Maybe we should just wait for BSPlayer 3...

[jimconley]

BS Player 2.0 reminds me a great deal of WinAmp 3.0. This is not meant as a compliment.

Specifically, a compact tight program is turning into bloatware as a 'corporate mindset' starts driving the product. If a camel is a horse designed by committee then BSPlayer 2 seems a media player designed by a bank manager. Much as many WinAmp users stuck with 2.x releases, I suspect BSplayer enthusiasts will keep a copy of the 1.x binary until BSPlayer decides what it's going to be when it grows up. WinAmp 3 annoyed so many people off that Nullsoft skipped a version number. Lacking AOL and Justin Frankel, I doubt BSPlayer will have the time or opportunity to try again.

This isn't to disparage ambition but BSPlayer has always excelled at video playback and not much else. It is a mediocre audio player (compared with Winamp) and, based on the initial relase of 2.0, is a fairly shoddy media library. That isn't too say there isn't room for improvement but, other than a deepset hatred for Microsoft, what would prompt an end-user to use BSPlayer 2.0 over Windows Media Player 10? Of course BSPlayer with FFDShow is much more powerful with a much smaller footprint but we're talking about the whole media package here. By introducing a media library, especially a half-cooked one, BSPlayer is now subject to comparison against full-featured and mature products such as Nero, BeyondTV, WMP instead of the relatively tight and safe video playback market. BSPlayer vs. VLC? No contest. BSPlayer vs Windows Media Center? Let's be serious.

As a tale of cautionary warning for users, let's not forget what just happened to the Meedio team who left a whole bunch of licensed users dangling after their buy-out by Yahoo. Webteh openly admits they need to make money and that historical users (you know - the real supporters) can kiss their upgrades goodbye. MusicMatch pulled the same stunt about four years ago but also introduced some genuinely valuable and feature-complete changes that justified the licensing reversal. The upshoot of all this? Why would users buy a product from a company 'on the verge', especially when the product is (politely) still a bit beta buggy?

Anyhow, enough ranting. I've promoted BSPlayer to a lot of friends and clients over the years and more than a few have plunked honest too goodness cash for the pro version. Clearly the BSPlayer team has a plan and I wish them the best.

But I doubt they'll make it through the year.

PS - the BSPlayer forum admin who responded to the poor soul having problems removing SaveU with the comment to use a spyware/adware remover really needs to step back and think about how ironic this is. Why not just have your uninstaller overwrite the boot sector?

[J7N]

Good post. :o
It pretty much summarizes my opinion about BSPlayer versions above v1.36 in proper English.

[Tizio]

Originally Posted by J7N

Good post. :o
It pretty much summarizes my opinion about BSPlayer versions above v1.36 in proper English.

What's wrong with v1.37? :?

[J7N]

Ok, perhaps v1.37 is the last good release (I haven't tried this minor upgrade), but starting from v1.39 BSPlayer's performace has worsened.

Speaking of Winamp: I have installed Winamp v5.08c. I was bundled with paid commercial CDDB, free-form modern skins, media library, to name a few bloat components. But since Winamp has modular structure, all those features can be removed! That's a big difference and doesn't force users to stick to v2.9x.

Edit:
BSplayer has lost its identy no longer being small and fast DirectShow application. Why pay now if you can receive Windows Media Player for free?

[artam]

Originally Posted by jimconley

Why would users buy a product from a company 'on the verge', especially when the product is (politely) still a bit beta buggy?

This is the most serious notice! I had said the same in one of the other threads on this forum.

The price 30 eur is just too much for a half-made product having many non-minor bugs. And people just will avoid to install adwared version they might want to try to see if the bugs were fixed and to decide if it's time to buy.

[grendizer]

There are things Jim said I agree with, and things I do not. Here are my comments.

Specifically, a compact tight program is turning into bloatware

I wonder why when a software gets new functions, it becomes a "bloatware". I think Webteh is going in the right direction when adding a media library, making the player universal, and extending its possibilities.
Microsoft did the same thing when going from Windows Media Player v6 to v7, and they were right to do it. In my opinion, it is very handy to get in one single program, a song player, movie player, a media library (a place where to launch the playback of all albums in your hard drive, instead of browsing through folders), an MP3/WMA ripping program, and a excellent tag editor. Now as BsPlayer evolves, we can see the same features in V2, added to the excellent assets of V1.
It is TRUE that Windows Media Player is a bigger program than, for example, Media Player Classic. It's true that it takes longer to start WMP than MPC, but WMP offers more functions. So I can accept to wait 1 second more of loading to get the extra functions!
I believe the old argument about a program being too bloaty belongs to those who want to save up every bit on their hard drive and ram. They should realize we’re not in the times of MsDos anymore, today’s computers are able to run larger programs!
Then, after the program is loaded, it does not affect at all the playback of medias. Same goes for BsPlayer. The video playback is still very good. I did not notice any loss in the video playback or speed quality since BsPlayer V1.
It is not because the program has a media library that it will play videos slower!! Or if I am wrong, could anybody explain me why??
And finally, what are the "heavy" features of BsPlayer V2, besides the media library? Nothing! BsPlayer V2 is pretty much like V1. And the media library does not seem bloaty neither.
But the BS media library could be improved in its functions and design. I have tried the WMP11 media library and it is just excellent. I'd like to see this in BsPlayer.

So, to summarize this:
- BsPlayer 2 is not a slow processing program.
- Webteh is right to add new interesting features to their program.

