WMC officially dead for Windows 10 and beyond

[n0x1ous]

http://www.zdnet.com/article/rip-windows-media-center/

Not a surprise to anyone in here I'm sure, but at least they finally let us know.

 

[w0ss]

my living room is still running media center pc, I have two extenders as well. I tried to get openelec working with my hdhomerun prime as a dvr and couldn't guess I will have to try again sometime before 2020

 

[destrekor]

my living room is still running media center pc, I have two extenders as well. I tried to get openelec working with my hdhomerun prime as a dvr and couldn't guess I will have to try again sometime before 2020

Well, your Prime will run on Linux and with any media software. I am assuming, however, that you have channels that set copy-once or copy-never flags on a premium cable subscription?

Thanks to the small market that this is and the cost of getting approved and having the right DRM, Microsoft was basically the only one who was willing to dip their toes in that market, and now they are retreating. It cost them less than it would for others, considering PlayReady is their own DRM.


I really hope that HDHomerun DVR is just the tip of the future wave, though I suspect it will become the only one that works with protected cable.

 

[w0ss]

Actually I have FIOS so it is very good on copy protection. I just looked at the hdhomerun dvr and 30$ a year doesn't seem that bad.

 

[Ketchup]

Well a bad move in my book. I just started using it (within the past 2 months), so that probably had something to do with it, lol.

I hope destrekor is correct and a good replacement comes along.

Does anyone know if this would affect current versions? Or current version when they pass EOL (just stop working for no apparent reason)?

I can't help but wonder if someone will be able to make a hack to "port" it over.

 

[bradly1101]

It's sad. He makes the point that there are a lot of cord cutters, but in my experience very few online sources provide video that's even close to the quality of cable - even on a fast internet connection, and I'm a bit of a perfectionist.

Support for my systems ends in 2020. That'll be the time I switch away from MS as they will no longer offer something as unique as WMC. Linux can do pretty much all the rest I need a PC to do, and I'll just have to get the crappy Charter cable boxes or go with DirecTV or if SD's software takes off. Maybe the world will end in 2019 and it won't matter.

 

[Jovec]

This both is and isn't an issue. I use WMC with a HD Prime for m-card cable streams. By 2020 I could probably get a comparable TV experience by paying for a few select networks directly (like HBO-Go) streaming to an Android or iOS device. If I don't care about TV channels, then Kodi/Linux/etc should provide a suitable HTPC setup for videos, music, and pictures.

 

[destrekor]

Something I'd advise everyone who qualifies: get your free license of Windows 10, even if you don't plan on using it. Who knows what they'll charge when the first year of free consumer licensing is up, I almost suspect they'll actually keep it free of the consumer versions. But regardless, even if you don't plan to upgrade just for fear of losing WMC, grab your license in case it is either ported, or some other software comes along that is worthwhile, of which hopefully SiliconDust's DVR software/service fits that bill. If that software is good, upgrading an HTPC to Windows 10 should be very worthwhile, as I suspect the media apps that are in the new "universal/metro" UI will be far more plentiful than they are on Windows 8. That app style is wonderful as a 10ft UI.

 

[bradly1101]

The one thing I like about Media Center (since the beginning) is that on copy-freely recordings you get fully editable video. It's great for saving your favorite clips from SNL or How It's Made or any of the late night shows, etc. Streaming can't do that. And WMC can be ad-free at the few touches of a button, streaming is full of ads at a very high volume (sound) that you can't usually avoid.

I think the real problem is that WMC was 'free', and we must have more REVENUE! {sigh} (in this case MS reallocated resources and will stop paying license fees)

 

[Charlie98]

I like WMC coupled with Media Browser... I think it's first class. I'm not too worried about it, by 2020 who knows what will be available, and, besides, that's about the time W7 will run out and I'll have to do something anyway.

 

[destrekor]

The one thing I like about Media Center (since the beginning) is that on copy-freely recordings you get fully editable video. It's great for saving your favorite clips from SNL or How It's Made or any of the late night shows, etc. Streaming can't do that. And WMC can be ad-free at the few touches of a button, streaming is full of ads at a very high volume (sound) that you can't usually avoid.

I think the real problem is that WMC was 'free', and we must have more REVENUE! {sigh} (in this case MS reallocated resources and will stop paying license fees)

It was free, but it cost them some, and there was not enough usage to justify the expense. I can see their reasoning, I just wish they would have absorbed it and coupled it with the entire system as opposed to judging it as a stand-alone feature. It was doomed to failure judging it on its own, it's a very niche market.

