Ac3 plugin now for money ??

[Mikerla]

I can confirm that AC3 is working for me also.

MKV Movie...
VIDEO MPEG-4 1280x720 5131 kb/s 23fps
AUDIO 448kb/s 48000Hz 5.1

What are you using to convert your movies?

[the1legend]

I can confirm that AC3 is working for me also.

MKV Movie...
VIDEO MPEG-4 1280x720 5131 kb/s 23fps
AUDIO 448kb/s 48000Hz 5.1

What are you using to convert your movies?

This file was already converted via the internet

[nz]

we are working on this!

Could you maybe also work on making it cheaper?
The price for the codec pack seems pretty steep when there are other video players on the market that can play most or all of those formats for cheaper (namely vPlayer, which is free).

do you see vPlayer listed as being licensed at the Dolby website?

[maxidvd]

I tried vPlayer, but it lags a lot !!

[Hajile_Ibushi]

I'm still playing back videos that are labeled as AC3.

Are either of these possible?

#1 A possible mislabel by the encoder, and it may have actually just copied the name of the source?

or

#2 It's actually a close variant of AAC that's being read as AC3?

[JasonF]

we are working on this!

Could you maybe also work on making it cheaper?
The price for the codec pack seems pretty steep when there are other video players on the market that can play most or all of those formats for cheaper (namely vPlayer, which is free).

do you see vPlayer listed as being licensed at the Dolby website?

Maybe not, but I also don't see VLC, Media Player Classic, FFDShow, FFmpeg, and a slew of other GPL desktop packages listed there either.

As it turns out, the GPL'd packages based on libavcodec are generally of higher quality than Dolby licensed packages too. Maybe Archos should bear that in mind when charging for something that was shipped for free, with no mention of having to pay for it after a half broken update. The tech specs page only mentions "optional downloadable" codec, it doesn't mention that the "optional codec" must be purchased.

[gibbon]

i think it would be more acceptable to (if possible) allow playing ac3 if it is to be output on internal speakers or headphones. but if it is using hdmi/digital out then the addon pack is required.

[nz]

Could you maybe also work on making it cheaper?
The price for the codec pack seems pretty steep when there are other video players on the market that can play most or all of those formats for cheaper (namely vPlayer, which is free).

do you see vPlayer listed as being licensed at the Dolby website?

Maybe not, but I also don't see VLC, Media Player Classic, FFDShow, FFmpeg, and a slew of other GPL desktop packages listed there either.

As it turns out, the GPL'd packages based on libavcodec are generally of higher quality than Dolby licensed packages too. Maybe Archos should bear that in mind when charging for something that was shipped for free, with no mention of having to pay for it after a half broken update. The tech specs page only mentions "optional downloadable" codec, it doesn't mention that the "optional codec" must be purchased.

You are missing the point. Playing AC3 requires a license from Dolby and we have to pay it. Same for MPEG2. Hence the cinema plugin is not free. So simple.

I do agree that the spec page could be clearer on the plugin being a paid one.

[czesiu]

You are missing the point. Playing AC3 requires a license from Dolby and we have to pay it. Same for MPEG2. Hence the cinema plugin is not free. So simple.

I do agree that the spec page could be clearer on the plugin being a paid one.

Could you offer separate ac3 only plugin?

[JasonF]

You are missing the point. Playing AC3 requires a license from Dolby and we have to pay it. Same for MPEG2. Hence the cinema plugin is not free. So simple.

I do agree that the spec page could be clearer on the plugin being a paid one.

No, actually, it doesn't. That was my entire point by bringing up all of the GPL'd packages that decode AC3 both legally and without license from Dolby. The same is true of MPEG2 licensing.

Here, educate yourself, and stop trying to defend Archos' bait and switch tactics:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libavcodec

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FFmpeg

[FZelle]

Maybee you should educate yourself:

FFmpeg contains more than 100 codecs [20] most of which do not just store uncompressed data. At least all codecs that compress information could be claimed by patent holders.[21] Such claims may be enforceable in countries like the United States which have implemented software patents, but are considered unenforceable or void in countries that have not implemented software patents. Furthermore, many of these codecs are only released under terms that forbid reverse engineering, even for purposes of interoperability. These terms of use are forbidden in certain countries. For example, some European Union nations have not implemented software patents and have laws expressly allowing reverse engineering for purposes of interoperability.[22]

Most GNU/Linux distributions include a stripped version of FFmpeg only including certain codecs to avoid legal complications, instead contributors maintain unofficial repositories containing such software. [23][24]

So here is clearly stated that even if they implmemented these codecs they know that its illigal in many countries.
Just because someone does an opensource implementation doesn't mean it's legal.

[JasonF]

Maybee you should educate yourself:

FFmpeg contains more than 100 codecs [20] most of which do not just store uncompressed data. At least all codecs that compress information could be claimed by patent holders.[21] Such claims may be enforceable in countries like the United States which have implemented software patents, but are considered unenforceable or void in countries that have not implemented software patents. Furthermore, many of these codecs are only released under terms that forbid reverse engineering, even for purposes of interoperability. These terms of use are forbidden in certain countries. For example, some European Union nations have not implemented software patents and have laws expressly allowing reverse engineering for purposes of interoperability.[22]

Most GNU/Linux distributions include a stripped version of FFmpeg only including certain codecs to avoid legal complications, instead contributors maintain unofficial repositories containing such software. [23][24]

So here is clearly stated that even if they implmemented these codecs they know that its illigal in many countries.
Just because someone does an opensource implementation doesn't mean it's legal.

