Does anyone no why the Quality on Video streams or TV streams over the internet using Linux Apps, & I have tried Just about all that work under Linux (Kaffeine,Kplayer,Mplayer,Xine etc etc) is very poor compared to when using "Windows Media Player 9 or 10".
The reason I say this is because 4 along time I was watching or trying to watch for example "BYU Television" on Linux just accepting the poor quality thinking it was just normal for watching Streams on the Internet.
Then I thought I better try it on windows & I was surprised just how clear & vibrant the picture & Sound was compared to these popular apps on Linux.
I thought Linux had just about everything covered when it came to Software & quality but maybe not.
My question is I suppose ,is it the Linux Media Players that make the Quality of Picture & sound so poor.?

Blame the people who design the codecs...i.e. MS. They don't release the specs to all their codecs (like some WMV versions). It means they need to be reverse engineered. This is why proprietry codecs are bad.

I have never noticed this before. On the few occassions that I have had to use a Windows PC, the multimedia capabilities and quality just seemed more or less the same as that of Linux. If indeed the quality was that bad, I am sure something would have been done about it a long time ago.

I have 2 PCs together on the one Desk & I see a huge difference.
Especially when it comes to viewing the picture in lareger size.
If I try to enlarge picture on linux Media Player it becomes extremly worse & a little bit better if I shrink or desize picture.
But on Windows media player I still get a reasonable good picture at 200%.
I think as Komakino has said its to do with the Codecs it seems.

That's really odd. I very often run video at 200% on my computer and I don't notice any (significant) degradation or issues. However, I always avoid WMV codecs, instead preferring H.264 or XviD. So I would be inclined to agree that it is a codec issue.

Just a couple of quick questions: Are those two PCs running the same screen resolution and pixel depth? And also, how do the graphic cards & CPUs compare?

I've also not seen any problems like the ones you described. I am perfectly willing to accept that the problem exists, and it could very well be a codec issue, but I'd also check the physical differences between the two PCs as well.

I dual boot. I always think my xvids look better on Linux, and i use VLC on both... :P, not to mention i use OMEGA Radeon drivers for windows and standard MESA ones on Linux.

Like mentioned above, it's the codecs fault!

That being said if i can get away with doing things on Linux i can, much more pleasant experience.

Glad to hear that you like doing things under Linux. Support open codecs!

I am the same ,I have hardly touched Windows lately except the fact I couldnt get a very good stream using Broadband on Linux prompted me to see if it was the same on Windows XP64.
But was shocked to see the difference ,Maybe I can experiment with the choice of Codecs being used if possible as I usualy rely on Auto to choose the right codec,
Maybe the quality of Win32Codecs are'nt up to scratch.
I also might try other video streams etc etc.
Maybe I havnt got my Setups right, Still Learning.
AnyWay

The only videos I've had problems with are:

* Streams referenced with the mms:// protocol (I never bothered to associate it to mplayer or kaffiene)
* Interactual streams and videos (F-bomb you, Interactual! My Extreme Terminator II DVD was a waste and I ended up downloaded a cracked copy - consider it Fair Use, bastards!)

I've never had problems with any other videos, DRM or otherwise. In fact I have found Linux to be far superior because it allows VERY easy capture of streams. I was able to record AOL's coverage of Pink Floyd's performance at Live8.