[DDDamian]

Just to kick off a list:

- input streams like SACD ISOs, DVD-As, MP3HD
- binaural headphone output
see: http://bs2b.sourceforge.net/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binaural_recording
- visualizations
- SQL-server/client dlls
- DSP-processing
- external codec support e.g. FFDShow

And my two favourites:
- reducing the burden on core devs having to code everything and keeping the bells and whistles completely multi-platform at the same time. This also allows developers to code in the platform of their expertise
- keeping the core of XBMC as lithe, nimble and small as possible for minimalist installation and deployment while allowing for a plethora of features

Okay, trying to open a flood-gate here......

[Montellese]

- reducing the burden on core devs having to code everything and keeping the bells and whistles completely multi-platform at the same time. This also allows developers to code in the platform of their expertise

Doesn't sound like an advantage to me if everyone just starts only supporting the operating system he uses and ignoring the other ones completely. For end users it will become very complicated to keep track of which platform supports which features. Sure there are and will always be features which will not be available on all platforms but IMO one big advantage of XBMC over other media centers is that is provides the bigger part of it's features on all major operating systems.

[Robotica]

- Browser addons!
- drm players (with bluray menu support);
- and lots of other closed source software

I foresee some new commercial forks and/or OEM-deals (like with Sigma) thanks to binary addons.

[ashlar]

Doesn't sound like an advantage to me if everyone just starts only supporting the operating system he uses and ignoring the other ones completely. For end users it will become very complicated to keep track of which platform supports which features. Sure there are and will always be features which will not be available on all platforms but IMO one big advantage of XBMC over other media centers is that is provides the bigger part of it's features on all major operating systems.

Once binary additions are available, I don't think this will be a decision where current developers could have a say. Which is different than having an opinion about it, obviously.

And, honestly, I think it's pretty much going to be a given that a single developer will start working on the platform he knows better. To maybe later expand to other platforms (or allowing others to do so, by opening the source).

What exactly is going to be possible through binary addons? Are there limits implicit in the way they are being designed?

[DDDamian]

Doesn't sound like an advantage to me if everyone just starts only supporting the operating system he uses and ignoring the other ones completely. For end users it will become very complicated to keep track of which platform supports which features. Sure there are and will always be features which will not be available on all platforms but IMO one big advantage of XBMC over other media centers is that is provides the bigger part of it's features on all major operating systems.

Nice to hear thoughts from a dev. Agreed that multi-platform is a big factor in XBMC's favour. That said, there is divergence already in the form of scripts and features. This is really kind of a strategic decision for the development team.

The purpose of the thread is to find out what users AND devs envision or hope for from the wide range of possibilities binary addons bring

[DDDamian]

What exactly is going to be possible through binary addons? Are there limits implicit in the way they are being designed?

The advantage of binary addons is they are able to process at high speeds (being compiled) and have virtually unlimited access to machine resources. On-the-fly DSP and visual enhancements become possible, as does interfacing directly with the OS and drivers. They become .DLLs called by XBMC at specific events. This is much less limited that Python scripts or external players.

The range of capabilities becomes virtually unlimited.

[Montellese]

And, honestly, I think it's pretty much going to be a given that a single developer will start working on the platform he knows better. To maybe later expand to other platforms (or allowing others to do so, by opening the source).

That's how it already works in the team, someone starts to write code for some new feature and if it's platform-dependent he finds himself devs for the other platforms which integrate the new feature there. The difference with binary addons is, that there generally is no team available as it is with Team XBMC but with open source obviously anyone can step up to the task of porting an addon to a different platform.

Nice to hear thoughts from a dev. Agreed that multi-platform is a big factor in XBMC's favour. That said, there is divergence already in the form of scripts and features. This is really kind of a strategic decision for the development team.

This was just my personal opinion. IMO binary addons are a nice step in further breaking XBMC apart in easier to update components and will allow a lot more than the current python scripts and I absolutely support the feature.

Just wanted to point out that it can also have drawbacks besides a lot of advantages. And concerning the possibilities they will generally be limited by the addon hooks provided by XBMC. You won't be able to provide a DRM-capable audio player if XBMC doesn't provide a hook for players as binary addons (not saying that it will or won't)

[DDDamian]

Just wanted to point out that it can also have drawbacks besides a lot of advantages. And concerning the possibilities they will generally be limited by the addon hooks provided by XBMC. You won't be able to provide a DRM-capable audio player if XBMC doesn't provide a hook for players as binary addons (not saying that it will or won't)

Some drawbacks I can think of are in the support area. Here it is obvious though that script & skin devs very much stand behind their work. Never heard of a virus or malware being infused via a plugin but it's very possible.

BTW, that's a great way to describe how XBMC and binary addons interact and how XBMC still decides where/how to provide external control and what info it provides to an addon. Maybe to input/process a stream, "while playing" hooks and post-stream hooks. Think of the custom button possibilities to skinners for browsers, etc!

Glad to hear you support the idea - I just feel it will help the range of capabilities expand at a much greater pace without tying up so much of the work of the core team!

Thanks for the insights!

[griffore]

Encrypted Media Extension CDM to allow for something like Netflix

[zilexa]

This is an old topic but I am curious how the dev team thinks about binary add-on support. This would allow companies to release add-ons for their services like Skype For XBMC, YouTube For XBMC etc and also local tv broadcasters could add XBMC support to their tv apps.

[Montellese]

We have added a basic build system for binary addons but we are still missing the repositories and all that stuff.