3 ms·

> MySQL and Linux weren't as good or better than the closed alternatives when they gained traction I don't recall either gaining any traction until they were b

by tvon 17y ago

> MySQL and Linux weren't as good or better than the closed alternatives when they gained traction I don't recall either gaining any traction until they were better in some way, either for developers or implementors. In some cases just being "open" makes it better, but that's only true if the project is going to be adopted in some way, like Apple using KHTML for WebKit. In the case of Theora, nobody wants to adopt it as a long term project, they just want to implement video for their users. From that perspective, H.264 is better (I'm a layman here, but as I understand it the quality is better and the file sizes are significantly smaller, but correct me if I'm wrong). It would certainly be better if they all got together on Theora much like they have on WebKit, but it seems ongoing development can't have the same level of improvement on a video codec that it can on a rendering engine, at least that's my perspective on it.

whopa 17y ago
> I don't recall either gaining any traction until they were better in some way, either for developers or implementors. No, when they got traction was before they were better, but after they were good enough, which means you could run your business on cheap Intel/AMD hardware.
- tvon 17y ago
  Ah, but that means they were better in some way relevant to business needs, and good enough elsewhere. Theora is better in terms of cost, but that apparently isn't enough of an advantage to counter the technical shortcomings.
  - whopa 17y ago
    No, they were not better than the closed source alternatives for most businesses. They were cheaper. Cheaper trumps better often. Cheaper drove adoption.
    - tvon 17y ago
      I'm defining "cheaper" as one of many factors that go into deciding if one thing is better than another, I'm not speaking purely from a technical/feature standpoint.
evgen 17y ago
It depends on where you define traction to have occurred. In the classic "crossing the chasm" terminology. A "good enough" solution that is open can attract early adopters and these same early adopters can become evangelists, developers who improve the open product, or developers who use the open product to create additional products (and sometimes show others how they did this in a devel/evangelism hybrid.) The improvements in awareness, product quality, and product ecosystem that come from all three of those variants of the early adopter are what gets the product into the mainstream and it is usually not until progress has been made on all three fronts that anyone claims that a product is "getting traction." The lack of an alternative choice will push a lot of people into the early adopter space for some product niches, which can lead to a fast elevator ride into mainstream usage for some products (c.f. MySQL, Linux, etc.) This is not the case with video codecs. The field is technically rigorous so only a few have the chops to contribute code, the alternatives (h.264) are currently better and widely available so few have much to gain by building the Theora ecosystem, which really only leaves the evangelists who are interested in the product as a mission rather than as a tool. This group is unlikely to gain significant traction with the mainstream computing audience.

by tvon 17y ago

whopa 17y ago

> I don't recall either gaining any traction until they were better in some way, either for developers or implementors. No, when they got traction was before they were better, but after they were good enough, which means you could run your business on cheap Intel/AMD hardware.

tvon 17y ago
Ah, but that means they were better in some way relevant to business needs, and good enough elsewhere. Theora is better in terms of cost, but that apparently isn't enough of an advantage to counter the technical shortcomings.
- whopa 17y ago
  No, they were not better than the closed source alternatives for most businesses. They were cheaper. Cheaper trumps better often. Cheaper drove adoption.
  - tvon 17y ago
    I'm defining "cheaper" as one of many factors that go into deciding if one thing is better than another, I'm not speaking purely from a technical/feature standpoint.

evgen 17y ago

It depends on where you define traction to have occurred. In the classic "crossing the chasm" terminology. A "good enough" solution that is open can attract early adopters and these same early adopters can become evangelists, developers who improve the open product, or developers who use the open product to create additional products (and sometimes show others how they did this in a devel/evangelism hybrid.) The improvements in awareness, product quality, and product ecosystem that come from all three of those variants of the early adopter are what gets the product into the mainstream and it is usually not until progress has been made on all three fronts that anyone claims that a product is "getting traction." The lack of an alternative choice will push a lot of people into the early adopter space for some product niches, which can lead to a fast elevator ride into mainstream usage for some products (c.f. MySQL, Linux, etc.) This is not the case with video codecs. The field is technically rigorous so only a few have the chops to contribute code, the alternatives (h.264) are currently better and widely available so few have much to gain by building the Theora ecosystem, which really only leaves the evangelists who are interested in the product as a mission rather than as a tool. This group is unlikely to gain significant traction with the mainstream computing audience.