4 ms·

If you're talking about doing the playback on Ubuntu, you lose the high-definition. I guess it may not be important for you, but I expect someone who sunk a fai

If you're talking about doing the playback on Ubuntu, you lose the high-definition. I guess it may not be important for you, but I expect someone who sunk a fair amount of change on a high-end TV to care.

ronsor 3y ago
At that point, hit the high seas and ditch the nonsense
- papichulo2023 3y ago
  Even then, last time I checked HDR playback on linux was a very hit-or-miss thing.
mcpackieh 3y ago
Do you mean HDR? High definition video playback works fine on Linux. Very performant even with low end hardware.
- callalex 3y ago
  The content providers will refuse to serve the video to you without DRM, attestation, HDCP, whatever new crap some MBA came up with to justify a paycheck to some other MBA…
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    Oh, well using linux to use the same services would be pointless of course. I thought the point was to play local media.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- natdempk 3y ago
  A lot of streaming services limit the resolution they provide via DRM restrictions on Linux unfortunately.
- michaelmrose 3y ago
  What is meant is that services explicitly short change Linux users by restricting resolution based on client in a fashion that isn't trivially circumvented by fudging the user agent. For instance a given content may be available in glorious 4K only via an app on a TV, 1080p via a windows or mac machine, and dogshit 720p that actually manages to look worse than old SD on Linux. This is basically true of every service with Youtube TV being the least bad and showing at least reasonable quality. In theory showing lesser quality streams to less locked down platforms is supposed to make piracy harder. In reality popular shows are always available same day anyway. Ultimately if you want creators to get paid and to enjoy the highest quality on Linux you need to both pay for and pirate the content and watch for instance on jellyfin.
  - mcpackieh 3y ago
    I've heard the others are as you say, but Youtube delivers 4k to me on Linux, in Firefox or mpv.
    - michaelmrose 3y ago
      Youtube has the video service with cats, puppies, howtos, reviews, and conspiracy theories and YoutubeTV which has live TV, as well as movies, and shows. It is the latter which is artificially limited on Linux but LESS so than for instance hulu or Amazon. In case any confusion remains these latter are available at tv.youtube.com with a subscription.
      - mcpackieh 3y ago
        Huh, I didn't know this exists. Seems antithetical to the point of youtube to be honest, is this actually popular?
        michaelmrose 3y ago
        It's a cheaper version of a cable package that can be used by up to five google accounts that might not share the same physical household. EG a subscription with multiple premium channels and a good range of channels available in two households could easily be $400-$500 not including internet. YoutubeTV for a similar range of content would be ~$100. The purpose of youtube for most consumers is to consume video content. Much of the professionally produced video content is TV shows and movies which obviously remains popular. This includes by reference content originating from a range of platforms HBO/Showtime/Starz/Paramount/AMC and so forth EG you select HBO and Showtime as part of your package and can view the same content as is on MAX or showtime in the singular unified youtubeTV interface. Kind of a mixture of TIVO and netflix with a better interface.

ronsor 3y ago

At that point, hit the high seas and ditch the nonsense

papichulo2023 3y ago
Even then, last time I checked HDR playback on linux was a very hit-or-miss thing.

mcpackieh 3y ago

Do you mean HDR? High definition video playback works fine on Linux. Very performant even with low end hardware.

callalex 3y ago
The content providers will refuse to serve the video to you without DRM, attestation, HDCP, whatever new crap some MBA came up with to justify a paycheck to some other MBA…
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  Oh, well using linux to use the same services would be pointless of course. I thought the point was to play local media.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
natdempk 3y ago
A lot of streaming services limit the resolution they provide via DRM restrictions on Linux unfortunately.
michaelmrose 3y ago
What is meant is that services explicitly short change Linux users by restricting resolution based on client in a fashion that isn't trivially circumvented by fudging the user agent. For instance a given content may be available in glorious 4K only via an app on a TV, 1080p via a windows or mac machine, and dogshit 720p that actually manages to look worse than old SD on Linux. This is basically true of every service with Youtube TV being the least bad and showing at least reasonable quality. In theory showing lesser quality streams to less locked down platforms is supposed to make piracy harder. In reality popular shows are always available same day anyway. Ultimately if you want creators to get paid and to enjoy the highest quality on Linux you need to both pay for and pirate the content and watch for instance on jellyfin.
- mcpackieh 3y ago
  I've heard the others are as you say, but Youtube delivers 4k to me on Linux, in Firefox or mpv.
  - michaelmrose 3y ago
    Youtube has the video service with cats, puppies, howtos, reviews, and conspiracy theories and YoutubeTV which has live TV, as well as movies, and shows. It is the latter which is artificially limited on Linux but LESS so than for instance hulu or Amazon. In case any confusion remains these latter are available at tv.youtube.com with a subscription.
    - mcpackieh 3y ago
      Huh, I didn't know this exists. Seems antithetical to the point of youtube to be honest, is this actually popular?
      - michaelmrose 3y ago
        It's a cheaper version of a cable package that can be used by up to five google accounts that might not share the same physical household. EG a subscription with multiple premium channels and a good range of channels available in two households could easily be $400-$500 not including internet. YoutubeTV for a similar range of content would be ~$100. The purpose of youtube for most consumers is to consume video content. Much of the professionally produced video content is TV shows and movies which obviously remains popular. This includes by reference content originating from a range of platforms HBO/Showtime/Starz/Paramount/AMC and so forth EG you select HBO and Showtime as part of your package and can view the same content as is on MAX or showtime in the singular unified youtubeTV interface. Kind of a mixture of TIVO and netflix with a better interface.