Topic: MC for linux? (Read 7162 times)

outsider · « **on:** October 07, 2005, 09:53:24 am »

Are there any intentions of porting the wonderful MC to linux?
I'm heavily leaning towards putting a flavour of Linux on my server (same machine that MC lives on) and the only thing holding me back from dropping windoz is MC.

I love it too much to just give it up.

hit_ny · « **Reply #1 on:** October 07, 2005, 12:15:06 pm »

I've wondered bout this for a long time, no one is asking for MC in KDE or GNOME. But a server that could run via the cmd line and be acessible via a client or maybe several clients. MC is most responsive when it lives on the same box as the media it acesses.

But this will have to wait, we cant get multi-updates via > 1 client in windows atm.

negopus · « **Reply #2 on:** October 07, 2005, 01:17:28 pm »

Quote from: outsider on October 07, 2005, 09:53:24 am

I'm heavily leaning towards putting a flavour of Linux on my server (same machine that MC lives on) and the only thing holding me back from dropping windoz is MC.

Me too! MC is the only reason that stopped my migration to Linux (I'm running a PC, not a server).

VGuarino · « **Reply #3 on:** October 07, 2005, 02:23:33 pm »

I'd like to see at a minimum, a server version for Linux. I am in the process of creating a media storage server. I would like to use a Linux box.

Having MC's Library server on linux would be a good start in my opinion.

Vin

urlwolf · « **Reply #4 on:** October 07, 2005, 03:06:56 pm »

Yep. Count me in.

UnknownID · « **Reply #5 on:** October 07, 2005, 07:46:49 pm »

Ditto! (for Server and Client)

UnknownID

outsider · « **Reply #6 on:** October 07, 2005, 09:15:27 pm »

Looks like I've hit on something here...
Are the Admins (and/or the JRiver team) aware of this desire by the paying users to see this product on a linux platform?

Mastiff · « **Reply #7 on:** October 08, 2005, 09:07:37 am »

Actually this one has been up every half year or so as long as I have been on this board, and it gets a few votes, and then it dies again. So don't hold your breath... Remember that developing something like that is expensive, and the few Linux users that will use it can in no way warrant the costs for JRiver, if I'm right. So I'm afraid it's another case of "whack the penguin".

JimH · « **Reply #8 on:** October 08, 2005, 10:54:48 am »

The Tzar has it right. It would cost around $1 million in development and most Linux users don't pay for software. We'd love to do it.

Mastiff · « **Reply #9 on:** October 08, 2005, 10:57:02 am »

Of course what they don't take into account is that if you guys should do it, it had to be done right the first time, as opposed to almost everything Linux that comes out. Most Linux stuff is GNU, so they don't loose anything in rep. A commercial company has al lot more to loose than to gain on this, which is why so little commercial stuff comes out on Linux.

VGuarino · « **Reply #10 on:** October 08, 2005, 11:10:50 am »

Hello,

Yes, developement costs can be high. In the back of my mind I would can see client box with video/audio etc...The OS of choice would be Linux, like a lot of black boxes out there today. JRiver would then license MC.

So, there are other markets to be tapped other than end users. Linux users will pay for software that is worth it.

V

pank2002 · « **Reply #11 on:** October 08, 2005, 11:20:50 am »

Quote from: JimH on October 08, 2005, 10:54:48 am

The Tzar has it right. It would cost around $1 million in development and most Linux users don't pay for software. We'd love to do it.

I didn't know it was that expensive to develop software. Of course a lot of people are involved and you need decent hardware and software etc.

Quote from: VGuarino on October 08, 2005, 11:10:50 am

So, there are other markets to be tapped other than end users.

At the moment larger servers aren't really what MC is aiming for though. At least that is how I see it.

Quote

Linux users will pay for software that is worth it.

That is a broad statement, and I very much doubt it! One of the more attractive features of GNU/Linux, beside it being quite customizable, is it's free (for end users at least). I doubt very much that the majority of GNU/Linux folks would pay for MC.

VGuarino · « **Reply #12 on:** October 08, 2005, 11:48:35 am »

Quote from: pank2002 on October 08, 2005, 11:20:50 am

At the moment larger servers aren't really what MC is aiming for though. At least that is how I see it.

Plank, I'm not talking servers. I'm talking a remote client device with wi-fi. Linux can fit on a Flash memory without any problems. Some cable desktop boxes are running linux as well as lots of other devices.

