Linked by Adam S on Mon 1st Feb 2010 18:19 UTC
Podcasts Back in August of 2009, the OSnews team spent 3 full hours discussing Apple. In the course of discussion, we spent some time talking about the then-mythical "Apple Tablet." So, 5 months later, how did we do? Were we accurate in our predictions? How did you envision the Tablet, long before the nonsensically named "iPad" became a reality? This clip, which I've called "Episode 20.x" and inserted into cannon retroactively, is pulled, unaltered, from the original podcast.
Thread beginning with comment 407443
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Ogg Vorbis?
by openadvocate on Tue 2nd Feb 2010 18:25 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Ogg Vorbis?"
openadvocate
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?"

Sound familiar? I understand that you are volunteering and that time is limited but OSNews looks like its being run by hypocrites when rants are published about other websites using proprietary formats despite the fact the OSNews continues to do the same.

If time is short and you don't have time for both, why not publish Ogg Vorbis only? If you want to give users a cleaner way to transcode to something else you could publish FLAC only. It's getting tiresome to read the several articles dealing with Youtube ignoring patents when OSNews does the same.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Ogg Vorbis?
by Kroc on Tue 2nd Feb 2010 19:30 in reply to "RE[5]: Ogg Vorbis?"
Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

In reply to you and StephenBeDoper below:

I don’t own or run OSnews. I am not the developer for OSnews; Adam is (I am writing a new system from scratch). I am a volunteer who has put himself forward to help the site. I restarted the podcast with Thom as my own idea to help contribute. OSnews is not my personal website that has to uphold my personal views. I honestly don’t think you understand the limits on my time, nor how time consuming producing the show and publishing it is (it requires many steps, made complicated by our admin system).

We cannot publish OGG only, because iTunes is by far and away the most common podcast client.

Could you please respect that I am doing a huge amount for OSnews voluntarily including time and monetary outlay, and *my opinions do not reflect those of OSnews itself*.

It's getting tiresome to read the several articles dealing with Youtube ignoring patents when OSNews does the same.


It’s getting even more tiresome hearing demands for OGG audio when I haven’t seen any demonstrateable need for it, and I am already working to address the problem by producing a new HTML5 site that will include OGG support. Honestly; I’m giving that much, and still it’s not enough—I wonder why I bother sometimes.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Ogg Vorbis?
by darknexus on Tue 2nd Feb 2010 20:14 in reply to "RE[6]: Ogg Vorbis?"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

We cannot publish OGG only, because iTunes is by far and away the most common podcast client.


Not so easy when you're the one doing the web developing is it? You do realize how your statement could be applied to other situations, for example:
We cannot publish Theora only, because H.264 is by far and away the most common and hardware-supported codec.

I'm not downing the effort you're making, even though it might've come across that way. I'm an ass sometimes--no, scratch that, I'm an ass *most* of the time. But to see an article just a few days ago deriding proprietary codecs and, then, you giving the same justifications for doing the exact same thing... you do see how that comes across, right? I guess it struck a major nerve, you have no right to criticize other web sites for not doing what you're not doing. Sure, the next version of osnews will have ogg support and I believe you, but the fact is that you do not have it *now* and yet you, among others here, have the nerve to criticize Youtube *now* for doing precisely the same as you.
This isn't meant to be offensive even though I'm sure it sounds that way. I just don't know any other way to put it, to be perfectly honest.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Ogg Vorbis?
by openadvocate on Tue 2nd Feb 2010 21:34 in reply to "RE[6]: Ogg Vorbis?"
openadvocate Member since:
2010-01-21

Kroc,

My comments are directed at OSNews as a whole, not you personally. I understand that you are volunteering and I appreciate the work that you do. I also understand that you are not directly responsible for the current website.

That being said, OSNews as a whole has recently published several chiding articles pointing out that other websites are using patent-encumbered file formats. However, OSNews itself is using a patent-encumbered file format. My previous comment was merely to point out this hypocrisy. It was definitely not directed toward you personally, but towards OSNews as a whole. If OSNews as a whole is unable to provide its content in non-patent-encumbered formats, it seems incredibly hypocritical for OSNews articles to deride other websites for doing the same.

Reply Parent Score: 1