Thanks, but I don't see Archos charging for a plug-in pack (that actually shipped with our units) to also play MP3, MPEG4, WMV, WMA, or any of the other formats also covered by FFmpeg with similar grey legal status.

This plug-in BS is a classic bait-and-switch. I refuse to pay to restore functionality that was only lost after an update. As long as Archos is going to cry poor mouth over it, I'd just assume give the money to the developers of Rock Player or vPlayer out of sheer principle.

[paulus3476]

After having played a good selection of my movies - it seems AC3 within .mkv needs the cinema plugin, AC3 within .avi container plays without restriction

[inc]

This plug-in BS is a classic bait-and-switch. I refuse to pay to restore functionality that was only lost after an update. As long as Archos is going to cry poor mouth over it, I'd just assume give the money to the developers of Rock Player or vPlayer out of sheer principle.

As i understood it the AC3 should not have been included in v2.1 so you are actually not losing any functionality. Its more like a bonus in v2.1. It states on the homepage that the AC3 5.1 are in a optional plugin. Archos would still need to pay royalties to Dolby if AC3 was included in the firmware. You are free to pay for other applications/codecs which will play the movies you want on your Archos instead of using the plugin. But I can say it was worth the download for 15 euro. It plays all my movies smooth and without crashing.

[JasonF]

This plug-in BS is a classic bait-and-switch. I refuse to pay to restore functionality that was only lost after an update. As long as Archos is going to cry poor mouth over it, I'd just assume give the money to the developers of Rock Player or vPlayer out of sheer principle.

As i understood it the AC3 should not have been included in v2.1 so you are actually not losing any functionality. Its more like a bonus in v2.1. It states on the homepage that the AC3 5.1 are in a optional plugin. Archos would still need to pay royalties to Dolby if AC3 was included in the firmware. You are free to pay for other applications/codecs which will play the movies you want on your Archos instead of using the plugin. But I can say it was worth the download for 15 euro. It plays all my movies smooth and without crashing.

It really doesn't matter whether or not is was supposed to be included. The fact is that it was included and functionality was in fact lost via upgrade. The way they describe it as an optional plug-in, while including it upon shipment, gives the implication that it is a no-cost download.

Again, it's the very definition of bait-and-switch. After spending over $300, I absolutely refuse to be a victim of fraud or listen to some cockamamie story about licensing costs when other codecs are included that can be licensed or covered by libavcodec.

If you think falling for a bait and switch scam is "worth it," be my guest. I've got half a mind to contact the Colorado Attorney General.

[elmerohueso]

After having played a good selection of my movies - it seems AC3 within .mkv needs the cinema plugin, AC3 within .avi container plays without restriction

I would really like NZ to comment on this. Why does AC3 audio play in one video container but not another?

[FZelle]

@JasonF:

Thanks, but I don't see Archos charging for a plug-in pack (that actually shipped with our units) to also play MP3, MPEG4, WMV, WMA, or any of the other formats also covered by FFmpeg with similar grey legal status.

Dolbi is the company holding the rights for AC3, and they charge a license from every COMMERCIAL product either creating or playing data in that format.
The owners of the other formats just want money from the people producing data in that format.

[JasonF]

@JasonF:

Thanks, but I don't see Archos charging for a plug-in pack (that actually shipped with our units) to also play MP3, MPEG4, WMV, WMA, or any of the other formats also covered by FFmpeg with similar grey legal status.

Dolbi is the company holding the rights for AC3, and they charge a license from every COMMERCIAL product either creating or playing data in that format.
The owners of the other formats just want money from the people producing data in that format.

Oh really? So then why is it that Archos is also trying to defraud us to play MPEG2?

Why is it that Microsoft has an entire set of pages devoted to their licensing fees for Windows Media Components, including strictly playback devices?

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/window ... ments.aspx

Why is it the MPEG LA covers licensing for PLAYBACK for H264/MPEG4, MPEG2, and everything else they own?

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2368359,00.asp

However, companies that develop products and services that are used to encode and decode video, for example, would be forced to still pay royalties to the licensing body.

Why is it you shills are so intent on defending the fraudulent activities of Archos after already handing over hundreds of dollars to them?

[Hajile_Ibushi]

After having played a good selection of my movies - it seems AC3 within .mkv needs the cinema plugin, AC3 within .avi container plays without restriction

I would really like NZ to comment on this. Why does AC3 audio play in one video container but not another?

I'm guessing it's only for a specific AC3 format. So far, all my AC3's are running (If you watch a lot of anime like i have, you'll know they encode every variant of every codec out there). Seems the only ones affected are the ones ripping off DVD's.

[nz]

@JasonF:

Thanks, but I don't see Archos charging for a plug-in pack (that actually shipped with our units) to also play MP3, MPEG4, WMV, WMA, or any of the other formats also covered by FFmpeg with similar grey legal status.

Dolbi is the company holding the rights for AC3, and they charge a license from every COMMERCIAL product either creating or playing data in that format.
The owners of the other formats just want money from the people producing data in that format.

Oh really? So then why is it that Archos is also trying to defraud us to play MPEG2?

we do not defraud you, playing MPEG2 also costs money.

for some codecs, the royalties are included in the unit price, for others, its a separate plugin.

Why is it that Microsoft has an entire set of pages devoted to their licensing fees for Windows Media Components, including strictly playback devices?

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/window ... ments.aspx

Why is it the MPEG LA covers licensing for PLAYBACK for H264/MPEG4, MPEG2, and everything else they own?

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2368359,00.asp

No need to remind us about codec royalties, we are quite aware of that. Trust me we would like not to pay any of them (and in effect make the product cheaper) if we could. But we cannot