Why don't they make AVS open-source?

mysterious_w

9th August 2004 10:24 UTC

Why don't they make AVS open-source?
I know this question has probably been asked many times before, but why isn't AVS open-source? Nobody at Nullsoft seems that interested in updating it, and if it was released under the GPL, wouldn't any modifications have to be submitted to the main project? So why not?

Raz

9th August 2004 13:42 UTC

Because then many avs clones would appear in other players, and AVS is pretty unique still at the moment.

Only reason i use it anyway.
foobar2k > Winamp
AVS > foobar2k

Yathosho

9th August 2004 13:47 UTC

..and why don't you just let it die

NemoOrange

12th August 2004 17:03 UTC

I'm still waiting for all you programmers to step up to the plate & start working on the open source AVS alternative

PAK-9

12th August 2004 17:38 UTC

Maybe we should get a count of how many people would be willing to contribute their talent to an open source AVS alternative.

Tuggummi

12th August 2004 18:23 UTC

Or then you could count the number of projects started on to make a avs alternative and the % of how many of them just died quietly (*HINT*100%*HINT*)

Warrior of the Light

12th August 2004 21:06 UTC

I really miss Justin, even though we hardly ever spoke him

Yathosho

13th August 2004 03:23 UTC

Originally posted by PAK-9
Maybe we should get a count of how many people would be willing to contribute their talent to an open source AVS alternative.

i'm wondering if there'll ever be a working dilate version. that needs support!

PAK-9

13th August 2004 05:23 UTC

I probably should have guessed that there would already be an open source project underway. The big problem with open source is that nothing gets done, lots of talk, not much code. Better to have a small group of committed coders and designers that are good at listening to what the community wants. Lets face it tho, its unlikely to happen either way.

sidd

13th August 2004 05:38 UTC

i think its more than i pipe dream.

Open source probably isnt the best dev option for such a project, because it would need such a robust framework. It would be better to just have one person/team develope a tidy and extendable interface with a good api that could then be improved upon with plugins in a similar way to avs' APEs (only better of course). And i dont just mean effect plugins, but also general interface and so such.

btw, i recently had a good look at R4. Its actully pretty customisable, and is starting to get a reasonably good user base.

PAK-9

13th August 2004 06:34 UTC

You right sidd, your absolutely right, what an AVS alternative needs is a solid base with easy component based additions like the plugin system in winamp or the APE's in AVS. But when I say it's unlikely to happen I'm not just talking about the coding implementation, there is so much more to a successful AVS alternative than that...

Lets start with implementation though, firstly it needs to be designed, that requires feedback from the community on what they want, how long is that going to take? a month? a year? and which group of people are you going to ask? the AVS community? there are a lot of noobs in the AVS community, are you going to take their opinion as well as the experienced artists? Once you know what you want you have to implement it, but its not a one off job, once its done it needs to be updated, if its a winamp plugin it needs to be updated when winamp is updated to ensure compatability. Is it hardware accelerated? if so you need to update it to support new hardware and graphics drivers.

Okay so we have our plugin... now where are you going to put it? On winamp.com? AVS has the advantage that it is shipped with winamp, so users have it already, you need to convince people its worth downloading your plugin. You also need a place for people to learn how to use it, and upload their presets, and discuss it... bascially you need a website. Who is going to make that website? it needs forums, uploading (reviewing?) plugin file hosting, some help maybe.

Okay so now we have a site, who is going to host it? who is going to pay for it? we're talking about a big site here, because if its popular like AVS is we have a heck of a lot of presets people have uploaded and bandwidth from visitors and downloads of the plugin etc...

You might think I'm overkilling but there are so many things going for AVS to keep it alive. Its bundled with winamp, one of the most popular media players out there, it has a whole section on the winamp forums, it has a place where people can upload presets and they will get reviewed, by staff AND users etc.. etc...

Dont get me wrong, I'd love an AVS alternative, i'd happily contribute, I'm just being pragmatic. Its (imo) unlikely to happen because will just end up dying like every other attempt (like tug says) because makers dont realise what a commitment it takes.

TheFilterMan

5th September 2004 08:49 UTC

There is so much that the AVS source would have to offer. I can't believe there isn't already an alternative out there. I am hoping that NULLSOFT atleast offers some kind of Licensing agreement for its use. There is much potential in it, I haven't seen a system as comprehensive and powerful as it before. Well, when it comes to building visualisations.

:)

PAK-9

5th September 2004 09:10 UTC

Originally posted by TheFilterMan
... I haven't seen a system as comprehensive and powerful as it before...

It would be nice if they would add 'stable' to that list tho :rolleyes:

sidd

7th September 2004 01:51 UTC

I really dont see what could happen that is so wonderful if nullsoft did release the source. True, AVS would be better if we could make some slight adjustments to it, but it would be a hell of alot better if a new project was started from scratch.

AVS is simply outdated. It runs slow when it could run fast.

And if they did release the source, we would still have the problem we have now, which is that no-one can be fucked putting the time into coding it.

Mr_Nudge

7th September 2004 02:40 UTC

Nullsoft need to pull their heads out of the ground (could have said something more rude but then...) and update it. Hire someone if they have to. I think that'll be the only way things will change. The general public on their own wouldn't get anywhere with rewriting avs, and plus, who would do it? What we really need it AVS with direct-x or openGL support.

My view of a new AVS would be to have the popular .apes (texer II, chanell shift, picture II etc..) built in to AVS.
A much, much better render engine, compaitbility between avs and other vis programs like r4 and jukebox and finally, refine the code to make it much faster.

sidd

7th September 2004 07:56 UTC

Nullsoft need to pull their heads out of the ground (could have said something more rude but then...) and update it. Hire someone if they have to.

Nullsoft made avs for fun. They have no duty to provide it with winamp. AVS has a very small user base out of those who download winamp. It isnt fair to expect them to hire new people to update it

The general public on their own wouldn't get anywhere with rewriting avs

Why not? There is alot more general public programmers interested in visualisations than there are nullsoft programmers at the moment.

What we really need it AVS with direct-x or openGL support.

As has been said a thousand times before, you cant just whack hardware support onto avs. It needs to be practically done from scratch.

and finally, refine the code to make it much faster.

You cant just "refine the code" to make it faster. In fact avs is pretty damn stretched to it's limit considering how customisable it is, and that it uses nothing but your cpu to calculate each frame.

PAK-9

7th September 2004 08:13 UTC

Time to let this thread die I think

mysterious_w

9th September 2004 09:35 UTC

I thought it had died, no one posted for ages after Yathosho first shot it down. Oh crap, this post is just going to pump it back up, isn't it. ;)