Additionally, I find it odd that you are comparing WMC vs streaming.

WMC is far from being the only option for copy-freely content. Most purveyors of free DVR software create recordings that are easily accessible with other software.

WMC was nice for what it was, especially with the Windows integration, but frankly, I never would have stuck by it without a need for its support of protected content on CableCARD. If it weren't for that, numerous other free solutions were available, and some could integrate with XBMC/Kodi, which when put together well, blew away WMC, thanks to a rich developer community and a ton of add-ons. WMC, even at its peak, was underdeveloped.

Even when it worked great on Windows 7, and eventually Windows 8, I could see the writing on the wall, especially once the "new Microsoft" come about and starting actually looking like it could prepare for the future. As time went by and WMC went undeveloped, no new features or really anything being changed, even minimally, I knew it was simply being carried around out of some kind of commitment as opposed to any real desire for success.

 

[bradly1101]

It was free, but it cost them some, and there was not enough usage to justify the expense. I can see their reasoning, I just wish they would have absorbed it and coupled it with the entire system as opposed to judging it as a stand-alone feature. It was doomed to failure judging it on its own, it's a very niche market.

Yes but it is a fantastic, unique piece of software that works very well. If MS promoted it and made a TV ad that started with, "Do you want to rid yourself of monthly cable box fees, and have complete control over your entertainment..." we wouldn't be worried about losing it.

Additionally, I find it odd that you are comparing WMC vs streaming.

I said that because so many people say that with streaming options, cable is no longer relevant. Yes there's no comparison.

WMC is far from being the only option for copy-freely content. Most purveyors of free DVR software create recordings that are easily accessible with other software.

Much of what I watch is not copy freely, again no comparison.

 

[destrekor]

Yes but it is a fantastic, unique piece of software that works very well. If MS promoted it and made a TV ad that started with, "Do you want to rid yourself of monthly cable box fees, and have complete control over your entertainment..." we wouldn't be worried about losing it.

You have too much faith in the people.

I think everyone who would want the option already knew about it. The public can stumble upon other people who use it and still never have interest. People I roomed with found it and a universal remote too complex. Many other people want nothing to do with the "hassle" of a computer attached to their TV. Most of these people hate dealing with computers in any capacity. You'd be hard-pressed to get them to adopt an HTPC to get rid of a cable box, which is far more streamlined in operation than any PC.

CableCARD solutions, or even just OTA PC-based DVR applications, are always going to remain a niche product, it's something only a small segment of the population wants to ever deal with.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Yep. I don't know how many people I've tried to sell on WMC & HTPC's over the years. All of them except one (ironically a 80+ year old man) just contorted their face at the idea of a computer hooked up to a TV regardless of the options it opened up.

 

[DigDog]

WMC

is that some sort of VLC clone i've never heard of and i'm not bothered?

 

[destrekor]

is that some sort of VLC clone i've never heard of and i'm not bothered?

You can't be bothered to google it?

LMGTF... screw it

"Windows Media Center" - a PVR/DVR/Media portal application
You can utilize the interwebs from there

 

[bradly1101]

You have too much faith in the people.

People I roomed with found it and a universal remote too complex. Many other people want nothing to do with the "hassle" of a computer attached to their TV. Most of these people hate dealing with computers in any capacity.

My partner is very computer illiterate and navigates it with no problems.

You'd be hard-pressed to get them to adopt an HTPC to get rid of a cable box, which is far more streamlined in operation than any PC.

If by streamlined you mean it does a lot less then I agree. But when I moved in with my partner here we had a cable box that I thought would be fine especially since we were moving to HD (this was four years ago!) and I didn't think my P4 HTPC would be up to the task. But in trying to use the cable box I discovered how awful the interface is compared to WMC. The selection screens took only one third of the display so you couldn't see many recordings or channels to select from. Most of the screen was covered in ads, and everything defaulted to the oldest rather than the most recent. It was crappy Cisco hardware with a maximum of only two tuners.

If cable cards and the need for a better interface were dead, why is TiVo still in business? $600 plus a monthly fee will get you a six-tuner box that can stream non-protected content to mobile devices. My HTPC can do all that PLUS I can edit the data. That's all I want (sans monthly fee). This just feels like a big step backward.

CableCARD solutions, or even just OTA PC-based DVR applications, are always going to remain a niche product, it's something only a small segment of the population wants to ever deal with.

