Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Mar 2012 19:37 UTC
Internet & Networking Ever since it became clear that Google was not going to push WebM as hard as they should have, the day would come that Mozilla would be forced to abandon its ideals because the large technology companies don't care about an open, unencumbered web. No decision has been made just yet, but Mozilla is taking its first strides to adding support for the native H.264 codecs installed on users' mobile systems. See it as a thank you to Mozilla for all they've done for the web.
Thread beginning with comment 510615
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Whatevs.
by BluenoseJake on Wed 14th Mar 2012 22:27 UTC in reply to "RE: Whatevs."
BluenoseJake
Member since:
2005-08-11

If apple and MS distribute the codecs with their respective OSes, then they have paid the licensing fees, therefore the little guy is protected, just like with DVD codecs.

This has the nasty side effect of leaving alternative OSes out in the cold, but that is less than 5%, so even in that case, most of the little guys are protected.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Whatevs.
by ephracis on Wed 14th Mar 2012 22:35 in reply to "RE[2]: Whatevs."
ephracis Member since:
2007-09-23

Fun fact, did you know that both Mac OS and Windows once had a 5% share on desktop computers?

By limiting the ability to create a desktop OS to those who can cough up a bucket of money we are limiting future innovations.

Apple started in a garage. Just sayin'.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[4]: Whatevs.
by WorknMan on Thu 15th Mar 2012 00:21 in reply to "RE[3]: Whatevs."
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

By limiting the ability to create a desktop OS to those who can cough up a bucket of money we are limiting future innovations.


Well, it's not like you could create an OS from scratch that could seriously compete in today's market without a shitload of funding anyway. Joe Coder and a group of his friends are not going to build something that rivals Windows or OSX in their spare time.

30 years ago it might've been possible, but the tech has gotten immensely more complicated since then. Even Linux wouldn't be where it is today without the financial backing of large companies.

Look, I'm not saying that patents are a good thing, or that someone shouldn't be able to create something and put it out in the wild with an investment of $0, but most things cost money to get off the ground. Seriously... if you have a good idea, you can probably get somebody with a lot of cash to invest in it. And anyway, this is a patent on a specific codec - not exactly the same thing as patenting 'swipe to unlock'.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Whatevs.
by BluenoseJake on Thu 15th Mar 2012 09:24 in reply to "RE[3]: Whatevs."
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Here is another fun fact:

The time you you are referring to is long gone. But even back then, you had the same crap. It's the laws that have changed, but even then you could see the writing on the wall.

Apple sued MS in a "Look and Feel" lawsuit back in the 80s. Apple lost. MS, and everyone else won. IBM sued Compaq for reverse engineering the PC BIOS, IBM lost, everyone won.

Those victories would not happen today. The Apple that started in a garage today will sue your ass off for looking at them the wrong way. MS is the same way. IBM doesn't even make PCs anymore. Compaq is gone.

The companies that started it all have tried very hard to close the door behind them, and they did a very good job. Is it sad and horrible? Yes. Does that feeling change anything? No.

Some say it's the Post-PC world, it's really the post freedom world, and your wallet better get used to it.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Whatevs.
by lemur2 on Wed 14th Mar 2012 22:47 in reply to "RE[2]: Whatevs."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

If apple and MS distribute the codecs with their respective OSes, then they have paid the licensing fees, therefore the little guy is protected, just like with DVD codecs.

This has the nasty side effect of leaving alternative OSes out in the cold, but that is less than 5%, so even in that case, most of the little guys are protected.


Au contraire, "the little guy" who wants to write an alternative OS and to include codecs for VP8 and Ogg has licenses to do so from the list of companies here:

http://www.webm-ccl.org/members/

and also this list excluding Sony and Philips:

http://www.openinventionnetwork.com/licensees.php

Between them, that is a lot of patents licensed (for no cost) to anyone who wants to write and build their own OS. Easily enough "inventions" therein to do so.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[4]: Whatevs.
by r_a_trip on Thu 15th Mar 2012 13:54 in reply to "RE[3]: Whatevs."
r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

Between them, that is a lot of patents licensed (for no cost) to anyone who wants to write and build their own OS.

True, but the codecs are not the problem. The problem is people.

You can have your kick ass OS filled to the brim with worthwhile and freely licensed codecs. That won't help one iota if your potential userbase says, nice OS, but when will it support H.264 or we have no interest.

But let's leave it there. No reason to rehash the VP8 vs X264 "war".

Reply Parent Score: 3