I don't think I've ever voluntarily used their shitty media player since the classic version. MPC-BE (some folks use MPC-HC) is my goto with VLC as a backup if certain codecs don't play nice with it. I'm able to use nVidia super resolution with them as well.
Windows 11 New Media Player Uses 3.5x More RAM, Charges for Popular Video Codecs
31–40 of 193 posts
Re: Windows 11 New Media Player Uses 3.5x More RAM, Charges for Popular Video Codecs
#32Removing HEVC support wasn't their choice but probably stems from the licensing pools increasing their prices [1]. Windows media player probably sees very little usage nowadays and probably even less for HEVC, when most content playback happens via streaming and browsers today. As for the RAM increase, well that's probably a consequence of the general trend of doing frontend engineering via JS/TS instead of using OS…
> The advantages are more on the development side of those apps
I mean, I agree, but Microsoft of all companies really should be invested in building Windows native applications. If they can't be fucked to build Windows-native applications, why would anyone else?
Microsoft should be setting the example, and the high bar of what Windows-native quality software should be. It's frankly embarrassing for them that they can't or won't do it.
Re: Windows 11 New Media Player Uses 3.5x More RAM, Charges for Popular Video Codecs
#33I kinda have to hand it to Microsoft for dogfooding vibecoding with Copilot to such an extent. You can't say they encourage their customers to use a bad solution while doing something different in-house.
Re: Windows 11 New Media Player Uses 3.5x More RAM, Charges for Popular Video Codecs
#34Removing HEVC support wasn't their choice but probably stems from the licensing pools increasing their prices [1]. Windows media player probably sees very little usage nowadays and probably even less for HEVC, when most content playback happens via streaming and browsers today. As for the RAM increase, well that's probably a consequence of the general trend of doing frontend engineering via JS/TS instead of using OS…
'It's worse for our users, but easier for our developers' is an unacceptable tradeoff, they deserve the backlash.
I mean... Yes, but there's nuance here.
Using 400 MB of RAM vs 100 MB of RAM is close to unnoticeable in a world of a GB+ for a single Chrome tab... And if "easier for our developers" means the end user is getting more regular updates with fewer critical issues, then it's not an uncomplicated tradeoff at all, parts of it are actually synergistic.
Re: Windows 11 New Media Player Uses 3.5x More RAM, Charges for Popular Video Codecs
#35Do people still use the K-Lite Codec Pack so their players have all the codecs installed? Or just use vlc?
I loved the K-Lite Codec Pack and CCCP (Combined Community Codec Pack) back in the XP days, especially while exploring MKVs and anime, but I virtually never run into a media file that VLC or MPC-HC can't play by default these days. Just drop it in and it plays.
Re: Windows 11 New Media Player Uses 3.5x More RAM, Charges for Popular Video Codecs
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
'It's worse for our users, but easier for our developers' is an unacceptable tradeoff, they deserve the backlash.
I mean... Yes, but there's nuance here. Using 400 MB of RAM vs 100 MB of RAM is close to unnoticeable in a world of a GB+ for a single Chrome tab ... And if "easier for our developers" means the end user is getting more regular updates with fewer critical issues, then it's not an uncomplicated tradeoff at all, parts of it are actually synergistic.
How come I have never seen this tradeoff work in practice?
Re: Windows 11 New Media Player Uses 3.5x More RAM, Charges for Popular Video Codecs
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
'It's worse for our users, but easier for our developers' is an unacceptable tradeoff, they deserve the backlash.
I mean... Yes, but there's nuance here. Using 400 MB of RAM vs 100 MB of RAM is close to unnoticeable in a world of a GB+ for a single Chrome tab ... And if "easier for our developers" means the end user is getting more regular updates with fewer critical issues, then it's not an uncomplicated tradeoff at all, parts of it are actually synergistic.
[deleted]
Re: Windows 11 New Media Player Uses 3.5x More RAM, Charges for Popular Video Codecs
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
'It's worse for our users, but easier for our developers' is an unacceptable tradeoff, they deserve the backlash.
I mean... Yes, but there's nuance here. Using 400 MB of RAM vs 100 MB of RAM is close to unnoticeable in a world of a GB+ for a single Chrome tab ... And if "easier for our developers" means the end user is getting more regular updates with fewer critical issues, then it's not an uncomplicated tradeoff at all, parts of it are actually synergistic.
There are 100s of processes running on my Windows without starting anything explicitly. They are using more than 10 gb of RAM. I am already feeling the consequences of this sloppiness. Especially that my IDE/compiler/emulator easily use 20+ GB. My 32 GB of memory is not enough somehow…
Re: Windows 11 New Media Player Uses 3.5x More RAM, Charges for Popular Video Codecs
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
'It's worse for our users, but easier for our developers' is an unacceptable tradeoff, they deserve the backlash.
I mean... Yes, but there's nuance here. Using 400 MB of RAM vs 100 MB of RAM is close to unnoticeable in a world of a GB+ for a single Chrome tab ... And if "easier for our developers" means the end user is getting more regular updates with fewer critical issues, then it's not an uncomplicated tradeoff at all, parts of it are actually synergistic.
IME, there is a negative correlation “justifies increased memory consumption by citing DX” and “ships code with fewer critical issues.”
Re: Windows 11 New Media Player Uses 3.5x More RAM, Charges for Popular Video Codecs
#40Didn't they just publicly make an apology for enshitting Windows over the last years, and committed to go back to building native app?
I understand that project might have started way before the public statement but it really doesn't look good from a PR standpoint.