bon allez je continue a debunké parce qu apres tout c'est dimanche et ca me plait bien de montrer a quel point Steve Jobs est full of shit
je l'avais bien dit que sa lettre ouverte lui botterait le cul alors dans sa lettre http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/ il utilise beaucoup le terme H.264 ca permet de ne pas utiliser Flash, d'avoir plus de batterie etc. 2 principales raisons - si H.264 est abandonné pour un autre codec ca fout super dans la merde Apple car le seul codec qui peut etre accéléré par le hardware c'est le H.264 - Apple, Microsoft ont tout intéret a ce que les gens utilisent H.264 parce qu'ils font parti du commité MPEG-LA qui gere les droits et patents du H.264 donc mettons ca ensemble, oui HTML5 est ouvert, mais le <video> tag pour lire une video doit utiliser un codec, Apple et Microsoft qui font parti du commité MPEG-LA pousse pour que le codec utilisé soit H.264 mais ce codec n'est pas ouvert du tout, techniquement le MPEG-LA peut demander des royalties a tous ceux qui utilisent le codec, sauf ceux qui font parti du commité MPEG-LA parce qu'ils ont "participé" en partageant une ou plus de leur patent http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/04/30/237238/Steve-Jobs-Hints-At-Theora-Lawsuit http://blogs.fsfe.org/hugo/2010/04/open-letter-to-steve-jobs "Steve Jobs' open letter on Flash has prompted someone at the Free Software Foundation Europe to ask him about his support of proprietary format H.264 over Theora. Jobs' pithy answer (email with headers) suggests Theora might infringe on existing patents and that 'a patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other "open source" codecs now.' Does he know something we don't?" la reponse de Jobs "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 by patents. A patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other “open source” codecs now. Unfortunately, just because something is open source, it doesn’t mean or guarantee that it doesn’t infringe on others patents. An open standard is different from being royalty free or open source. Sent from my iPad" oh apparemment Ogg Theora risque d'etre attaqué par le MPEG-LA http://www.osnews.com/story/23233/Jobs_Patent_Pool_Being_Assembled_To_Go_After_Theora "Both Apple and Microsoft have stated that the legality of Theora is highly debatable, and as it turns out, they knew more than we do - most likely courtesy of their close involvement with the MPEG-LA." Xiph est le groupe derriere Ogg Theora et voici quelques poste interessants de plusieurs de leur membres Greg Maxwell ici http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/theora/2010-April/003769.html explique comment les participant du MPEG-LA se couvre mutuellement avec des patents "The reason the MPEG formats are so thoroughly encumbered by patents is that the process used to build the formats is designed to be "blind" to patent considerations: all the participants have agreed that any patents they hold will be licensed under "Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory" terms, a term of art which few normal people would actually describe as all that reasonable or all that non-discriminatory, as RAND often means "quite expensive". With only that assurance in hand, they go about constructing their formats through an extensively political tournament process where proposals are made and encouraged to be combined." Monty Montgomery cité ici http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/04/30/237238/Steve-Jobs-Hints-At-Theora-Lawsuit explique que MPEG-LA vuet s'attaquer à Ogg Theora sous pretexte qu'ils sont sur qu'on ne peut pas developer un codec sans patents "Thomson Multimedia made their first veiled patent threats against Vorbis almost ten years ago. MPEG-LA has been rumbling for the past few years. Maybe this time it will actually come to something, but it hasn't yet. I'll get worried when the lawyers advise me to; i.e., not yet. The MPEG-LA has insinuated for some time that it is impossible to build any video codec without infringing on at least some of their patents. That is, they assert they have a monopoly on all digital video compression technology, period, and it is illegal to even attempt to compete with them. Of course, they've been careful not to say quite exactly that. If Jobs's email is genuine, this is a powerful public gaffe ('All video codecs are covered by patents.') He'd be confirming MPEG's assertion in plain language anyone can understand. It would only strengthen the pushback against software patents and add to Apple's increasing PR mess. Macbooks and iPads may be pretty sweet, but creative individuals don't really like to give their business to jackbooted thugs." et pour le final ce post de OSNews http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/05/02/1114235/The-MPEG-LAs-Lock-On-Culture http://www.osnews.com/story/23236/Why_Our_Civilization_s_Video_Art_and_Culture_is_Threatened_by_the_MPEG-LA "We've all heard how the h.264 is rolled over on patents and royalties. Even with these facts, I kept supporting the best-performing 'delivery' codec in the market, which is h.264. 