5 ms·
Aura: shipping software that was delayed for 4 years because of patent licensing
- js2 9y agoThis deserves a better title. HN's title submission rules are going to hurt chances of it being up voted despite the good story. Something like: Aura: delayed 4 years by "Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory” licensing edit: Thank you both folks who replied. I posted this comment, emailed the mods, then saw your replies. :-)
- grzm 9y agoThe rules are bent when deemed useful. Suggest a better title to the mods via the Contact link in the footer. I've seen it done in the past.
- DoreenMichele 9y agoThey aren't rules. They are guidelines. If you feel it really needs another title, you can email the mods. They are typically very helpful where there is a good article with a terrible title
- dang 9y agoAgreed. Thanks! and thanks for the email.
- bangonkeyboard 9y agoThe cherry on top is that in the four year limbo between this software's completion and release, Apple removed the optical audio port that it requires to function from all new Macs.
- outsidetheparty 9y agoYeah, that was just a tragic kicker to the story.
- test6554 9y agoIt sounds like people have a love-hate relationship with Apple. If you hit the sweet spot, you are minting money, but they can cut you off at any time by exercising their control over the ecosystem.
- LeoPanthera 9y agoWhat happens if you connect a Mac to a receiver using an HDMI cable? (And then chain your monitor to the receiver.) HDMI can carry uncompressed 7.1 channel audio - will a Mac send that? If it does, does any playback software support that?
- inopinatus 9y agoYes, just tried it from a 2015 MacBook attached through HDMI dongle to a Denon AVR. Playback of Dolby test videos and the receiver shows 7.1 audio with correct perceived sound position. Tested with VLC, Quicktime and Elmedia player. It's possible the audio stack is remixing on the way through, because I tried a 5.1 AC3 file as well and receiver was still showing 7.1 except with Elmedia player configured for audio pass-through, upon which it showed 5.1 audio (and issued a noticeable click when the change of format occurred)
- vortico 9y agoDoes the optical input for the amplifier only suport AC-3? Why don't manufacturers use a more naive patent-free method that might be slower? Are they really starving for bandwidth enough to justify the cost of an AC-3 license? Even uncompressed PCM times 6 channels could easily be transmitted over USB 2.0, and I was under the impression that these optical formats were even faster.
- LeoPanthera 9y agoUsually the four codecs supported over optical are uncompressed (limited to 2 channels), AC-3, DTS, and MP2. The patent status of MP2 seems to be hard to determine. DTS seems to be still patented.
- vortico 9y agoWeird, so manufacturers just haven't implemented uncompressed 6-channel optical audio? Is it bandwidth?
- c2h5oh 9y agoUncompressed stereo 16 bit 44.1khz sample rate (cd quality) is <150 KBps so it's definitely not bandwidth.
- makomk 9y agoIt's bandwidth. More specifically, standard TOSLINK only has the bandwidth to carry stereo audio in uncompressed form. If you want full surround sound it needs to be compressed to fit into the same bandwidth that stereo audio would use.
- ComputerGuru 9y agoI thought the problem wasn’t toslink (the physical optical layer) but rather s/pdif (the software layer) which is constrained by its support for the rca physical layer? IIRC, toslink 1.0 (circa ‘82 or ‘83) had a limit of 2 or 3 mbps while modern toslink is well over 100mbps (constrained more by distance than speed).
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- arunoda 9y agoI thought this is a "shipping software". But it's a music related app for Mac (Which seems to be pretty cool). So, I am thinking this post deserves a better title.
- upofadown 9y ago>AC-3, like the competing DTS standard, is a non-optional part of various other standards, including ATSC, ... At this point it appears that Dolby has managed to worm its way into the new ATSC 3 broadcast TV standard as well in the form of something called AC-4. Dolby started as a tape hiss reduction system that actually was useful. Since that time it has more and more become just a way to extract license fees from companies making electronics that involve audio. For the TV standard they could of just used the open Opus codec, but since the people who are creating the standards are the ones getting the licensing revenue there is no real incentive to do something like that. These "industry standards" have become a kind of a scam. So no, Dolby is not all that interested in licensing software implementations of their codecs for random programs. That is simply not where the big money is and it isn't really their business.
- test6554 9y agoI wonder if the big players creating the hardware are part of these patent collectives and are also receiving some of these licensing fees. That would be a good way to keep smaller competitors out of an industry.
- Arqu 9y agoI work for a rather large company that works with audio and video and we used Opus but have since switched to a Dolby based audio stack as it offers much better sound quality, reduced transmission bitrate and is generally more robust. However this needs a direct involvement with Dolby and not just of the shelf stuff.
- upofadown 9y agoSo Dolby has some sort of audio compression method much better than the state of the art that they are keeping secret? Why would they do this?