From MultimediaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Qabala, is the marketing method relevant to this article? There is no marketing section for AVI or Matroska or FLV or any other container format. The MultimediaWiki is for "cataloging technical details," not marketing methods. In fact, there is only one other article in the whole wiki which even mentions marketing. I don't think the marketing method for the Vodei software is significant enough (heck, it's just typical shareware) to include it in an article which is supposed to be about the technical details of the format. Do you think otherwise or just a little upset about not being able to watch those redheads? ;) MovieMan 03:17, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

Yes, the marketing strategy is relevent to the article because the marketing, itself, is technical. There is no portion of the marketing (other than the official site) that isn't a part of the software or the container. Users learn of the software due to an embedded ad in the container. They learn they must pay for the software due to an embedded nag screen. As you've stated what you observed in your tests, I have tested the software on multiple systems as well and gotten different results than you. Are your results more valid than mine? I have re-entered the information about the internet connection that I posted before, but this time I entered it as if to be a preample to your refutation. Is this a decent compromise? I get my findings in, but yours is still the prevailing information. And I had no problem watching the redheads after running the file through virtualdub ;). Qabala 11:25, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
The ad is content inside the container. It is not part of the container format which is what this article is about. Do you see the difference? Also, I looked again at the link to the forum you added and "DeeK" reports being able to use it for at least 30 minutes so the 10 minute statement makes no sense either (I have been able to run it for hours with no windows). I also saw plenty of posts stating that it does not connect to the Internet. I can be easily convinced otherwise if you provide packet sniffer logs indicating Vodei MP connects to the Internet, would you please do that? MovieMan 21:05, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
You first! Qabala 12:50, 11 September 2007 (EDT)

I have now completed the purpose and safety sections. I welcome any comments. I have replaced the speculations with the safety information, since that is what it was mostly about. I moved some ideas to other sections and got rid of what I was able to analytically confirm to be garbage. There were some allegations regarding the business model but those do not belong here, IMO; for example, Microsoft does not have any business related info and they have faced major lawsuits. I checked many other company articles, at random, and none of them have any money information or links to any forums discussing them. I'm happy with how this article turned out, I think it is the best available source for information about this container format. MovieMan 03:09, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

Would you objest if I took on the softwares claim to be "free"? I think the pictures were fairly compelling and they can be easily referenced.Qabala 23:20, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
I tested the software on 4 machines with the file in your screenshots and did not get any of the registration notices. My guess is that maybe they only show up after having it installed, or using it, for a long time. That's why I added the sentence "it has also been suggested, on Internet forums, that Vodei MP is sold using the shareware model" which explains it quite well, IMO. There are no claims of the software being free on the Vodei website, all it says is "free download", and it is; I haven't found anyone claiming that they were charged for downloading it. I'm not defending them but these are the same marketing methods used by thousands of other shareware authors and millions of merchants that offer something for "free" with conditions. If the software somehow billed the user without their authorization or forced them to pay or was impossible to uninstall then we should definitely warn people - but it does none of that. It would be awesome if you could direct your passion to get the real bad guys shut down: and
Call it what it is.. "Shareware" or "Nagware". --Compn 08:53, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
Try installing it one more time on any of those machines. The nag will probably show up immediately now.Qabala 10:00, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
I did, no difference. I actually did it a few times during my install/uninstall/safety testing MovieMan 03:16, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

Folks, there are other ways to view movies with vodei encoding. There is no reason to pay for this software.Qabala 11:53, 10 March 2007 (EST)

I think we should edit this article to be more technically oriented towards the Vodei container format and not the software used to decode it. I'm going to see if I can find some files to analyse. MovieMan 22:38, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

I definitely think this should be expanded. With as little information as we have, this appears to be the most information gathered in one place on the subject.Qabala 23:54, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

We should stick to information from accurate technical analysis - not comments on forums. There is far too much contradictory information on the forums and we don't know who posted it. Maybe it is a clueless computer newbie? Maybe it's a competitor? Maybe it's a shill? Maybe it's someone just making stuff up to increase their post count? Maybe it's a pirate? - how do you feel about that? MovieMan 00:58, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
Ideally you're right, however, there are no official sources on this subject. The website gives almost no information. The screenshots are from my own computer. I've asked a few reputable software reviewers to take this software on. No one will review it or do an article based on it because they don't review adware or codecs. I'm going to continue adding information, but if you would be so kind as to ask for references where I miss them, I will find the best sources I can, or rephrase the articla.Qabala 10:59, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
I know there is a lack of sources for this format. I think the forums are a great way for us know what to investigate but I believe the criteria for inclusion in this article should be whether we can reproduce it. This is not Wikipedia, we should aim to investigate and test the information we find, not just reference it. I'm in the process of analysing the format/software (I have done R&D for IBM related to multimedia in the past) and I'll update the article once I can prove, or disprove, the user reports. MovieMan 18:50, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
Good luck MovieMan! --Compn 19:04, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
Most of the stuff in the article can be reproduced with some direction. The only things I can think of that I can't confirm are: The contents of a vodei encoded file, and how it's encoded. The theories are not confirmed either as they are purely speculation, but I have attempted to state them as such.Qabala 20:42, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
Thanks Compn but I don't think it's a matter of luck, just having the right tools and enough time. I have made some good progress today, I'd like to tackle tomorrow the structure of Vodei files and determine whether they really speed up downloads. MovieMan 01:30, 14 March 2007 (EDT)