Is VLC 3.0.3 for Windows 7?

I am currently running 2.2.4 Weatherwax on a 64 bit Win 7 machine. Should (can I) upgrade to VLC
3.0.3?

wrote:
I am currently running 2.2.4 Weatherwax on a 64 bit Win 7 machine. Should (can I) upgrade to VLC
3.0.3?

My VLC 1.1.11 works just fine on 7/64. No reason for me to upgrade.

On Sun, 05 Aug 2018 18:50:55 -0500, Paul in Houston TX
wrote:

wrote:
I am currently running 2.2.4 Weatherwax on a 64 bit Win 7 machine. Should (can I) upgrade to VLC
3.0.3?

My VLC 1.1.11 works just fine on 7/64. No reason for me to upgrade.



It's up to you of course. Working fine is always good. But until you
try a new version of something, you don't know whether it works even
better or what new features it has that you might like even better.

My recommendation is almost always to try the new version, but save
the installation file for the old one. If you don't like the new
version, go back to the old one.

In message , Ken Blake
writes:
[]
My recommendation is almost always to try the new version, but save
the installation file for the old one. If you don't like the new
version, go back to the old one.

That's what I like to do too. However, VLC doesn't make it easy, as it
offers to self-upgrade. That's fine the first time - you've got the
installation file you got to install it in the first place - but, if
that upgrade works (especially if it works better or has new features
you like), you stick with it - and _next_ upgrade, you don't have the
installation file for the second one to go back to if you don't like
_that_ upgrade for some reason.

I think you _do_, actually, but you don't know _where_ (and I don't
think it has the version in the filename if you _can_ find it).

Of course, you can always decline the offer to self-upgrade, and
manually fetch the latest complete installer. But that's tedious, and
there's also the concern that some settings (which you've carefully
made, and may not be sure how you did so) might be lost.


This applies of course to anything that offers to self-upgrade, not just
VLC.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The early worm gets the bird.

On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 15:14:08 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Ken Blake
writes:
[]
My recommendation is almost always to try the new version, but save
the installation file for the old one. If you don't like the new
version, go back to the old one.

That's what I like to do too. However, VLC doesn't make it easy, as it
offers to self-upgrade. That's fine the first time - you've got the
installation file you got to install it in the first place - but, if
that upgrade works (especially if it works better or has new features
you like), you stick with it - and _next_ upgrade, you don't have the
installation file for the second one to go back to if you don't like
_that_ upgrade for some reason.

I think you _do_, actually, but you don't know _where_ (and I don't
think it has the version in the filename if you _can_ find it).

Of course, you can always decline the offer to self-upgrade, and
manually fetch the latest complete installer. But that's tedious, and
there's also the concern that some settings (which you've carefully
made, and may not be sure how you did so) might be lost.


You can always find the old versions he

http://download.videolan.org/pub/videolan/vlc/

Just choose the version, and then the OS.
[]'s



This applies of course to anything that offers to self-upgrade, not just
VLC.
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

In message , Shadow
writes:
On Mon, 6 Aug 2018 15:14:08 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Ken Blake
writes:
[]
My recommendation is almost always to try the new version, but save
the installation file for the old one. If you don't like the new
version, go back to the old one.

That's what I like to do too. However, VLC doesn't make it easy, as it
offers to self-upgrade. That's fine the first time - you've got the
installation file you got to install it in the first place - but, if
that upgrade works (especially if it works better or has new features
you like), you stick with it - and _next_ upgrade, you don't have the
installation file for the second one to go back to if you don't like
_that_ upgrade for some reason.

I think you _do_, actually, but you don't know _where_ (and I don't
think it has the version in the filename if you _can_ find it).

I take back that particular point, in the case of VLC at least: as G.
Ross has pointed out, the downloaded filename _does_ show the version.
Although the point remains that, if you let VLC do the upgrade (as it
offers to), you don't know _where_ it has _put_ the installer file, or
whether it keeps it after installation (or even if it doesn't delete it,
has put it somewhere that will be purged eventually).

Of course, you can always decline the offer to self-upgrade, and
manually fetch the latest complete installer. But that's tedious, and
there's also the concern that some settings (which you've carefully
made, and may not be sure how you did so) might be lost.


You can always find the old versions he

http://download.videolan.org/pub/videolan/vlc/

Just choose the version, and then the OS.
[]'s

But you have to know which version you want. If you've allowed it to
self-upgrade more than once, and the last one did something undesirable,
then unless you made a note of the version you had before the last
upgrade you (just) did, you don't _know_ what version you want.

(Good to know back versions _are_ available, though. [It'd be
interesting to see which ones people are fetching.])

