Can anyone clear up the confusion?
For one, this is a response to Real's claims. Real said MS had developed WMP for Linux in its initial claim. Is this true in any form (the actual player, not the format)?
The InterVideo announcement I saw when it was released but adds further confusion. This is not WMP but rather just the codecs, container, and DRM which I had thought was already ported a while ago. Is this not the case yet? (I had thought it was, and the InterVideo agreement was simply a more specialized deal for embedded and consumer devices.)
Thirdly, to make this clear, Real had stated this a long time ago. The argument was: MS has ported WMP, and its related technologies, to and separated it fromother platforms, and that it can act independent of the OS. Microsoft is simply stating that is true, but it is different code and provides different functionality.
This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, February 24, 2004 at 13:55.
|