V

JimH · « **Reply #13 on:** October 08, 2005, 12:19:55 pm »

Quote from: VGuarino on October 08, 2005, 11:10:50 am

... I can see client box with video/audio etc...The OS of choice would be Linux, like a lot of black boxes out there today. JRiver would then license MC.

That's a more do-able project and something we've thought about.

Mastiff · « **Reply #14 on:** October 08, 2005, 02:41:00 pm »

Quote from: VGuarino on October 08, 2005, 11:10:50 am

Linux users will pay for software that is worth it.

Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! Omigod, you're killin' me! The vast majority of Linux users think it should a crime to demand any money for software!

KingSparta · « **Reply #15 on:** October 08, 2005, 07:22:20 pm »

I think gateley likes linux\apple too

Mastiff · « **Reply #16 on:** October 09, 2005, 03:48:02 pm »

I didn't say all Linux users meant that, I said the vast majority. Remember that the vast majority is students, and they really aren't the group who spend much money on software. Actually they spend a lot more on beer...

danrien · « **Reply #17 on:** October 09, 2005, 04:55:53 pm »

mastiff: very true about the beer! (i dont spend any money on the stuff.... i just have friends who do.... um yeh). anyways, i would definitely pay the same price or perhaps a premium (like 5 more bucks) for this program on linux. could it be easily ported using the libraries from Wine or something (I've already tried doing it with wine, but my system is so wierd that Wine doesn't recognize the sound drivers)?

outsider · « **Reply #18 on:** October 11, 2005, 06:57:59 am »

danrien, I thought of using the wine libraries to get MC working on linux but haven't actually tried it.
I think I'll spend some time with that in the next few weeks, and see what results I get.

Maybe all we need is just a version of MC which is more wine friendly... not necessarly a total re-write.
That would certanly cost a LOT less, and provide the ability to use it in Linux.
The multi-zone feature is the biggest part that I'm hoping to get working.

Mr ChriZ · « **Reply #19 on:** October 11, 2005, 07:11:10 am »

Tots up... how much spent in last month
Beer hmm probalby about £70
Software hmm $5. (Fish tank Screensaver!)

Ah well ( My MC is Legit

)

ChriZ (Student)

Oh and I spend a lot of time with Wine, and can confirm
I'm totally wine compatible. (Especially the cheap ones)

outsider · « **Reply #20 on:** October 12, 2005, 06:42:46 am »

Quote from: Mr ChriZ on October 11, 2005, 07:11:10 am

Oh and I spend a lot of time with Wine, and can confirm
I'm totally wine compatible. (Especially the cheap ones)

The question wasn't whether anyone is wine compatible.
But thanx for bumping this thread.

Mastiff, I guess you were right... there's really only a handfull of people that seem to be interested in MC+Linux combo... So I'll let it drop.

For now.

Mastiff · « **Reply #21 on:** October 12, 2005, 09:11:10 am »

Don't worry, somebody will ask the same question in a few months...

salsbst1 · « **Reply #22 on:** October 12, 2005, 02:31:54 pm »

Quote from: outsider on October 11, 2005, 06:57:59 am

danrien, I thought of using the wine libraries to get MC working on linux but haven't actually tried it.
I think I'll spend some time with that in the next few weeks, and see what results I get.

Maybe all we need is just a version of MC which is more wine friendly... not necessarly a total re-write.
That would certanly cost a LOT less, and provide the ability to use it in Linux.
The multi-zone feature is the biggest part that I'm hoping to get working.

Chalk me up as very interested in Wine compatibility (mostly on the Library Server side). Let us know how your experiment turns out!

outsider · « **Reply #23 on:** October 12, 2005, 04:25:51 pm »

So I gave it a wirl last night.. (installing MC11 with Wine in SuSE9.3)
Not too long into the install, MC tells me to download IE6.0, since it needs it.
What does MC need IE for?
Can this be desabled in the install of MC?

outsider · « **Reply #24 on:** October 12, 2005, 05:06:21 pm »

Ok.
Overcame the IE6 hurtle. Installed IE6 using Sidenet's script.

Then MC 11 installed without a problem. Listening to an MP3 as we speak on SuSE 9.3 and MC 11.
I remember using wine years ago, and it never worked very well/consistently, so I assumed I would have to fight with it to install MC, but I was wrong. It was extremely painless. No different then installing on a Windows machine.

