Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 147

Thread: Adobe Rants Over Linux Video Acceleration APIs

  1. #121
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote 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".

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,129

    Default

    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.

  3. #123
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    1,033

    Default

    Quote 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.

  4. #124
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote 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.

  5. #125
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote 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.

  6. #126
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    1,033

    Default

    Quote 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.

  7. #127
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,788

    Default

    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.

  8. #128
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Hellas
    Posts
    1,033

    Default

    Quote 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.

  9. #129
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,583

    Default

    Quote 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. ".

  10. #130
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    772

    Default

    Quote 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):

    Quote 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)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •