Linked by Kroc Camen on Mon 18th May 2009 12:30 UTC
Podcasts A week full of big chunky topics requiring big chunky time to discuss. We cover Sony's history of failed proprietary formats (including the MiniDisc), then discuss the future of advertising on the web, the 1.06 Billion Euro Intel fine, and finally finish up with a three course meal of Windows 7. Fear not though! Despite being almost an hour and a half long, we managed to save you 5 bytes by keeping the show title short.
Order by: Score:

Savings..
by Buck on Mon 18th May 2009 13:55 UTC
Buck
Member since:
2005-06-29

That won't nessesarily save anything since the packets are usually padded to a much larger size. Use titles freely, people! We only live once.

RE: Savings..
by sbergman27 on Mon 18th May 2009 14:03 UTC in reply to "Savings.."
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

That won't nessesarily save anything since...

No. But a Speex feed would. No doubt they'll wait 'til the rationing starts, OSNews being ever on the forefront of web innovation and all that.

Edited 2009-05-18 14:05 UTC

RE[2]: Savings..
by Adam S on Mon 18th May 2009 16:08 UTC in reply to "RE: Savings.."
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

What the heck does that mean? We're ALWAYS open to new ideas and constantly experimenting and changing the site. Why would you throw out some trendy, BARELY USED buzzword and then be snide about us not dropping everything to implement your wish to appease the three people who might care about it today?

v RE[3]: Savings..
by sbergman27 on Mon 18th May 2009 16:19 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Savings.."
RE[4]: Savings..
by Adam S on Mon 18th May 2009 16:30 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Savings.."
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

For the same reason we don't provide an OGG podcast, because we can't accommodate every single request for every single format, we don't implement every single web extension or support every single standard. No one has *ever* requested Speex support before, yet you're leaving a trollish comment incredulously ranting about why we don't support it, as though it somehow diminishes the site experience.

You know what's really annoying? Users who hijack the comments to whine about how we're not stopping in our tracks to work on their immediate wishlist (which may benefit ~4 people).

RE[4]: Savings..
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 18th May 2009 16:30 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Savings.."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

>99% has an .mp3 codec installed.
<0.1 percent has this codec installed.

So, there has to be one hell of a set of advantages to justify asking of our users to install some obscure codec no one's ever heard of.

And Speex doesn't offer anything that would justify asking our users to install it.

Look, OSNews is not some obscure blog with three visitors - we have hundreds of thousands of people visiting OSNews, and we have to make sure as many of those can readily access our content. Idealism is nice and all, but at the end of the day, we have a large website to run.

Edited 2009-05-18 16:38 UTC

RE[5]: Savings..
by Alex Forster on Mon 18th May 2009 16:47 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Savings.."
Alex Forster Member since:
2005-08-12

OSNews is not some obscure blog with three visitors - we have hundreds of thousands of people visiting OSNews


Whoa there Thom, ego.

Compete says 50k/month- http://siteanalytics.compete.com/osnews.com/

Google trends says 15k/month, optimistically- http://trends.google.com/websites?q=osnews.com

And as anyone knows these kinds of figures are all ridiculously inflated. Judging by the average amount of comments per story, I'd say a coupe thousand regular readers at most.

Edited 2009-05-18 16:49 UTC

RE[6]: Savings..
by Adam S on Mon 18th May 2009 16:50 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Savings.."
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

I think it was just poor communication. We do several million hits a month, obviously not all uniques. Our internal stats easily confirm tens of thousands uniques though.

Edit: fixed weird grammar

Edited 2009-05-18 16:50 UTC

RE[6]: Savings..
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 18th May 2009 16:50 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Savings.."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Yeah you're right, hundreds of thousands is nonsense of course, I meant it as a hyperbole, but it didn't come through very well.

Still, your figures are way off, it's a little more.

RE[3]: Savings..
by Alex Forster on Mon 18th May 2009 16:33 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Savings.."
Alex Forster Member since:
2005-08-12

Speex is actually probably the most popular open voice codec. I completely disagree with the suggestion to use it, however. Speex is more for use in situations that need to do low latency, high quality VoIP transmission. It is completely inappropriate for this sort of distribution, because no general purpose audio player worth mentioning can play it. Not to mention that MP3 (or AAC) is basically a requirement for podcasts, else you'll no longer be able to play it in iTunes or on your iPod.