This applies of course to anything that offers to self-upgrade, not just
VLC.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I don't see the requirement to upset people. ... There's enough to make fun of
without offending. - Ronnie Corbett, in Radio Times 6-12 August 2011.

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Ken Blake
writes:
[]
My recommendation is almost always to try the new version, but save
the installation file for the old one. If you don't like the new
version, go back to the old one.

That's what I like to do too. However, VLC doesn't make it easy, as it
offers to self-upgrade. That's fine the first time - you've got the
installation file you got to install it in the first place - but, if
that upgrade works (especially if it works better or has new features
you like), you stick with it - and _next_ upgrade, you don't have the
installation file for the second one to go back to if you don't like
_that_ upgrade for some reason.

I think you _do_, actually, but you don't know _where_ (and I don't
think it has the version in the filename if you _can_ find it).

Of course, you can always decline the offer to self-upgrade, and
manually fetch the latest complete installer. But that's tedious, and
there's also the concern that some settings (which you've carefully
made, and may not be sure how you did so) might be lost.


This applies of course to anything that offers to self-upgrade, not just
VLC.

I keep the install file. There it is in my Downloads
folder--VLC-3.0.1-Win64.exe.
So it does show the version and that it is for windows 64 bit.
--
G Ross

Ken Blake wrote:
On Sun, 05 Aug 2018 18:50:55 -0500, Paul in Houston TX
wrote:

wrote:
I am currently running 2.2.4 Weatherwax on a 64 bit Win 7 machine. Should (can I) upgrade to VLC
3.0.3?

My VLC 1.1.11 works just fine on 7/64. No reason for me to upgrade.



It's up to you of course. Working fine is always good. But until you
try a new version of something, you don't know whether it works even
better or what new features it has that you might like even better.

My recommendation is almost always to try the new version, but save
the installation file for the old one. If you don't like the new
version, go back to the old one.

That is a good point.

wrote:
I am currently running 2.2.4 Weatherwax on a 64 bit Win 7 machine. Should (can I) upgrade to VLC
3.0.3?

Yes.
--
Quote of the Week: "You feel the faint grit of ants beneath your shoes,
but keep on walking because in this world you have to decide what you're
willing to kill." --Tony Hoagland from "Candlelight"
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\Ant(Dude) @ http://antfarm.home.dhs.org / http://antfarm.ma.cx
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail privately. If credit-
| |o o| | ing, then please kindly use Ant nickname and URL/link.
\ _ /
( )

wrote

|I am currently running 2.2.4 Weatherwax on a 64 bit Win 7 machine. Should
(can I) upgrade to VLC
| 3.0.3?

For the record, I'm running VLC 2.0.5 on XP.
Later versions run and install OK, but they
malfunction, with weird visual static and
instability. I don't know why. You may be
fine with v. 3 on 7. If not then try an older
version. I don't know of anything 2.0.5 can't
handle.

jackpatton wrote:

I am currently running 2.2.4 Weatherwax on a 64 bit Win 7 machine.
Should (can I) upgrade to VLC 3.0.3?

I'm currently using VLC 2.2.6 on my home PC running Windows 7 Home x64.
I just used the "Help - Update check" menu in VLC and it reports that
3.0.3 is available. I remember seeing 3.x of VLC was available but
don't remember back then why I choose to not update from 2.2.6.

https://www.videolan.org/index.html

If you go there and click the downward chevron on the download link,
you'll see multiple operating systems are supported, including Win7.

https://www.videolan.org/vlc/download-windows.html

says "VLC runs on all versions of Windows, from Windows XP SP3 to the
last version of Windows 10." The author should probably remove the
first clause since "all" doesn't really apply due to the list of
restrictions in the 2nd clause. However, Win7 is listed as supported.

I noticed in the last VLC update that some videos have hiccups in them
that wasn't present before. For example, when reaching the end of a
video (with VLC set to loop) or selecting an interval to repeat, some
videos don't immediate restart smoothly when they hit the end of the
file or the end of the loop. Instead there's a blacked out interval for
a second or the first frame freezes for a second. I've noticed more
pixelation in old videos that played okay before in a prior version of
VLC. I had switched from using the Windows photo & fax viewer for GIF
files to associating VLC with .gif files, and the first artifact that I
noticed in playback is that there is a long pause before VLC starts to
actually play the GIF.

I suspect the problem is with updated codecs. Although I use the K-Lite
Codec Pack to update the codecs on my PC, those are for the globally
accessed codecs (those called by other media programs that use what have
been registered with the OS). VLC doesn't use the global codecs. It
has its own codec library; i.e., VLC uses its own set of codecs (under
installpath\plugins\codec), so updating the K-Lite package won't help
with getting a later codec for VLC to see if the hiccups disappear. A
newer version of VLC might have a later collection of codec versions
that resolve whatever screwup occured in the prior codec version (but
which were a later version than what I had before VLC 2.2.26).

