A fair point is made in the comments in that article, that it isn't
worth the patent trolls time and money unless someone deep-pocketed
like Apple gets involved, but then they coud well come out of the
woodwork.
Another comment does, however, note his use of the passive tense to
describe this
In all Job's attacks on Flash, he didn't really talk about the
technical limitations of Flash video for animation/interactivity/media
synchronization - which is telling, since Apple systematically ignored
Quicktime development interactive Quicktime for years - and have
basically just
Jobs cant really say much about VP8 until oogle make an official announcement
about it can he? When that time comes, I predict the main argument will be
along the lines of lack of VP8 hardware decoding.
As for Quicktime,if we care about open standards then thank god Quicktime
multimedia
There is no future-proof perfect answer at this stage.
VP8 may be the longterm answer but even if its a roaring success it will take
years to reach the promised land.
Like it or not, H264 is the answer for at least the next few years, if not
longer. With one H.264 file you can cater for most
Looks like things may be about to turn uglier on this front:
http://blogs.fsfe.org/hugo/2010/04/open-letter-to-steve-jobs/
Jobs has apparently replied:
'From: Steve Jobs
To: Hugo Roy
Subject: Re:Open letter to Steve Jobs: Thoughts on Flash
Date 30/04/2010 15:21:17
All video codecs are covered
Isn't this where we started on this thread?
j
On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 10:17 AM, elbowsofdeath st...@dvmachine.com wrote:
Looks like things may be about to turn uglier on this front:
http://blogs.fsfe.org/hugo/2010/04/open-letter-to-steve-jobs/
Jobs has apparently replied:
'From: Steve Jobs
heck, i'd pay somebody to go for me, or, to be specific, i'd give a piece of
any action to one who helps arrange it.
i would love to take the easy path, google adsense and youtube, but, as has
happened over and over in the history of the small screen, edgy material gets
pushed aside and has to
On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Joly MacFie j...@punkcast.com wrote:
Isn't this where we started on this thread?
j
Yes.
- verdi
--
Training for a triathlon and raising money for The Leukemia Lymphoma Society.
http://training.michaelverdi.com
Im confused, this subject isnt where the thread started at all, it started with
the rumours about Google opening up VP8. Most of the talk about downsides of
theora has been to do with quality, hardware decoding, quantity of videos
already in H.264. The potential for patent problems with theora
What he was referring to was that a day (and 11 emails ago), Joly
noted a quote from the same story you just brought up and we all just
had a discussion about it.
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Joly MacFie j...@punkcast.com wrote:
I also noted Jobs recent statement that Theora is not free of
On 2 May 2010, at 14:28, elbowsofdeath wrote:
Jobs cant really say much about VP8 until oogle make an official
announcement about it can he?
Fair enough, I guess, though it seems a pretty open secret. And
they've bought it, right? So it's not irrelevant, and the possibility
should
Ahh right. The difference is that in his original statement Jobs was only
making a point about potential theora patent woes, which quite rightly could be
dismissed as FUD. But in Jobs later email reply to the open letter, he actually
states that there is actually something going on with this,
Hi folks,
Since many of you have your own websites and such, I thought I would ask you
all to see if any of you have a good solution for selling digital downloads? I
am looking for a one-time purchase option rather than a monthly fee
arrangement. In the past I've used a plain old HTML system
--- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, Rupert Howe rup...@... wrote:
Fair enough, I guess, though it seems a pretty open secret. And
they've bought it, right? So it's not irrelevant, and the possibility
should deserve some recognition in a full honest discussion?
Yeah but I certainly
Just trying to extract the interesting topic of multimedia from the video
format discussion.
I dont really know whee to start, Ive always been interested in it, although as
mentioned previously I get a bit lost when I actually try to flesh out some
vague ideas into something more solid and
Whatever happened to SMIL? :)
On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 4:06 PM, elbowsofdeath st...@dvmachine.com wrote:
Just trying to extract the interesting topic of multimedia from the video
format discussion.
I dont really know whee to start, Ive always been interested in it,
although as mentioned
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 1:53 AM, daredolls dared...@gmail.com wrote:
heck, i'd pay somebody to go for me, or, to be specific, i'd give a piece of
any action to one who helps arrange it.
i would love to take the easy path, google adsense and youtube, but, as has
happened over and over in the
By the time h.264 patents are an issue again, there will be another codec
that trounces everything we're talking about, and it may or may not be open
source. Five years is a very very very long time in this field. We may not
even be using web browsers as we know them today, or HTML at all by then,
Adobe started using SMIL a bit a few years ago with their Adobe Media
Player.
Was good to see it being used in a big project. It usually is behind the
scenes on phones (MMS) and some television programming systems.
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/mediaplayer/articles/amp_cdk_pt08.html
Moving
Might as well just focus on HTML5 and CSS3 and Javascript and cutting edge
Web Browsers (Webkit, Gecko).
The web page should be considered the viable multimedia canvas of the
future. Continued advancements in web browser capabilities will lead to
multimedia that we normally see with Flash or
20 matches
Mail list logo
