insike
About
- Username
- insike
- Joined
- Visits
- 0
- Last Active
- -
- Roles
- member
- Badges
- 0
- Posts
- 188
Reactions
Comments
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Hiro There is no open standard for video codecs. Anywhere. Period. Correct. Quote: Yes I'm looking square at your potential response of WebM as an open standard. It's not. Correct. WebM is not a standard. H…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by tonton First, neither WebM nor H.264 are open standards. I agree completely. H264 is not open, and WebM is not a standard. Quote: They are both proprietary, owned and developed by a single entity. WebM is owned …
-
Quote: Originally Posted by tonton This is where your argument falls flat on its face. WebM will no longer be free when it's killed in patent court, will it? There's no evidence whatsoever that it violates any patents. In fact, the MPEG-LA fai…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Hiro The web is built on open standards, many of which have multiple closed proprietary implementations. This IS how the web was envisioned to be built. What on earth are you talking about? I don't give a crap whet…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Hiro H.264 has nothing to do with an open web. Ask Vint Cerf what an open web is, he'll tell you it's a standard anyone can code to. Even if you want to charge for your code, that's OK. Again, it's not about sourc…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Mr. H you have repeatedly failed to construct a sound argument as to exactly how the end-user benefits from a codec being "open" (you mean free), rather than the codec having royalties associated with it So what you…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by jragosta Open Source software is a very minor component of the software industry. Um, WebKit? Quote: Mac OS X? "Major components of Mac OS X, including the UNIX core, are made available under Apple's Open Sou…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by hill60 Imagine if Google accused Bing of copying their search results derived using mathematical formulae known as algorithms... ...oh, hang on they did, then whined about it all over the Internet. But did they s…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Slurpy It's clear the decision had nothing to do with 'openness' but instead an effort to undermine Apple Your paranoia is pretty amusing. Do you really think Google really gives a crap about Apple? All Google cares…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by tumme-totte One funny angle of all of this is that Google is a American company infringing on patents from and destroying other american companies. What patents is Google infringing on? VP8 was created by On2 specif…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by nvidia2008 As much as it would have been an instinctive move Nokia was smart not to have anything to do with Google. Symbian and Google was the burning platform and Microsoft was the icy sea. Nokia jumped into the sea.…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by mjtomlin Why wouldn't they just choose H.264? It's both a standard on the web and on consumer devices. H264 is not a standard for the web. H264 is closed, and therefore incompatible with an open web. Quote: Micr…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by penchanted You clearly do not understand the issues regarding being anti-competitive. As an example, Microsoft was found guilty of anti-competitive behavior even though they gave IE away for free. They were using an…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by tonton You don't get my point. There's no open standard now. Our choice isn't between an open standard and a proprietary standard. Our choice now is between a proprietary standard and nothing. I don't want nothing. …
-
Quote: Originally Posted by penchanted That's not the issue. YouTube, as the dominant online video provider, may be considered to have a monopoly. Making all their content WebM (a format they control) only might well be considered anti-competitiv…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Slurpy Let me think... no, I'm pretty sure that still qualifies as less pathetic I disagree. It's more pathetic. Quote: At least, in that case, the person assumedly enjoys and derives pleasure from the product. …
-
Quote: Originally Posted by tonton Nope. If you use a codec that isn't supported by popular browsers, then that's bad development. It's not lack of an "open web". If a browser doesn't support a widely implemented codec, then that's bad busines…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Hiro He's just being coy, because he knows as well as everyone else there is no such source, and that W3C never wanted a single codec as a standard, as that isn't multi-vendor interoperable. The whole idea of legislat…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by JeffDM Just using flash seems to cause other problems that using a dedicated, single purpose plug-in rarely causes. Such as? Quote: Originally Posted by tonton After all this time, I still don't get the proble…
-
Quote: Originally Posted by Slurpy Such hatred for Apple, yet you've spent time typing 174 posts on a message board for a site called AppleInsider. I'm not sure I can think of anything more pathetic. I can. Someone blindly defending Apple no m…