If you've got linux installed, give it wirl. I used the latest wine build from www.winehq.com

[edit] Later this evening, as I played with MC, the font rendering is starting to bother me. ALL fonts within MC11 are rendered strangely. Most are very very thick (bold) and it often makes the display unreadable. Another problem is that fonts within the Tools>Options menu are rendered very small (at least on the left hand column)
Over all, font rendering is less then ideal. Usable, but for the most part annoying. Having used MC already on a windows box, I already know my way around. A beginner would be tottaly lost, since some things are un-readable.
Oh, and changing skins makes no difference.

For those of you attempting this on your linux installation, let me know how things look for you.
If we get a few of us running MC on linux, maybe we can get a dedicated sub-forum to help each other out, and maybe even JRiver support to make things friendlier on linux??

jgreen · « **Reply #25 on:** October 12, 2005, 07:02:28 pm »

Outsider--
This is really cool, IMO. Congratulations! Now how about some details? Playback works, what about library searches and refreshes? How does the performance compare to the Windows version?

glynor · « **Reply #26 on:** October 12, 2005, 11:15:21 pm »

Cough... OSX. Cough.

No, but seriously. Mastiff, I don't think the vast majority of Linux users have any problem with asking for money for software. Asking is just fine.

Many Linux/GNU-heads have a problem with non-free software, but they're not talking free-as-in-beer, they're talking about free-as-in-speech. Open source, no draconian EULA, stuff like that.

One other thing I wanted to address is the comment someone made above about "MC prefers to live on the same box as the media" or something like this. This is completely false. All of my media lives on a network-attached Linux box served up via SAMBA amd it works splendidly. MC does prefer (basically requires for all intents and purposes) to have it's "library files" (the database files) living on the same machine, but the media files can be remote with no problems.

I love Linux. I have two Linux boxes (three Windows, two Macs, and a partridge in a pear tree) but I'm not sure I'd ever actually use mc on my Linux boxes. VLC does just fine, and Linux certainly isn't ready to replace my HTPC (as I do like to fire up HL2 or Call of Duty every so often).

Now, OSX... That's another story. (And after that, Linux wouldn't be that hard...)

hit_ny · « **Reply #27 on:** October 13, 2005, 03:06:46 am »

Quote from: glynor on October 12, 2005, 11:15:21 pm

One other thing I wanted to address is the comment someone made above about "MC prefers to live on the same box as the media" or something like this. This is completely false. All of my media lives on a network-attached Linux box served up via SAMBA amd it works splendidly. MC does prefer (basically requires for all intents and purposes) to have it's "library files" (the database files) living on the same machine, but the media files can be remote with no problems.

Heh that was me

Oh what you say is true, but don't you get the best performance out of MC if its on the same box as the media than using networked storage. My impression is that local media is much faster to access. PCI 100/133 vs. 100Mbit ethernet vs. USB2/Firewire (nice but only in bursts)

JRiver only recently offered a fix, to make viewing mp3 cbr files faster over networked storage. Compare the times Alex posted to what it's like if MC + storage are on the same box vs. over a 100MBit ethernet.

I'm not sure but could this only hold if said media is not yet imported into MC ? and whether mp3 is the only affected media format.

Valissystem · « **Reply #28 on:** October 13, 2005, 03:17:09 am »

Quote

Now, OSX... That's another story.

So, if OSX was at all doable I'd love it. Having spent a year now on Mac OS X for my work machine - I love the system, however I really miss MC! iTunes is simply not as good.

outsider · « **Reply #29 on:** October 13, 2005, 05:25:52 am »

Quote from: jgreen on October 12, 2005, 07:02:28 pm

Outsider--
This is really cool, IMO. Congratulations! Now how about some details? Playback works, what about library searches and refreshes? How does the performance compare to the Windows version?

I was so excited that it actually worked so easily, that I didn't really look for performance issues.
I'll install MC on the other partition (WinXP) and play with it on the same cmoputer (to be able to judge the FEEL of it between OSs)
I"ll let you know what I come up with...
Any other requests?

VGuarino · « **Reply #30 on:** October 13, 2005, 03:07:26 pm »

As I said earleier, I could envision seeing MC Library Server running on linux. Network attached drives do work, but are not less efficient than local drives. In a situation where MC is talking to a NAS, MC has to get the file via network from the network drive, then send the same file to the client over the same network (most likely). I can see having 3-4 clients running throughout the house, which would add unnecessary traffic on my network. I am not saying everyone needs to think of this, but it is something I consider for my network.

I found this today:
http://www.lime-technology.com/

It's running Linux on a 128mb USB flash memory. Add MC Library server to it and you have what I was envisioning.

Vin

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: MC for linux? (Read 7162 times)

UnknownID