If they knew what it offered them, it would be a different story IMO.

 

[destrekor]

My partner is very computer illiterate and navigates it with no problems.



If by streamlined you mean it does a lot less then I agree. But when I moved in with my partner here we had a cable box that I thought would be fine especially since we were moving to HD (this was four years ago!) and I didn't think my P4 HTPC would be up to the task. But in trying to use the cable box I discovered how awful the interface is compared to WMC. The selection screens took only one third of the display so you couldn't see many recordings or channels to select from. Most of the screen was covered in ads, and everything defaulted to the oldest rather than the most recent. It was crappy Cisco hardware with a maximum of only two tuners.

If cable cards and the need for a better interface were dead, why is TiVo still in business? $600 plus a monthly fee will get you a six-tuner box that can stream non-protected content to mobile devices. My HTPC can do all that PLUS I can edit the data. That's all I want (sans monthly fee). This just feels like a big step backward.



If they knew what it offered them, it would be a different story IMO.

Some people can adapt to things fine, but don't necessarily ask them to put things together.

And yes, I make no argument that rented boxes are GOOD or very capable. They are limited, locked down, and suck, but working with them means pointing the remote and, if something happens, pulling the power cable and resetting. It does everything a casual user needs, and if it does not, they have Apple TV, Roku, FireTV, etc. Their TV might even have the media offerings they'd get with an add-on box.

There's a world of difference between a Tivo and an HTPC. A Tivo might as well be a cable box, it is, again, very streamlined, and basically does what modern rented DVR boxes do with a little more flair. Remember that Tivo built a business on DVR before cable companies even started offering their own DVR boxes. This has led to numerous return users who simply liked it and never looked back. Some got good deals on hardware and paid a one-time lifetime membership, which, depending on overall hardware expense, will still be cheaper than the equivalent service and hardware fees from the cable company after a few years, if not a year or two.

I help my parents out with computers. I will never set up an HTPC for them, never. There are too many little odd things that can just pop up that will require a phone call to me.

Setting up a Tivo is usually done by a cable company on-site visit, or those who are comfortable can just put the card in themselves. And if something happens, it's a phone call to Tivo or the cable company. With an HTPC, you are the support, unless you can tell it is a cable issue and then you call the cable company.


I'm not saying these "truths" are the law or anything, there are always exceptions, and I'm glad when I hear of people who are even computer or technology illiterate getting by HTPCs, but I do know many people who just view it as too much to juggle. And it's not even a technology literacy thing, many very technical people just don't want the hassle. I feel it is easy and I can make things just work, but even then, I know there are times things just stop working or something goes screwy. I don't mind.

 

[bradly1101]

Some people can adapt to things fine, but don't necessarily ask them to put things together.

And yes, I make no argument that rented boxes are GOOD or very capable. They are limited, locked down, and suck, but working with them means pointing the remote and, if something happens, pulling the power cable and resetting. It does everything a casual user needs, and if it does not, they have Apple TV, Roku, FireTV, etc. Their TV might even have the media offerings they'd get with an add-on box.

There's a world of difference between a Tivo and an HTPC. A Tivo might as well be a cable box, it is, again, very streamlined, and basically does what modern rented DVR boxes do with a little more flair. Remember that Tivo built a business on DVR before cable companies even started offering their own DVR boxes. This has led to numerous return users who simply liked it and never looked back. Some got good deals on hardware and paid a one-time lifetime membership, which, depending on overall hardware expense, will still be cheaper than the equivalent service and hardware fees from the cable company after a few years, if not a year or two.

I help my parents out with computers. I will never set up an HTPC for them, never. There are too many little odd things that can just pop up that will require a phone call to me.

Setting up a Tivo is usually done by a cable company on-site visit, or those who are comfortable can just put the card in themselves. And if something happens, it's a phone call to Tivo or the cable company. With an HTPC, you are the support, unless you can tell it is a cable issue and then you call the cable company.


I'm not saying these "truths" are the law or anything, there are always exceptions, and I'm glad when I hear of people who are even computer or technology illiterate getting by HTPCs, but I do know many people who just view it as too much to juggle. And it's not even a technology literacy thing, many very technical people just don't want the hassle. I feel it is easy and I can make things just work, but even then, I know there are times things just stop working or something goes screwy. I don't mind.

