Many moons ago, I worked for a proprietary software company [1] in the arena of network delivery systems, where the CEO of the company stood up in front of the whole company, outlined their whole strategic vision of where they wanted to go and specifically said that they wanted to lock in customers, and were going to do so by starting to lock down the protocols they were using to prevent interoperability.
[1] Not Microsoft :) Since I no longer work there, but now work at the BBC (and have done for a while), does that make me fundamentally untrustworthy, or do my subsequent actions speak louder for me as an individual than the actions of my previous employer? If I'm judged on the actions of others, that seems rather unfair, but fair if judged on my own actions. Likewise to judge other people simply because of who they worked for seems unfair to me. Each to their own. Michael -- http://kamaelia.sourceforge.net/SummerOfCode http://yeoldeclue.com/blog (only top posting because this is a reply to the tone of your mail, rather than specific points). On Tuesday 15 April 2008 10:00, Sean DALY wrote: > Tim, what disturbs people about a former MS executive in that position > is that Microsoft's interests are not at all aligned with the > interests of a public broadcaster. Microsoft wants video format > lockin, which is why to this day Windows Media Player has no support > for MPEG-4 AVC/H.264 and AAC (Xbox excluded), the Xiph Ogg codecs, or > even Dirac for that matter whose bitstream has been frozen for SMPTE > VC-2. Microsoft chooses not to license Windows Media 9 format for > implementation in GNU/Linux. Their DRM architecture is Microsoft-only, > just like the Apple FairPlay AVC/AAC extension is Apple-only. > > If Mr. Huggers had worked for, say, a bank, nobody would care. But he > had an active role at Microsoft promoting a closed, proprietary format > at the expense of open formats. Anyone using a non-Microsoft system > knows that only open standards guarantee interoperability and given > Microsoft's shoddy record on open standards, concerns are justified. > Probably the best thing he could do to allay those concerns would be > to support open standards. It's a mystery to me why the BBC doesn't > make available a Dirac codec installer for WMP. I have no doubt the > browsers and mobile manufacturers would line up for Dirac given its > patent-unencumbered status. Did you see Sun announcing the reinvention > of the wheel last week, a patent-unencumbered video codec? > > Sean. > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please > visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