This isn't to disparage ambition but BSPlayer has always excelled at video playback and not much else. It is a mediocre audio player (compared with Winamp) and, based on the initial relase of 2.0, is a fairly shoddy media library.

Hmm that is true. WMP is still my favorite program for MP3/WMA playback, and WinDVD is still my favorite for DVD playback. I will explain in another thread why I still prefer those programs. But I’m sure if we report every problems and requests to the Webteh team, they will work on it, and make a very good program.
If Webteh is serious, we can get a media player that is as good as WMP and Winamp for MP3’s, WinDVD for DVD’s, and BsPlayer for Divx videos!

Why would users buy a product from a company 'on the verge', especially when the product is (politely) still a bit beta buggy?

Because a lot of users noticed that BsPlayer is one of the best players around. Webteh has done a very good job over the years, partly for free! Therefore we can trust Webteh for future improvements. BsPlayer 2 may be buggy, but according to my experience, it is as much usable as V1 for most uses.

Why you just have your uninstaller overwrite the boot sector?

Huh?


In short, I still trust Webteh.

[J7N]

a media library (a place where to launch the playback of all albums in your hard drive, instead of browsing through folders)

There is nothing wrong if you have to browse the filesystem to find your files. It makes you keep files organized. Because many users know only the Windows built-in media playback functions, lots of computers appeared containing hundreads of audio files in a single directory without common naming conventions and randomly placed AlbumArt JPEG graphics. (Observed in the Direct Connect P2P network.) If you lose the media library you end up before a complete chaos.

They should realize we’re not in the times of MsDos anymore, today’s computers are able to run larger programs!

So that's why today's computers do not appear as fast as they are supposed to be judging by the processor frequency and ammount of RAM. What's the point of having a fast computer then?

Then, after the program is loaded, it does not affect at all the playback of medias.

It indeed does affect playback. If you don't have enough free mem (because it is taken up by bloatware) you can no longer quickly switch to a different background application: sound mixer or a communications application, for example. You can no longer quickly jump to another track in the playlist. I remember that I once was so stupid to install Media Player 7 when it came out. My comp had 96 MB of RAM and the CPU ran at 400 MHz, enough to play back most videos and even emulate N64 sound system, but not for WMP7. It had much trouble switching to a different set of codecs when the file type changed.

Webteh should have followed the example of Winamp at least (if not Foobar2000) where almost every function is optional and can be removed. If you like a media library, you can use it. But you're not forced to do it. If there is a bug in a component, you can remove the faulty one (which you might not even need) and continue to use the application.

[grendizer]

It's a question of preference to launch albums playback from Windows Explorer or from a media library. I do both, but I like to have a media library, it's great for making playlists, and to jump quickly from one track to another (from different albums/ bands), I.M.O. I think it is now an essential tool of a media player (a lot of people enjoy the media centers).

I didn't understand your reasoning about fast computer. With old computer you could run Doom 1, but not Doom 3. With today's computer you can run both. The same goes for media players. Old computers: Windows Media Player 6, new computers: Windows Media Player 11 and Media Player Classic.
Before I used BsPlayer, I was using WMP8/9 to read divx videos. My comp had (and still has) a 2.4Ghz processor and 1Gb of Ram. There was no problem reading divx, no lagging and slow downs. My friends have a new computer with 3ghz processor and 2Gb of Ram, there is far enough space and speed to run WMP and Bsplayer together, and even to run other applications. And now there is the dualcore processors: even more apps can be run at the same time.
Now I understand that for people with an older computer, applications like WMP 10 can really slow down everything. So the problem goes down to this: should Webteh develop for 5 years old computers, or should they explore new technologies? Sorry for the owners of old computers, but I would choose the second alternative.

A modular software like what you describe sounds a good idea because it would please the owners of old and new computers. But I wonder if this feature request deserves to be the main priority.

[J7N]

A modular software like what you describe sounds a good idea because it would please the owners of old and new computers. But I wonder if this feature request deserves to be the main priority.

I think a major version change like v2.0 (or 3.0 like Jim predicts) is the right time to introduce modular architecture. I don't have a slow computer now, but I guess I haven't changed my way of thinking since MS DOS. :lol:

[Tizio]

Hi all!
I have an old computer (not too much, but pretty old: 900MHz 256MB SDRAM) and I never had problems with BSplayer v0.8x v1.xx and v2.00 (I also saw older PCs working very good with v1.xx). I'm able to run 3-4 CPU intensive requesting programs at the same time and still watch a movie with BSplayer without choppy scenes.
I think BSplayer is the best player in resources management, and the last added features haven't introduced loading delays (the biggest delay is took from the EXE-PACKER unpacking task)

BST in first place, and now Whebteh did and are still doing a great work with this player.

You are right J7N by saying that modular programming will be a great thing for BSplayer (and not only for old/new PC's users), but I think that this will be impossible to implement before a v3 release. I hope they'll implement modular programming, but I think that they have already made other major plans for the years to come, but still hope they'll consider that

[adicoto]

That's not old, but ancient. A mummy :lol: :) I call mine old (P4 2,4 ock at 3 GHz, 1 GB DDR1 dual channel.)
How can you test on that configuration 1080i or 720p x264 HDTV files ?

[Tizio]

Originally Posted by adicoto

That's not old, but ancient. A mummy :lol: :) I call mine old (P4 2,4 ock at 3 GHz, 1 GB DDR1 dual channel.)
How can you test on that configuration 1080i or 720p x264 HDTV files ?

:lol: with BSplayer