Talk:Miro (video software)

Podcasting Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Podcasting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of notable podcasts and podcast-related information on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PodcastingWikipedia:WikiProject PodcastingTemplate:WikiProject Podcastingpodcasting articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Low-importance).

According to this PDF at their website, it appears that even by introducing the Democracy name, they weren't dropping the DTV name. —Tokek 14:22, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Is this page anything more than an advertisement? The links don't work, and neither does the windows uninstall for the software. How best to reflect that in the article? -Sweavo 22 Jan 2007

The links do work and so does the windows uninstaller. It seems like it is just you? --Sish 22:35, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like Cory Doctorow won out and the project recently changed its name to Miro, the url will be changing to getmiro.com soon. Probably not worth mentioning until they make the change over. Kookrme 00:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it should be mentioned now, as the miro project is looking to build name recognition.riffic 02:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Miro.png

Image:Miro.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 18:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rmvb

Can it read rmvb? 89.214.25.177 (talk) 00:25, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot is very old

The screenshot being used is very old - at version 0.9.9 while the current version is 2.0.3. I presume that uploading a newer one (as the ui is significantly different enough) would be worthwhile? Faemir (talk) 02:32, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Go right ahead! --85.77.199.25 (talk) 17:41, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I changed the screenshot from 0.9.9 to 3.5. CyberWasteland (talk) 16:45, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unbalanced Content - Need for Revision History?

The substantive content of the article is barely a dozen sentences or so (as of this note); it is dwarfed by a multi-screen table of the version revision history, down to four-decimal version numbers, some only days apart, most giving no information other than the version number and date. This seems awkward and not very useful. Perhaps just a brief mention of major upgrades, and a note on the name change, would suffice?KTK (talk) 22:59, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

Should provide the intended pronunciation. I for one haven't been able to locate it... Cub

Sort of on that note, I've been wondering how they decided on this name. What immediately came to mind for me is that "miro" in Japanese means "look" (the imperative, as in, "Look over there!") If that's where they got the name, then it would be pronounced "MEE-roh". Does anyone know where they got the name? NoriMori (talk) 14:40, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

/mIɹo/ according to the speaker in the video on the getmiro.com homepage 24.101.187.174 (talk) 21:29, 12 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Miro 3.0.3 & Malware

I think note should be made in the article that this softwares newest version, 3.0.3 by default it seems contains malware, something Ad-Aware id's as "Zugo (fs)" ..

80.220.201.10 (talk) 09:52, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above poster is probably referring to the toolbar added by the installer for the Windows build. See [1] where the Participatory Culture Foundation representatives explain why they use the Zugo installer and that users have the choice of not using the installer. See also [2] and [3]. I may be too close to this topic having used Miro on Windows, both the official Windows build and a portable apps build, and having found and removed Zugo traces on my PC (flagged as adware and toolbar Zugo by DrWeb and NOD32 and as not malicious by VIPRE, see [4]). The toolbar appears to be not present in the portable version, see https://www.virustotal.com/file/b7c70e9ccd14b3a098029a4ac10363e8f93f00df89cfadc29f94093cbde7f24a/analysis/.

However, from a wikipedia viewpoint I searched for reliable sources that mention Miro with Zugo or toolbar: Google news only found [5] and [6]. Google web search finds many more results including this list of software derived from this Installers Hall of Shame list that also bundle toolbars and other adware. That list includes such well-known software as Adobe Flash Player, Avast, Google Earth, and Sun Microsystems Java installer, none of whose articles mentions adware or bundling. One exception is IrfanView#Search Engine Toolbar cited by a CNET post. This CNET Editors' review criticizes the toolbar installation in MIRO but does not label it adware or malware. Finally, Martin Brinkmann of Ghacks covered adware bundling in other installers in this post. -84user (talk) 20:38, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up

Can somebody fix my reference if I don't get back to this in time. Also the references and links are all mixed up.--tumaru 03:09, 18 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tumaru (talk • contribs)

removal of reports of crumware

I remove some reports of scumwaare in Miro as this is certainly caused by people that downloaded 3rd party infected versions of miro (vla suffers a similar problem because of its good name.

It would be good if this topic got covered from the other angle, here is an official blog post on the topic

http://blog.l0cal.com/2011/07/07/these-companies-that-mislead-our-users/

coverage of that blog post: http://www.geek.com/articles/news/vlc-media-player-suffering-in-face-of-crapware-and-uncaring-google-2011077/

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Scientus (talk • contribs) 12:05, 25 April 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

Restored deleted malware section, which was properly cited. The official site for Miro Video Converter [7] hosts a Windows installer that tries to install some "AVG anti-virus" package with an overreaching EULA. It's not some third party doing this. John Nagle (talk) 20:56, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When pushed, the authors admitted that the drive-by installer was added to produce revenue.[8]. John Nagle (talk) 21:15, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Miro (software). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/674vofIJQ?url=http://blog.getmiro.com/2007/03/a-name-change/ to http://www.getmiro.com/blog/2007/03/a-name-change/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927131044/http://www.getmiro.com/blog/2007/07/announing-miro/ to http://www.getmiro.com/blog/2007/07/announing-miro/
Added {{dead link}} tag to https://develop.participatoryculture.org/index.php/ConversionMatrix
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://bugzilla.pculture.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15208

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:04, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

General tidy up

Although the intro text has been updated, most of the body of the article is still written as if Miro and a bunch of the PCF's other defunct projects are still active. Given that it's a dead project, and the article is now only useful for historical purposes (eg for anyone wanting to study the code, or the evolution of independent media in the digital age), it probably makes sense to heavily prune it down to what can be found it suitable third-party sources. What do others think? --Danylstrype (talk) 16:03, 7 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]