I agree that the average user wants simplicity. But there are many of us that can handle being the support person (I also wouldn't do that for another) and love the flexibility of a PC solution (storage options, sources of streaming content, etc.). It's everything you need in one box, and with guides like this it's a project that's fun and rewarding (well until 2020 anyway).

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

If the average person was rational HTPC's would be ubiquitous and WMC would still be actively developed. As it is they rather pay $15 a month for Tivo and $7 a month to watch Hulu on something that's just not a "computer."

 

[bradly1101]

If you read The Road Ahead by Bill Gates (1995-1996), he envisioned tablets in everyone's hands with computers all around the house controlling HVAC, security, etc. AND entertainment. TiVo and cable boxes are kinds of computers, but only a full-fledged PC offers a lot of flexibility (I forgot about gaming). Maybe a PC needs to be easier and less troublesome, but I was amazed back when I got Windows XP Media Center Edition at how easy it was to setup and use.

 

[DigDog]

You can't be bothered to google it?

LMGTF... screw it

"Windows Media Center" - a PVR/DVR/Media portal application
You can utilize the interwebs from there

i guess i wasn't clear enough.

let's try: "windows media center has been redundant since around 2004 (for me - and for pretty much the world, his wife and their dog) since VLC does everything better; actually, there's about a dozen media player / media center software who do everything better than WMC, all of which are free, lighter, highly customizable, come with their own codecs, and generally leave no reason watsoever to use WMC".

incidentally the same goes for explorer, office, defender, and essentially the whole MSFT line except for ages of empire.

 

[destrekor]

i guess i wasn't clear enough.

let's try: "windows media center has been redundant since around 2004 (for me - and for pretty much the world, his wife and their dog) since VLC does everything better; actually, there's about a dozen media player / media center software who do everything better than WMC, all of which are free, lighter, highly customizable, come with their own codecs, and generally leave no reason watsoever to use WMC".

incidentally the same goes for explorer, office, defender, and essentially the whole MSFT line except for ages of empire.

Actually I have no idea how you reach your position regarding the other Microsoft products, other than some prejudice, bias, or distaste. Internet Explorer sucks, sure, but Office is wonderful, and Defender is far from the worst. Explorer itself is especially wonderful in Win8, just missing tabs.

Regardless, that's beside the point.
You entirely missed the point of WMC, apparently. It may have been designed to handle as much as it could, regardless of your personal use interests. However, it was clearly targeted toward the DVR crowd.

If you are using VLC for everything, you are not in the DVR crowd. Also, are you using things like VLC on an HTPC from the couch? Are you using KB&M or a remote? Because VLC from the desktop is a pain in the ass without a KB&M, possibly impossible, never gave that one any effort. You seem to be comparing WMC to very focused specific apps like VLC and MPC, which they aren't remotely in the same league. If you are comparing to SageTV, BeyondTV (now defunct, I think), Kodi/XBMC, and there are a few others, well, that's what should be compared, and yes, WMC falls flat, very flat.

It's also the only single choice physically possible for people who keep a cable subscription and their provider sets copy-once flags on various channels or programs. Some providers set copy-once on every single channel, regardless of what is on.

So, for people like me, my preferences weren't involved in decisions whatsoever, and WMC was far from redundant.


TL/DR version:

Congrats, you didn't have to use it. You also entirely missed the point of why it was so important and clearly not redundant.

 

[Ketchup]

i guess i wasn't clear enough.

let's try: "windows media center has been redundant since around 2004 (for me - and for pretty much the world, his wife and their dog) since VLC does everything better; actually, there's about a dozen media player / media center software who do everything better than WMC, all of which are free, lighter, highly customizable, come with their own codecs, and generally leave no reason watsoever to use WMC".

incidentally the same goes for explorer, office, defender, and essentially the whole MSFT line except for ages of empire.

Show me how I can DVR with VLC (that is the main point of MC, BTW) and I will forgo any crying over the departure.

Just because VLC does the same things as dozens of other media playing applications doesn't mean it can replace applications that truly have unique features.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

i guess i wasn't clear enough.

let's try: "windows media center has been redundant since around 2004 (for me - and for pretty much the world, his wife and their dog) since VLC does everything better; actually, there's about a dozen media player / media center software who do everything better than WMC, all of which are free, lighter, highly customizable, come with their own codecs, and generally leave no reason watsoever to use WMC".

incidentally the same goes for explorer, office, defender, and essentially the whole MSFT line except for ages of empire.

Are you confusing WMC with WMP (Windows Media Player)? Because VLC is in no way a substitute for WMC.