On Sun, 11 Oct 2009 20:28:15 -0500
Paul Louden wrote:
> Rafaël Carré wrote:
> > The "top-tier" category would include targets where the OF is not
> > needed at all anymore.
> >
> This is going to rule out some players forever (for example, we can
> never support DRM and possibly some propriet
Rafaël Carré wrote:
To me it would mean anything but video DSP, DRM crypto units and dock
connector (for devices plugged to iPods), does that sound correct ?
That's more or less fine. I'm not really able to think about the details
right now. It's just not good to say or even suggest that "t
On 12.10.2009 00:07, Dave Chapman wrote:
All,
I've been thinking a bit about the target classifications, and have
come to the conclusion that we now have a large number of ports, in a
wide variety of states of completion, that the current 3 categories is
not enough.
I would like to see the
Rafaël Carré wrote:
The "top-tier" category would include targets where the OF is not needed
at all anymore.
This is going to rule out some players forever (for example, we can
never support DRM and possibly some proprietary audio or video formats).
Maybe instead we should have a list of re
Le 12/10/2009 00:07, Dave Chapman a écrit :
> Thoughts? Or am I going round in circles (apologies if I haven't read
> all previous discussions on this issue...)
Interesting, I fully agree with your proposal.
The "top-tier" category would include targets where the OF is not needed
at all anymore
All,
I've been thinking a bit about the target classifications, and have come
to the conclusion that we now have a large number of ports, in a wide
variety of states of completion, that the current 3 categories is not
enough.
I would like to see the addition of a "top-tier" category - one th
