Am Donnerstag, den 16.07.2009, 11:58 +0200 schrieb Arve Bersvendsen:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:23:40 +0200, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 15.07.2009, 19:16 -0500 schrieb Adam Shannon:
It has been tried but Apple will not
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:23:40 +0200, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 15.07.2009, 19:16 -0500 schrieb Adam Shannon:
It has been tried but Apple will not implement it due to hardware
limitations.
As if. I somehow recall that a few
Arve Bersvendsen wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 03:23:40 +0200, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
nils-dagsson-mosk...@dieweltistgarnichtso.net wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 15.07.2009, 19:16 -0500 schrieb Adam Shannon:
It has been tried but Apple will not implement it due to hardware
limitations.
As if. I
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 3:20 AM, Maik Mertenmaikmer...@googlemail.com wrote:
An nice thing is that Rockbox provides CPU-consumption numbers for an
interesting set of codecs on various hardware platforms:
http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/CodecPerformanceComparison
Apparently Vorbis
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
Note that hardware limitations isn't as simple as can play. For
example a portable player device uses 90% CPU to play things certainly
work, but possibly for an unacceptable short time before battery runs
out.
We're
Jonas Sicking wrote:
Note that hardware limitations isn't as simple as can play. For
example a portable player device uses 90% CPU to play things certainly
work, but possibly for an unacceptable short time before battery runs
out.
That's correct.
Thankfully all mentioned codecs are well
Yet another killer app that uses Vorbis: Spotify!
160kbps for the free service. 320 kbps for the premium one.
Of course Apple and microsoft, both being hellbent upon using
proprietary technologies and taking every single opportunity they have
to leverage any monopoly they have attained[1] will
2009/7/16 Keryx Web webmas...@keryx.se:
Of course Apple and microsoft, both being hellbent upon using
proprietary technologies and taking every single opportunity they have
to leverage any monopoly they have attained[1] will object to Vorbis.
Now, now. Let's assume good faith.
I will assume
A few years ago, Vorbis as a baseline codec for audio was dismissed,
because it was expected that the audio codec agreed upon to be used
with video would also be used with audio. Now that agreement on a
codec for video is out of the question, Vorbis can again be
considered as a baseline codec for
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Remco remc...@gmail.com wrote:
A few years ago, Vorbis as a baseline codec for audio was dismissed,
because it was expected that the audio codec agreed upon to be used
with video would also be used with audio. Now that agreement on a
codec for video is out of
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Remco wrote:
A few years ago, Vorbis as a baseline codec for audio was dismissed,
because it was expected that the audio codec agreed upon to be used with
video would also be used with audio. Now that agreement on a codec
for video is out of the question, Vorbis can
2009/7/16 Adam Shannon ashannon1...@gmail.com:
It has been tried but Apple will not implement it due to hardware
limitations.
Hardware limitations or patent limitations? Either seems ill-matched
to evidence-based reasoning.
What was Apple's issue with Vorbis audio? I'd like to hear from
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 2:16 AM, Adam Shannonashannon1...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Remco remc...@gmail.com wrote:
A few years ago, Vorbis as a baseline codec for audio was dismissed,
because it was expected that the audio codec agreed upon to be used
with video
On Thu, 16 Jul 2009, Remco wrote:
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 2:18 AM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
Given the problem we had with the video codec, I would like to request
that those of you interested in getting a standard audio codec do so
by directly working with the browser vendors to
Vorbis is the best lossy audio codec - Do you have data to back up this
assertion? I am not an expert here, I had the naïve assumption that AAC was
better given that major devices (e.g. iPod) use this format over Vorbis. I
would love to see some data (other than some studies from 2005 on some
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Adam Shannonashannon1...@gmail.com wrote:
This was from an email that Ian posted, I do not know if it is directly from
Apple. I am just posting it as reference, you will have to ask Ian to the
source/creditability of the statement.
Apple refuses to implement
2009/7/16 Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) ife...@google.com:
Vorbis is the best lossy audio codec - Do you have data to back up this
assertion? I am not an expert here, I had the naïve assumption that AAC was
better given that major devices (e.g. iPod) use this format over Vorbis. I
would love to see
2009/7/16 Ian Fette (イアンフェッティ) ife...@google.com:
Widely adopted ... in portable media players? Really? iPod? Zune?
Almost every media player I've purchased from the local electronics
store here in NZ has Vorbis support. Many of them even support Flac.
The notable exception is Apple products.
2009/7/16 Remco remc...@gmail.com:
Cowon/iAudio, iRiver, LG, Samsung, SanDisk, Creative, Google. Those
are a few of the companies that support Vorbis:
http://wiki.xiph.org/PortablePlayers
Also everything using the Actions S1 MP3 chipset - almost *all*
Chinese MP3/MP4 players.
Basically,
Am Mittwoch, den 15.07.2009, 19:16 -0500 schrieb Adam Shannon:
It has been tried but Apple will not implement it due to hardware
limitations.
As if. I somehow recall that a few years ago, a Linux Distribution on
Ipod did Vorbis (and Doom, incidentally - that was the original reason
for me to
20 matches
Mail list logo
