Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 14th Apr 2009 15:38 UTC
GNU, GPL, Open Source On June 29, 2007 the Free Software Foundation released the GNU General Public License, version 3. What happened since then? Federico Biancuzzi had the opportunity to discuss many subjects with the FSF's founder and president Richard Stallman.
Thread beginning with comment 358513
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: rofl ?
by Kochise on Tue 14th Apr 2009 16:47 UTC in reply to "rofl"
Member since:

Haven't be MP4 purposed for multipurpose video showcasting, streaming being an implemented feature ? So why focusing on FLV in MMS stream while a good MP4 should be enough ?


Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: rofl ?
by darknexus on Tue 14th Apr 2009 17:51 in reply to "RE: rofl ?"
darknexus Member since:

MP4 (or mov) wouldn't satisfy stallman anymore than flash does. It's patent-encumbered, after all, regardless of what video codec used. And then, speaking of which, you have the problem of which video codec to use... and we end up in the same situation as we were in several years back, where we need a bunch of media players and/or codec packs installed to be able to play what we want.
I hate Flash as much as rms does, though for different reasons. But, as much as I hate it for being a buggy and dirt slow piece of crap, at the moment it's the only way to be sure that most people will be able to view the media you publish. It should be noted that the Flash player is a bloated piece of crap, not the flv format itself which actually plays quite smoothly... in any player except Adobe's.
And as for rms... I don't think he'll ever be satisfied with anything but using Theora, unless Dirac or Snow mature. Too bad Theora is, to put it politely, sub-par when compared to just about every other video codec in use today. Perhaps Stallman should stop ranting and start coding again?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: rofl ?
by KugelKurt on Tue 14th Apr 2009 23:10 in reply to "RE[2]: rofl ?"
KugelKurt Member since:

MP4 (or mov) wouldn't satisfy stallman anymore than flash does. It's patent-encumbered

There's actually a difference. Patent issues are dependant on the legislation one is currently in.
MPEG codecs are not patented in every part of the world.
It's probably easier to take down the software patent laws in the USA than to convince Adobe to open source Flash. ;-)

And as for rms... I don't think he'll ever be satisfied with anything but using Theora, unless Dirac or Snow mature.

Dirac is mature! Unlike Theora Dirac is actually used in production environments. BBC uses Dirac.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Theora— "It's getting better"
by gmaxwell on Thu 16th Apr 2009 02:53 in reply to "RE[2]: rofl ?"
gmaxwell Member since:

The history of lacklustre performance from Theora is almost entirely caused by the encoder, not the format itself. Sadly, most of the people in the open software world doing video codec development are doing it to enhance codecs owned by others (x264, for example).

Recently Theora has seen substantial sponsorship from companies who support the open web— Mozilla, Redhat, and Wikimedia and as a result the encoder is under active development again.

The new 'alpha' encoder is substantially better than the past encoder, and basically makes Theora far more generally competitive. Enhancements that should be found in the next alpha allowed me to produce examples showing Theora apparently outperforming H.264: (look at teraflop and gmaxwell). I wouldn't expect Theora (with the 1.1 encoder) to regularly outperform a decent H.264 encoder, as H.264 is a more modern, more complex, and more computationally expensive format. I think it's clearly premature to call it non-competitive.

Of course, quality isn't everything— YouTube managed to achieve web-video dominance with some of the lowest quality video I've ever seen. A truly free and unencumbered format has the potential to bring about levels of interoperability and compatibility which aren't possible in a world dominated by warring proprietary formats. A weaker format can have its quality offset bit a bit more bitrate in any case.

Checkout for some of the exciting things made possible when we fully embrace open technology.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: rofl ?
by google_ninja on Tue 14th Apr 2009 18:12 in reply to "RE: rofl ?"
google_ninja Member since:

Thats my point, MP4 is an example of something being good enough, but being nowhere near displacing flash as the standard way to publish media on the web. Stallman thinking his merry band of college students will be able to accomplish anything by sending out angry letters to youtube is downright delusional.

Reply Parent Score: 1