Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Adobe Rants Over Linux Video Acceleration APIs

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
    in 5 years where will theora be? Im sure that or another codec will be far superior.
    I doubt that will be the case, on par maybe, but remember even though it is free they still have to dodge technologies that may have a patent on it. Besides with Quad resolution HD TV's probably coming out by then or around I doubt MPEG-LA is going to sit idly by and say H264 in it's present state is "good enough".

    Comment


    • That's what they did with MP3 too, and once it became so entrenched that noone could live without it they started charging an arm and a leg.

      A typical marketing ploy.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by deanjo View Post
        lol, honestly I don't have an issue at all if people/corporation/etc say "If you don't charge for our implementation of xyz then we won't charge you." that is their prerogative. It's their IP they should be able to do what ever they want with it.
        You don't, I do. Their IP, their problem. I don't want to have any relations with them and because of that I don't want they to have any relations with me and ofcourse to be enforced to use their software as well. Fair is fair.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
          That's what they did with MP3 too, and once it became so entrenched that noone could live without it they started charging an arm and a leg.

          A typical marketing ploy.
          It's all about the device support and what the pirates prefer. Vorbis was superior for years but it still lags behind in support. The pirates won't support formats that cannot appeal to the widest audience.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Apopas View Post
            You don't, I do. Their IP, their problem. I don't want to have any relations with them and because of that I don't want they to have any relations with me and ofcourse to be enforced to use their software as well. Fair is fair.
            Sure you always have that freedom, but so do the service providers. You want to use their service then you play with their partners.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by deanjo View Post
              Sure you always have that freedom, but so do the service providers. You want to use their service then you play with their partners.
              That's the matter! If their product is considered as a standard (alone), then I'll be forced indirectly to use it in a matter of ways. I don't like to be forced. That's, at least, outrageous. I dont want that freedom to exist only theoritically.

              Comment


              • There's a difference between being forced to use it and having the choice to use it.

                And btw, where's Dirac here? It's supposed to beat Theora and be almost on par with H.264. And it's both Free and Open.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                  There's a difference between being forced to use it and having the choice to use it.
                  Yes, I agree.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                    And btw, where's Dirac here? It's supposed to beat Theora and be almost on par with H.264. And it's both Free and Open.
                    It maybe free and open but even the BBC itself admits it has no idea if it may infringe on patents (they haven't really done any research on it). The unfortunate part about doing that is by doing such hardware vendors and the like are less likely to pick it up. Lawyers don't like hearing "The short answer is that we don't know for certain, but we're pretty sure we don't. ".

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                      Lawyers don't like hearing "The short answer is that we don't know for certain, but we're pretty sure we don't. ".
                      Well, in all seriousness you can't do much better than that for any remotely current codec. Even MPEG LA flat-out states this (with regard to their MPEG-2 pool, even):

                      Originally posted by MPEG LA
                      No assurance is or can be made that the License includes every essential patent. The purpose of the License is to offer a convenient licensing alternative to everyone on the same terms and to include as much essential intellectual property as possible for their convenience.
                      (emphasis added)

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                        It maybe free and open but even the BBC itself admits it has no idea if it may infringe on patents (they haven't really done any research on it). The unfortunate part about doing that is by doing such hardware vendors and the like are less likely to pick it up. Lawyers don't like hearing "The short answer is that we don't know for certain, but we're pretty sure we don't. ".
                        Same holds true for Theora though.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
                          Well, in all seriousness you can't do much better than that for any remotely current codec. Even MPEG LA flat-out states this (with regard to their MPEG-2 pool, even):

                          (emphasis added)
                          Sure but with at least codecs that do have a patent portfolio the guy using and gets caught in the middle can have some legal recourse to the solution provider. For example, a guy makes a player that utilizes a patented and licensed codec. If that codec is later found to be in infringement on an other technology a deal can be worked out between the licensor and the infringed party (usually done out of court through a settlement) and the end manufacturer of the player can keep on going selling his player with no additional cost placed upon himself or loss of functionality. If a free codec was to be found in violation chances are is that they would have to remove the infringing code and change the spec and maybe to the point of rendering that player manufacturer's product useless because of the change in spec.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by RealNC View Post
                            Same holds true for Theora though.
                            Actually Theora does have patents it's just that they have been acquired and made free by the patent holder with use of a irrevocable license. Xiph actually investigated these matters and as such is actually "safer" then Dirac is when it comes to legal matters.

                            Comment


                            • Wasn't the case for Dirac that it sucked on low bitrates, and was very slow to encode?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by curaga View Post
                                Wasn't the case for Dirac that it sucked on low bitrates, and was very slow to encode?
                                Here is a good little comparison of h264/Schroedinger/theora.

                                http://codecism.blogspot.com/2010/01...roedinger.html

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X