If you're really looking to cut bandwidth usage, this MP3 could easily have its bitrate cut in half and remain listenable. 24-32kbps is common for spoken word podcasts and internet streams.

RE[4]: Savings..
by Adam S on Mon 18th May 2009 16:36 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Savings.."
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

We're actually not looking to cut bandwidth usage. Kroc was making a joke about the length of the podcast. No one is worried about about bandwidth.

That said, I'll mention the bitrate cut to Kroc.

Comment by Tomasz Dominikowski
by Tomasz Dominikowski on Mon 18th May 2009 14:55 UTC
Tomasz Dominikowski
Member since:
2005-08-08

Talk talk talk BOOOM blowing into the microphone. Kroc, please. I appreciate the better sound quality, but put the microphone next to your mouth, not in front of it.

And why am I getting the impression that Kroc stands next to the well in which Thom is sitting? The sound levels are uneven. Either Kroc is too loud or Thom is too quiet.

more savings
by krom on Mon 18th May 2009 16:32 UTC
krom
Member since:
2006-09-29

If you remove the useless comments in the generated page (What is this? <!-- Arrrr! Hess! Hess! --> ??? ), filter the page to remove \t \n and why not \r, if you use those kind of systems, would get better savings without quality lose.

Also those ads waste bandwidth...

RE: more savings
by Adam S on Mon 18th May 2009 16:39 UTC in reply to "more savings"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

I'm not sure where the misunderstanding is here, but no one is actively trying to save bandwidth. The podcast is long, Kroc made a joke, the end.

RE[2]: more savings
by krom on Mon 18th May 2009 17:09 UTC in reply to "RE: more savings"
krom Member since:
2006-09-29

No misunderstanding, I just wanted to note the comments in the page source, some are funny, and was making a joke.

btw, did you really remove the "Arrrr! Hess! Hess!" and keep the "If blood and lust taste so sweet, then we should give them what they want"? LOL

RE[3]: more savings
by Adam S on Mon 18th May 2009 17:10 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: more savings"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

:)

I *LOVE* that anyone sees them, let alone laughs at them.

Edited 2009-05-18 17:11 UTC

Let me just say...
by darknexus on Mon 18th May 2009 19:15 UTC
darknexus
Member since:
2008-07-15

that this episode was well done and, at least for me, the sound volumes and quality were perfect... and for once, it appears Garage band actually cooperated too.

Keep up the good work, you two and, of course, everyone else behind osnews.

Now, to all the complainers out there: Remember, these guys aren't getting paid to do this Podcast, and whether you like it or not, MP3 is the most widely supported and used codec. If you really feel the need to complain about lack of ogg/speex/whatever codecs for a podcast that needs to be as universal as possible, either go get a life or, by all means, role your own. It's a wide wide web out there, and you are free to do your own podcast in whatever codec and format you wish. Why not just appreciate what is being done here? They don't have to do it and, if this kind of bitching keeps up, I wouldn't blame them for saying "screw this" and having done with it.
Finally... trolling that your preferred format isn't available when you had never even made a request for it is just stupid. The last time I checked, none of us on this wonderful rock we call home were telepathic.

So, good job Thom and Kroc, and to the trolls... go hide under a bridge or something.

RE: Let me just say...
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 18th May 2009 19:17 UTC in reply to "Let me just say..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

and for once, it appears Garage band actually cooperated too.


Garageband DID crap out... Kroc just cut it out ;) . Garageband on MY PowerMac continued to function properly, as always ;) .

Power to PPC, people.

RE[2]: Let me just say...
by darknexus on Mon 18th May 2009 19:40 UTC in reply to "RE: Let me just say..."
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Nice editing job on that one, I didn't even notice a drop in the sound.

RE[3]: Let me just say...
by Kroc on Mon 18th May 2009 19:56 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Let me just say..."
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

It didn’t crash, we merely paused and restarted to avoid GarageBand ’06 crashing at 1:06:00 and cut it together.