> It (mpv) has copied several good ideas from madVR.
> I have the utmost respect for open source developers.
> I have to admit that I'm more selfish than they are
http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=223175&pid=2172627#pid2172627
http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=223175&pid=2172683#pid2172683
It seems that madshi doesn't like mpv very much, but why?
he says it quite clearly in the post you linked:
"If I made my algorithms available to an open source project, I could just as well open source madVR itself. Which is not going to happen. The key reason why madVR is closed source is that I want users to use madVR, and not some other renderer. Open sourcing madVR means I would lose any quality or feature advantage that I might still have over other renderers, which means users wouldn't gain anything, anymore, by using madVR, which is the opposite of what I want."
>I could give you a detailed list of all quality differences, but if I gave you such a list, I already know that you'd forward it to the mpv devs to use as a checklist for their future development, so I'm not going to do that.
Kek. Trust me goyim keep using madvr for my epeen.
>>51572041
It is a commercial shit...
He wants money... That's all.
I think he needs to create a full player like mpv and names it mpv++.
No seriously, all his exclusive features are a mess for video rendering.
Maybe he included a FUD spyware inside madVR.
This is the only good reason to keep it closed source.
Sincerely I can't see any improvement in my own cinema (picture related).
I think it's for people that watch movies at 10" from their monitor.
>>51572041
>The key reason why madVR is closed source is that I want users to use madVR, and not some other renderer.
This is the sentiment behind most closed source freeware. madshi does not care about you, the user, first. Priority number one is padding his ego, his sense of power, possibly his resume, and possibly his wallet (after releasing his paid version.) People say that FOSS devs are egomaniacs, but they have nothing on hobbyist closed source devs. By releasing their code under a FOSS licence, FOSS devs are letting anyone study their algorithms, and letting other developers use their code as a starting point for a competing piece of software. madshi is not allowing this for entirely self-serving user-harmful reasons. I'm surprised to hear him say this, but he's practically admitting it himself in those posts.
>Also the quality of some of the key algorithms that mpv does have doesn't match madVR's quality (yet?).
Yeah, okay, and your most valuable algorithm (Jinc) is incorrect and slower than mpv. Nice FUD here. Videophiles will eat this quote up, no proof required.
>I could give you a detailed list of all quality differences, but if I gave you such a list, I already know that you'd forward it to the mpv devs to use as a checklist for their future development, so I'm not going to do that.
And there we have it. Not only is this sentence also obvious ludicrous FUD, it's also a pretty disgusting sentiment. madshi has the skill to improve the state of media players in general, but instead he chooses to only improve the state of media players on Windows that use DirectShow, and only if they use software that has his name on it. On the other hand, everyone is free to rip out mpv's OpenGL renderer and use it in their own projects, or just study the algorithms used in mpv and write their own implementations (I'm fairly sure the LGPL doesn't even require attribution for this.)
Don't use madVR (or any closed source freeware.)
>>51572269
Do you work there?
>>51572400
Don't people mainly use madvr for nnedi3 which MPV just started implementing? I heard that nneid3 is still slow in MPV though. Maybe once nneid3 starts getting faster and frontends start getting updated to support it MPV will start become more recommended over MPC/MadVR for videophiles?
He doesn't want a single dev to profit from the hard work of misguided freetards all over
aka mpv and how that one dev gets paid fat cash while taking all the credit from others
>>51572521
Depends on who you ask. A lot of people, myself included, think nnedi introduces too many artifacts. Feel free to think of it as a "fox and the grapes" type deal though. Maybe when mpv's implementation becomes fast enough to be usable, everyone will change their mind about it.
![Gt+yify+_ac6b0d0f07e3338177847cc10ace6ea6[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/uECWNme.jpg "Gt+yify+_ac6b0d0f07e3338177847cc10ace6ea6[1].jpg")
>>51572269
>>51572604
"That one dev" does literally 90% of the work. Without him, there is no mpv. He deserves to get paid, and I've never heard an actual mpv dev complain about it (open source devs don't think this way.) He's also not getting paid to develop mpv so much as he's getting paid to do shit he hates, but Plex needs (GUI work and Windows/OS X/RasPi specific features.) After all, it would be a dumb move to pay someone for something they'd do for free.
>>51572716
Yeah, just look at the commit history. I'm glad wm4 is getting acknowledged for his work.
Yes wm4 > madshi.
Damned I just notice that madshi wasn't dead like people say in july.
Still no pro/paid release, it's a little bit strange.
>>51572400
People don't have the same objectives in life. Can we really blame him for this? Genuine question.
>>51572004
As someone who goes to Neuschwanstein Castle every summer I wonder how famous it is in other countries
Why do freetards care so much? Serious question here. I always see shitposting by mpvfags in mpc threads and vice versa. Is it so hard to believe that there are people with different priorities who don't want to spend time reading documentation and manually editting their config files or looking for a frontend that isn't included with the program? madVR is built with consumers in mind while mpv is built for a different audience.
>>51572057
>>I could give you a detailed list of all quality differences, but if I gave you such a list, I already know that you'd forward it to the mpv devs to use as a checklist for their future development, so I'm not going to do that.
kek, it's true tough. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlwwVuSUUfc
>>51572716
>>51572400
Freetard in a couple of lines:
>A CLOSED SOURCE DEV NOT GETTING PAID?! >Priority number one is padding his ego, his sense of power, possibly his resume, and possibly his wallet (after releasing his paid version.)
>AN OPEN SOURCE DEV GETTING PAID FOR 90% USING FFMPEG AND OTHER PEOPLES LIBRARIES??
>He deserves to get paid!
Freetards are the biggest cocksuckers out there.
You're happy for one guy to use tons of others work and get paid but a closed source guy doing it for free is nothing but an egotistical money grabbing devil.
>>51578050
Nice straw man you tard.
