here.)

      • Otter@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Yep, here’s the section

        When he was talking about that, he also shared that they plan to add support for FAST channels and other kinds of ad-supported online media streams that would allow users to watch ad-supported movies, TV shows, and more.

        However, he also clarified that plans for this were not finalized yet, and if it were to happen, it would be optional for VLC users.

        .

        It does when you consider that there are over 1,500 FAST channels in the US alone, plus countless others around the globe, with the number still growing.

        They already support other forms of streams, why not this. It would be weirder if they chose to not support it

      • eveninghere@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah, I think evil bastard streaming services choosing open source (VLC) is rather a win for the society.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      I mean, the guy who made vlc hasn’t charged for like 15 years now.

      For most people the only time they open VLC is to view a file locally. I’m surprised they’re not also trying to become more like plex/jellyfin then pivot to ad supported streaming

      • kratoz29@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’m surprised they’re not also trying to become more like plex/jellyfin then pivot to ad supported streaming

        Well, not people are driven by money, but I do agree that several costs need to be addressed, and sadly ads are one of the means to achieve this (and more depending on your greed).

    • Pantherina@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      They dont display ads, the channels send video streams that have embedded ads for money purpose things (whoever buys shit because of ads)