Discussion Forums > Technology
Proprietary video codec H264 and open-source WebM
K7IA:
--- Quote from: Daiz on May 30, 2010, 04:40:35 PM ---While you're free to post wild fantasies pulled out of your ass?
--- End quote ---
Actually I am quite free to post any kind of fantasies that I can pull out of my ass in here. This is not the RFC list.
If only you can find a way to speak properly instead of spitting, while stating your facts and pointing out to any sources that will support you.
--- Quote from: theholyduck on May 30, 2010, 04:48:36 PM ---while the vp8 spec is frozen and was developed in secret by a properitary company repeatedly proven to be staffed almost entirely by idiots,...
...
Open and free videoformat, don't make me laugh. its a gigant pile of shit and google refuses to help you if you use it and get sued
--- End quote ---
Yes I understand what you are saying. In fact many people seriously criticize google's actions including not submitting the license to OSI.
But in the long run European and other countries will adopt the regulations and "outside the US" won't work anymore.
--- Quote from: fohfoh on May 30, 2010, 05:10:51 PM ---AFAIK, Microsoft did try to implement that either in earlier versions of vista or windows 7 (forgot which it was). The issue was that there was such a HUGE backlash from people that they were required to removed that "feature" in a later update.
--- End quote ---
Yes, microsoft originally intended to use hardware supported content protection in Windows Longhorn AKA Vista
Proin Drakenzol:
--- Quote from: K7IA on May 30, 2010, 05:20:52 PM ---
--- Quote from: Daiz on May 30, 2010, 04:40:35 PM ---While you're free to post wild fantasies pulled out of your ass?
--- End quote ---
Actually I am quite free to post any kind of fantasies that I can pull out of my ass in here. This is not the RFC list.
If only you can find a way to speak properly instead of spitting, while stating your facts and pointing out to any sources that will support you.
--- End quote ---
Here's an idea.
GO FUCK YOURSELF
You're not special. If you want other people to "speak properly instead of spitting" maybe you should stop taking a dump on your own fucking thread.
--- Quote ---
--- Quote from: fohfoh on May 30, 2010, 05:10:51 PM ---AFAIK, Microsoft did try to implement that either in earlier versions of vista or windows 7 (forgot which it was). The issue was that there was such a HUGE backlash from people that they were required to removed that "feature" in a later update.
--- End quote ---
Yes, microsoft originally intended to use hardware supported content protection in Windows Longhorn AKA Vista
--- End quote ---
The other problem is, of course, that it's impossible to sort the illegal content from the legal-but-unregistered content. Without some guarantee that Microsoft won't accidently delete Timmy's 3rd Birthday videos it's not something that can ever be implemented without being an undue invasion of privacy. People have a "reasonable expectation" that none of their personal, legal files will ever be touched. And that's something no amount of EULA fine print can overcome (e.g. "If the user fails to properly select options X, Y, Z and register the video withing 5 days the content will automatically be deleted") since a EULA is not a legally binding document.
vuzedome:
Alright, alright, back on topic.
WebM, why the name? This just confuses more people as it is still Matroska.
Xtras:
There is one thing that I like a lot about this though. It might lend devices to stop viewing MKV as just a tool for pirates since now Google is backing it in this WebM. Thus, more companies might add MKV compatibility to devices instead of just using MP4 and AVI.
nstgc:
Its more likely that the use of the matraska container will hurt Google for that very reason.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version