I always keep a couple older versions of software in case I need to step
backward after trying a new version. I could've walked backward from
VLC 2.2.6 to, say, 2.2.2 but the video artifacts where significant
enough for me to bother. I will try going to 3.0.3 to check if the
playback artifacts disappear.

https://www.videolan.org/vlc/releases/3.0.3.html

Some codecs were mentioned, so maybe they updated their internal codec
library with newer codecs that resolve the playback artifacts
encountered in 2.2.6.


UPDATE - After updating from 2.2.6 to 3.0.3 of VLC

As an extremely short glance at VLC 3.0.3, GIFs no longer have a long
delay before they starting playing in VLC. I saw no delay to restart a
loop; however, this didn't happen in every video, I don't remember for
which video formats it happened, and perhaps the videos that I choose
for testing 3.0.3 didn't incur the delay back in 2.2.6. The delay on
loop restart might be one of those artifacts that I'll have to watch for
until I feel the new version no longer has that problem. The new
version did preserve my customized toolbar, so I don't have to figure
out how to define it again to how I want.

Why not read their forums:

https://forum.videolan.org/viewforum.php?f=21)

to see what other users are complaining about, like:

https://forum.videolan.org/viewtopic...144622#p473561

I've never used whatever is "video effects", so I cannot address that
issue in 3.0.3. In VLC's settings, hardware-accelerated decoding is set
to Automatic, so I can't tell if VLC is using or even needs that method
for the videos that I'm playing on my particular setup. Since it works
as-is, I haven't bothered testing with hardware-accelerated (GPU
assisted) decoding to set to one of the two listed methods or disabling
it. Seems that setting affects whether or not VLC will play 2K and 4K
videos, and I don't have of those yet. Doesn't seem an overt exposure
of whether VLC is using GPU assist or not (i.e., there's no obvious
indicator). Instead the responses that I saw mention to watch CPU or
GPU usage by changing this setting. GPU assist should reduce the CPU
load by VLC.

On Sun, 5 Aug 2018 20:38:20 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

I've noticed more
pixelation in old videos that played okay before in a prior version of
VLC.

Same here, for versions prior to 3......

jackpatton wrote:

VanguardLH wrote:

I've noticed more pixelation in old videos that played okay before in
a prior version of VLC.

That was for prior versions to 2.2.6, not 3.0.3. After installing
3.0.3, the problems introduced in 2.2.6 (when I moved from 2.2.2) had
disappeared.

Same here, for versions prior to 3......

But I noticed it when going from 2.2.2 to 2.2.6 of VLC. Well, when I
had 2.2.6 is when I happened to notice the increased pixelating but it
might've happened before if I had played the same videos in VLC when
using 2.2.2. No way to really know which videos I was playing with
which version of VLC to know when pixelation increased.

That I noticed it in 2.2.6 doesn't mean it wasn't happening in earlier
versions. I probably most noticed the pixelation when I would jump
through a video by using the Forward/Backward buttons (which jump at
10-second increments). Sometimes when I jumped, synchronization seemed
to get lost for a couple seconds, the video pixelated, and then it got
corrected and playback continued okay. I don't have that many .mp4,
..flv, or other video files, and none that I tried had the pixelation in
VLC 3.0.3. Probably depends on which codec the video used that VLC
would then use to decode the video. Many video formats are just
containers, so the codec could be different despite playing the same
container filetype.

For me, 3.0.3 was an improvent in playback quality: no more pixelation
and immediate restart on looping. It's possible a damaged codec got
replaced in the new version's internal codec library. Whatever made it
work better, it's better in 3.0.3 for me than it was in 2.2.6 (which was
worse than when I was previously using 2.2.2). 2.2.2: okay. 2.2.6:
some problems. 3.0.3: okay again.

On Sun, 05 Aug 2018 18:51:08 -0400, wrote:

I am currently running 2.2.4 Weatherwax on a 64 bit Win 7 machine. Should (can I) upgrade to VLC
3.0.3?

Version 2.2.8 here. I did try a more recent version, but got
crashes, so reverted.
If 2.2.4 works, use it.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On Sun, 05 Aug 2018 23:36:21 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Sun, 05 Aug 2018 18:51:08 -0400, wrote:

I am currently running 2.2.4 Weatherwax on a 64 bit Win 7 machine. Should (can I) upgrade to VLC
3.0.3?

Version 2.2.8 here. I did try a more recent version, but got
crashes, so reverted.
If 2.2.4 works, use it.
[]'s

I don;t think i have had crashes yet on updates of VLC.