'Let the best win,' I kept thinking. But it wasn't until very recently when I was made aware that the problem is way deeper. No, my friends. It's not just a matter of just 'picking Theora' to export a video to Youtube and be clear of any litigation. MPEG-LA's trick runs way deeper!"" donc revenons sur http://blogs.fsfe.org/hugo/2010/04/open-letter-to-steve-jobs "May I remind you that H.264 is not an open standard? This video codec is covered by patents, and “vendors and commercial users of products which make use of H.264/AVC are expected to pay patent licensing royalties for the patented technology” (ref). This is why Mozilla Firefox and Opera have not adopted this video codec for their HTML5 implementation, and decided to chose Theora as a sustainable and open alternative." et Flash dans tout ca ? bah avant H.264 flash supportait le On2 codec, et si ils devaient implémenter un nouveau codec je pense qu'ils n'hesiteraient pas trop humm par ex, le dernier codec de on2 le VP8 ;) http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2010/04/google-will-open-source-on2-vp8-codec.html "Google will soon open source VP8, the latest video codec released by On2, a company acquired by Google for $133 million. On2 is the company that open-sourced VP3, which has been further developed and it's now known as Theora. "In June 2002 On2 donated VP3 to the Xiph.Org Foundation under a BSD-like open source license. On2 also made an irrevocable, royalty-free license grant for any patent claims it might have over the software and any derivatives, allowing anyone to use any VP3-derived codec for any purpose. In August 2002, On2 entered into an agreement with the Xiph.Org Foundation to make VP3 the basis of a new, free video codec, called Theora." " oh mais alors comme c'est bizarre ... vous avez d'un coté Apple et Microsoft qui poussent au cul pour que tout le monde utilise du H.264 (le truc plein de patents) et boom Google va plutot du coté du codec On2 VP8 (le truc open source), qui découle de On2 VP3, sur lequel Theora se base. Ma prediction: le rapprochement de Google avec Adobe pour distribuer le Flash Player dans Chrome met les 2 en parfaite position pour collaborer sur On2 VP8, il faut se rappeler que Macromedia avait directement bosser avec On2 pour les premiers codecs videos du flash player (Flash8 utilisait le On2 VP6) http://support.on2.com/h264_faq.php "Cost: With H.264, the IP licensing terms are determined by MPEG-LA. Depending on your use, IP fees may be payable for encoders, decoders and distribution of content. These costs are in addition to the licenses required to acquire and implement actual H.264 software. With VP6, On2 combines IP licenses and software licensing fees into a single set of license terms and charges no fee for distribution of content. Customers are advised to consider total cost of ownership with both options, as these will vary with the type of product or service." Autre prédiction: Adobe s'est pas mal rapproché de pleins de fabriquant de hardware avec le Open Screen project http://www.openscreenproject.org/partners/current_partners.html Si pour l'instant il n'y a que le codec H.264 qui peut etre accéléré au niveau du hardware, il se pourrait que une collaboration de Adobe, Google, et de tous les autres partenaires fassent que le codec On2 VP8 que Google prévoit de mettre en open source soit un bon candidat pour etre aussi accéléré par le hardware. et en fait tout est expliqué là http://www.openscreenproject.org/partners/partner_benefits.html "Increase chipset demand and value with sophisticated software and applications that take advantage of new hardware capabilities" "Lower bill of materials (BOM) costs through royalty-free runtimes" "Reduce time to market and lower development costs in deploying content across multiple devices and platforms" :) zwetan -- Vous recevez ce message, car vous êtes abonné au groupe Google Groupes FCNG. Pour envoyer un message à ce groupe, adressez un e-mail à [email protected]. Pour vous désabonner de ce groupe, envoyez un e-mail à l'adresse [email protected]. Pour plus d'options, consultez la page de ce groupe : http://groups.google.com/group/fcng?hl=fr
