To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I believe that audio is in a slightly better situation than video.
I think that, for example, the iPhone easily has the power to decode Vorbis/Speex/FLAC in software. This means that the hardware argument for video doesn't matter.
Vorbis is also very high quality, definitely better than MP3 (and Speex obviously beets them all for speech, and FLAC obviously has the best quality, but larger file sizes). This invalidates the quality argument.
I don't know about patents, but I doubt they are much of a problem for Vorbis (it is fairly well known). Also, audio codecs are quite a bit simpler than video codecs, so there are less patents on them.
This means that the only thing stopping adoption of free audio formats is online store support and player support. Both of these are political issues, rather than technical issues like with video.




Member since:
2010-01-21
"Web developers, the choice is yours. Are you ignorant and short-sighted, or are you willing to make a stand for keeping the web open, and finally breaking video loose from its proprietary shackles?"
It is just as important to avoid being short-sighted or stubborn when it comes to providing audio content on the web. MP3 is also in proprietary shackles. Each time audio is only provided in a closed format, it gives less incentive for hardware manufacturers to support non-patent-encumbered audio formats and it puts users in a compromised position. For this reason, web developers who wish to supply users with audio content should consider using an open codec (e.g. Ogg Vorbis, Ogg Speex, FLAC) in lieu of or in addition to anything patented like MP3.