Linked by Kroc Camen on Tue 24th Feb 2009 14:55 UTC
Apple Apple released the Safari 4 Beta today. Features: Tabs on top. "Top Sites" 'Speed Dial' feature. "Smart" address/search fields. HTML5 Canvas. HTML5 Audio/Video (though no Ogg). Acid 3. CSS Animation/Gradients/Masks/Reflection. CSS Web Fonts. New "Nitro" Javascript engine - "Up to 4 times faster than Firefox 3.1". 'Native' look and native font rendering on Windows Vista/XP. I can think of only one thing: "Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational battle station!"
Permalink for comment 350552
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

"Agreed. Totally.

Patents, inter-operability and access-for-all are concepts that don't really mix at all well. Open unencumbered standards are far, far better for everybody.

Vorbis for music, speex for speech, and FLAC when quality is required but compression is not, and Theora for "videolets" and Dirac for higher-quality video would seem to be the best options for avoiding all kinds of patent issues.

What I'd like to see is a more sane model. If you're not making a buck off it then why should one have to pay a royalty? I mean, why shouldn't Fedora ship with all the patented codecs given that it (not Red Hat) makes no money off it; same goes for other community based distributions and operating systems. Now, if the companies like Red Hat wish to ship and support it (and thus make money off it through support contracts) - then its a different matter entirely.

Going back to the browser, given that the browser is free, why shouldn't they be be allowed to include support for MPEG4/h264? they're making no profit off it, thus, it isn't as though there is any 'profit' that the said organisation needs to 'share' with the patent holders for the use of intellectual property to create a product.

Maybe I'm just strange but the whole patent issue doesn't make any sense to begin with in the first place.

I think you are spot on ... I think it is the patent issue that is in the strange place.

In the EU one supposedly cannot get any patent on pure mathematics ... an idea needs to be a "machine" in order to have patent protection.

My question is this then ... how can a codec possibly be patentable? A codec is about as close to pure mathematics as one can get. It is nothing but a transformation of one set of numbers into another set.

Meanwhile, the push against "proprieatry content delivery software/systems on the internet" has just got a little more interesting, especially in the EU, IMO.

Reply Parent Score: 2