Linked by Kroc Camen on Fri 25th Sep 2009 22:19 UTC, submitted by clododunord
"We are pleased to announce a new stable release of libtheora,
the Xiph.org Foundation's reference implementation of the royalty-free Theora video
format. This new release, version 1.1, codenamed Thusnelda, incorporates all of the recent encoder improvements we have been making over
the past year, though some of the code had its genesis all the way back in 2003.
It also brings substantial speed and robustness improvements to the 1.0 decoder." For a more visual run-down of the changes, check out Mozilla's excellent article.
Thread beginning with comment 386566
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[11]: Comment by kaiwai
by lemur2 on Mon 28th Sep 2009 10:38
in reply to "RE[10]: Comment by kaiwai"
Member since:2007-02-17
You keep on comparing the base Windows with the fully fledged Linux or w/e.
* No you can boot ext3 and stuff, there's some trick dding the first 512o of the root FS, but I had linux installed on ext3 with the MS bootloader numerous times.
* Install OpenOffice if you think the MS Office price is prohibitive, and you'll get EXACTLY the same word processing and spreadsheet capabilities than Linux.
* The base Linux doesn't even have an X server. Hell, the base Linux isn't even an OS. Your bias is enormous on this. These are all third parties. You can get third parties on Windows too.
* Install any free compiler? Same as you'd do in Linux?
You prefer Linux, good for you, it IS a very good OS (I do half my work on it), and you're entitled to your opinion, but spreading misinformation is not the way to go for FOSS advocacy.
* No you can boot ext3 and stuff, there's some trick dding the first 512o of the root FS, but I had linux installed on ext3 with the MS bootloader numerous times.
* Install OpenOffice if you think the MS Office price is prohibitive, and you'll get EXACTLY the same word processing and spreadsheet capabilities than Linux.
* The base Linux doesn't even have an X server. Hell, the base Linux isn't even an OS. Your bias is enormous on this. These are all third parties. You can get third parties on Windows too.
* Install any free compiler? Same as you'd do in Linux?
You prefer Linux, good for you, it IS a very good OS (I do half my work on it), and you're entitled to your opinion, but spreading misinformation is not the way to go for FOSS advocacy.
I could have bet my house that Windows fans would not believe most of this.
I gave the start of a list of what any new desktop computer owner would actually get (and what deficiencies they would endure) if he/she bought a computer with "Windows" pre-installed versus what they would get if they bought one with a Linux distribution pre-installed.
There is no disinformation in my list at all.
Have a look here at what you get if you get a Linux distribution pre-installed:
http://system76.com/articles.php?tPath=2_8
http://www.zareason.com/shop/pages.php?pageid=4
That fact that you can remedy (at a later time, and at additional expense and/or trouble) some of the deficiencies of a bare Windows install does not negate this point.
The fact that one can add many of the same FOSS software to a Windows computer as one can get pre-installed on Linux is not a good reason to get Windows and put up with its deficiencies.
I don't know about that, but isn't the problem resolved by disabling auto updates? And while you have to confirm installation, I doubt every Ubuntu user out there parse through kernel.org changelogs before installing a new kernel, even though you could put "any code" into it. There's a question of trust. You trust (and I do too) Linus and the gang, okay. Some people out there trust MS.
No. An "update to Windows update" sent from Microsoft can install silently on your machine (i.e. without asking your permission) even if you have "disabled" Windows update.
Given that, and given the fact that Microsoft clearly don't trust you (e.g. EULAs, no-dissasembly rules, WGA, OGA, registration keys, the anti-copying provision brought about by the registry, and DRM in general) ... why would anyone sane trust MS?
Edited 2009-09-28 10:57 UTC
RE[11]: Comment by kaiwai
by lemur2 on Mon 28th Sep 2009 11:11
in reply to "RE[10]: Comment by kaiwai"
Member since:2007-02-17
And while you have to confirm installation, I doubt every Ubuntu user out there parse through kernel.org changelogs before installing a new kernel, even though you could put "any code" into it. There's a question of trust. You trust (and I do too) Linus and the gang, okay.
This is a very common misconception that Windows fans seem to have about FOSS code, and trust.
The trust that one can have in FOSS code does not come about because "Linus and the gang" seem like good people. It does not come about because you personally can read the code (or changelogs) if you like.
No. That is not it.
The trust comes about for several reasons, some of which in order of importance are:
(1) EVERYONE can read the code. Not just you, or me, but everyone on the planet. They can all read the code. It can be shown by ANYBODY that the public source code that can be read does (or does not) make the downloadable executable. People who DID NOT WRITE THE CODE THEMSELVES but who nevertheless can read and understand code, they too can read the FOSS code ... and they can know what is in it, and they use it themselves ...
(2) FOSS code distributed via repositories has an impeccable record. IMPECCABLE. Over many years, for many millions of users, not one piece of malware installed on any users system via repositories.
(3) The FOSS community writes its own code, for its own use, in full public view. In what possible way, under such conditions, does it make any sense for someone to include functions that are NOT in the best interests of users of the system (considering that the FOSS authors themselves are users of the systems they write).
I could list a lot more ... but the point is that the trust comes as a direct result of the FOSS open process. It is an inevitable consequence of it.
Member since:
2008-11-19
You keep on comparing the base Windows with the fully fledged Linux or w/e.
* No you can boot ext3 and stuff, there's some trick dding the first 512o of the root FS, but I had linux installed on ext3 with the MS bootloader numerous times.
* Install OpenOffice if you think the MS Office price is prohibitive, and you'll get EXACTLY the same word processing and spreadsheet capabilities than Linux.
* The base Linux doesn't even have an X server. Hell, the base Linux isn't even an OS. Your bias is enormous on this. These are all third parties. You can get third parties on Windows too.
* Install any free compiler? Same as you'd do in Linux?
* I don't know about that, but isn't the problem resolved by disabling auto updates? And while you have to confirm installation, I doubt every Ubuntu user out there parse through kernel.org changelogs before installing a new kernel, even though you could put "any code" into it. There's a question of trust. You trust (and I do too) Linus and the gang, okay. Some people out there trust MS.
You prefer Linux, good for you, it IS a very good OS (I do half my work on it), and you're entitled to your opinion, but spreading misinformation is not the way to go for FOSS advocacy.
Edited 2009-09-28 10:07 UTC