The point being...

Post #323,977 by rcareaga 4/3/10 9:25:04 PM Reply	The point being... In twenty-five years (or likely five) this will look as quaint as MacPaint running on the original Mac 128K. But just as that original underpowered box transformed the world of personal computing (for all that the Beast never acknowledged its paternity), posterity may not understand that this was the tipping point. cordially,
Post #323,983 by pwhysall 4/4/10 1:09:35 AM Reply	I must confess to be amused at the nerdRage engendered by it
Post #323,985 by Bman 4/4/10 3:04:53 AM Reply	Thank You "Pictures are better then words because some words are big and hard to understand" Peter Griffin (Family Guy)
Post #323,987 by static 4/4/10 7:28:31 AM Reply	Ditto likewise. I'm happy being an observer because I am not the target market - a fact I realized about three weeks ago and which means Apple's marketing and product development makes more sense. And that's quite apart from the reason I haven't bought any other Apple products (except the only major innovative product made when Jobs was absent: a Newton. Which may tell you more about Jobs than me). So why am I not the market? In a nutshell, it's because I know how to program my VCR. Well, I did when I still used one. I might be the target market later, but I'm not at the moment. They have to convice highly techno-aware people that giving up your computing experience to what Apple has decided is what it should be is a good thing. They might be waiting a long time. Wade. Q:Is it proper to eat cheeseburgers with your fingers? A:No, the fingers should be eaten separately.
Post #323,990 by malraux 4/4/10 9:48:56 AM Reply	The only thing I really dislike... ...is the lack of Flash. Otherwise I'd probably get one for lazing on the couch. My iPod Touch irritates me in that the only streaming video I can watch is YouTube. If I find a random site with videos on it, too bad. I may get one for my son as an educational device (if there are more programs like The Elements out there). Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #324,018 by SpiceWare 4/4/10 6:33:15 PM Reply	that won't be an issue for long CBS.com Prepping HTML5 Video Playback for iPad http://www.macrumors...layback-for-ipad/ Vimeo's adding support http://www.Vimeo.com/blog:268 Brightcove is adding support. Their customers include a number of broadcasters http://blog.brightco...video-experiences http://www.brightcov...ove/our-customers Apple has a list as well, CNN, Reuters, New York Times, Time, ESPN, Major League Baseball, Netflix, NPR, etc. http://www.apple.com...d/ready-for-ipad/
Post #324,020 by malraux 4/4/10 6:44:12 PM Reply	Yes, that will be nice when it's there. Once everyone decides on a codec, though. :-P Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #324,025 by SpiceWare 4/4/10 7:13:36 PM Reply	hehe Mozilla is the odd man out, even Microsoft's supporting H.264. http://daringfirebal...illa_video_mobile The practical effect of MozillaÂs current position will not be to drive adoption of Ogg Theora. WhatÂs going to happen is that Safari, Chrome, and even IE9 users will be served HTML5 video, and Firefox users will get Flash. ... MozillaÂs intransigence in the name of ÂopennessÂ will result in Firefox users being served video using the closed Flash Player plugin, and behind the scenes the video is likely to be encoded using H.264 anyway.
Post #324,028 by scoenye 4/4/10 10:08:43 PM Reply	It is the only sane stance http://www.betanews....treams/1265237599 The implied danger here is that a producer of video who did not use a licensed codec (whether or not he owed anything for it) could be exposing the viewer of that video to liability. Or as Mozilla contributor Robert O'Callahan described it in a blog post last Friday, "In other words, if you're an end user in a country where software patents (or method patents) are enforceable, and you're using software that encodes or decodes H.264 and the vendor is not on the list of licensees, the MPEG LA reserves the right to sue you, the end user, as well as the software vendor or distributor." The others have (or think they have) deep enough pockets that they can put their end users out of the wind, then all the best to them. And then there is still the spectre that even free streams will need to pay royalties at the whim of MPEG-LA.
Post #324,036 by SpiceWare 4/5/10 10:33:39 AM Reply	Their end users are "out of the wind" Apple, Google and Microsoft already have licenses for H.264. All Mozilla would need to do is have Firefox call the OS' built in video playback (Apple's QuickTime API, Microsoft's Windows Media Player API, etc). Yes, that spectre does exist, but I would expect the same response that caused PNG to be created for lossless image compression would happen for video.
Post #324,040 by drook 4/5/10 11:48:04 AM Reply	Other players learned their lesson There already is been a PNG-like replacement: Ogg Theora -- http://techcrunch.co...b-video-standard/ That's exactly what Firefox uses, and the other players learned from the GIF->PNG experience that if they support the new standard they lose control of the old one. So they aren't supporting it. -- Drew
Post #324,102 by pwhysall 4/6/10 2:00:39 AM Reply	Re: Other players learned their lesson Theora has its own patent woes. Gruber: http://daringfirebal...submarine_patents Rebuttal: http://www.osnews.co...n_H264_Wait_What_
Post #324,113 by drook 4/6/10 8:45:03 AM Reply	That's really interesting I just followed a link in the one I posted pointing to this ArsTechnica article -- http://arstechnica.c...-codec-debate.ars What do you notice in this passage: Apple and Google favor H.264 while Mozilla and Opera favor Ogg Theora. Google intends to ship its browser with support for both codecs, which means that Apple is the only vendor that will not be supporting Ogg. In discussing the positions of browsers and their vendors, what do they not even bother mentioning? -- Drew
Post #324,159 by scoenye 4/6/10 9:08:52 PM Reply	Who is the licensed supplier on Linux? And where after 2015? MPEG-LA can stop extending the free content royalty policy once world+dog is locked to H.264. Then who will absorb the cost?
Post #324,591 by SpiceWare 4/13/10 3:00:50 PM Reply	Re: Who is the licensed supplier on Linux? And where after 2 apparently Adobe is as all the info I've seen is that sites plan to fall back to Flash for browsers that don't directly support H.264. As for after 2015, dunno but H.264 will most likely be outdated by then - Google to Open-source VP8 for HTML5 Video http://newteevee.com...-for-html5-video/ On2 went so far as to claim that it could provide Â50 percent bandwidth savings compared to leading H.264 implementations.Â
Post #323,994 by pwhysall 4/4/10 10:10:43 AM Reply	Perhaps. Apple, Inc are in the business of making money. "Highly techno-aware people" - i.e. the nerd market - isn't where the money is. Too few in number and much more prone to blog about stuff than buy it.
Post #324,003 by drook 4/4/10 11:47:00 AM Reply	My TV doesn't play Flash! I just spent $4,000 on a 57-inch plasma TV and it doesn't play Flash! In fact, it doesn't surf the web at all. And I can't figure out where to plug in the keyboard. Bluetooth seems to be disabled -- the wireless system seems to operate on infrared if you can believe it, meaning it's line-of-sight only. Man, how can Sony build such crap. They must hate their customers. The preceeding story is from an alternate Earth, where everything is exactly the same as this one except that I have more money and less sense. -- Drew
Post #324,083 by static 4/5/10 8:31:13 PM Reply	Correct. Q:Is it proper to eat cheeseburgers with your fingers? A:No, the fingers should be eaten separately.
Post #323,993 by jake123 4/4/10 10:09:28 AM Reply	Where's the like button on that one?

Welcome to IWETHEY!