3 ms·

1) So Apple add Vorbis in the iPhone 6 and iPod fifth generation. "Why does this work on his iPod and not mine?" 2) For the iPhone 8 a new super low power, low

1) So Apple add Vorbis in the iPhone 6 and iPod fifth generation. "Why does this work on his iPod and not mine?" 2) For the iPhone 8 a new super low power, low cost chip with better integration of audio output becomes available but doesn't support Vorbis. Nevermind we will just use the old expensive high power chip instead. Every feature you add is a limitation on the future changes you can make. 3) Not always. Just a new encoder that does something differently can work on one player and not others, then you have to work out whether it is an encoder bug or decoder bug. I meant almost all users get AAC/AVC/MPEG4 from their OS provider or Linux users can install open source (although probably not patent licensed) AAC/AVC/MPEG4 codecs from various locations. I wasn't clear and I will re-edit for clarity.

shmerl 13y ago
1) So? Instead of breaking your head on "how and where do I get a player which supports the codec I need", you'll worry about "which of these from the same manufacturer supports the codec I need". I surely prefer the second case to the first. 2) Why doesn't it support Vorbis? Let them make it low power low cost and add support for all modern codecs. It's doable. Apple sabotages it not because of any technical reasons. Also, modern SoCs allow optimal decoding of any custom codec potentially, by allowing it to be defined programmatically, even if hardwired decoder is not available. See: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEON_%28instruction_set%29#NEON https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEON_%28instruction_set%29#NEO... * http://mobile.arm.com/products/processors/technologies/neon.php?tab=Why+NEON http://mobile.arm.com/products/processors/technologies/neon.... 3) Let them debug it. Or they shouldn't make players if they can't support modern codecs because it's "hard to debug". It's not about what users or developers and publishers can do. It's about what they can't (because of Apple). And what people can't do is using open codecs without worrying that some users won't be able to access them.
- josephlord 13y ago
  AAC/AVC/MPEG4 are open. Your other points are arguing that it isn't that hard to do which I don't dispute but it isn't free and doesn't benefit them.
  - shmerl 13y ago
    They are open as in "specs are available". They aren't open as in freedom to use them. Let's not start the semantics arguments, you know what was meant above. Whether that benefits them not to do it - you are correct. My point is, it benefits them to sabotage the industry and to hold back innovation. It's because they view control as their main benefit, not the innovation. And that's why they are a problem for the open Web (it defines the medium that diminishes control of the likes of Apple). That was in my original point, so we don't argue here.
    - josephlord 13y ago
      We have gone quite far off course but I thought I would summarise our polite disagreements which I doubt we will resolve: 1) How much effort it would be to introduce and support Vorbis over the long term. You seem to believe it is negligible in cost while I believe it is quite achievable if they wanted to do it but VERY far from free to support additional codecs. 2) Terminology. I don't like appropriation of words and think that terminology does matter. I was clear in an early post that I understood that the AAC/AVC/MPEG4 codecs are not free (or Free). I will continue to argue against claims (even implicit) that Open Standards are not open. 3) Innovation. Although I haven't responded to the point I don't see Vorbis as a significant innovation beyond AAC so I don't see Apple as holding back innovation by not supporting it. I don't see much innovation held back by the lack of Free codecs but perhaps you do. 4) "it benefits them to sabotage the industry and to hold back innovation" This is a really strange one to me. As (3) I'm not sure about the innovation. Also the idea that they have a duty to at their own expense (1) take actions that benefit other people seems odd to me. If they were using their own proprietary codec that would be different but I just don't see the duty that they are breaching. 5) My view is that there are advantages to the limited set of codec required to support virtually all devices that may even outweigh the disadvantages of them not being Free. This is probably our core disagreement. Until there is at least a factor of two improvement in coding efficiency it is unlikely to be worth making a leap in codecs. Vorbis, theora, VP8 all came too late (at least with hardware implementations) to win this generation and it is best that an open non-proprietary winner takes all. The presence of the Free codecs (and to an even greater degree VC-1 which at the time was pitched as royalty free) helped ensure reasonable licensing terms for AAC/AVC etc. (unlike MPEG4 part2/H.263) so for almost all use cases the cost of AAC/AVC/MPEG4 is negligible in business scenarios. (Shipping a free Linux distribution or other free player/encoder software is the only case that I can see being troubled but they mostly get around it by not including the codecs while making it easy for the user to obtain them elsewhere.)

shmerl 13y ago

1) So? Instead of breaking your head on "how and where do I get a player which supports the codec I need", you'll worry about "which of these from the same manufacturer supports the codec I need". I surely prefer the second case to the first. 2) Why doesn't it support Vorbis? Let them make it low power low cost and add support for all modern codecs. It's doable. Apple sabotages it not because of any technical reasons. Also, modern SoCs allow optimal decoding of any custom codec potentially, by allowing it to be defined programmatically, even if hardwired decoder is not available. See: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEON_%28instruction_set%29#NEON https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEON_%28instruction_set%29#NEO... * http://mobile.arm.com/products/processors/technologies/neon.php?tab=Why+NEON http://mobile.arm.com/products/processors/technologies/neon.... 3) Let them debug it. Or they shouldn't make players if they can't support modern codecs because it's "hard to debug". It's not about what users or developers and publishers can do. It's about what they can't (because of Apple). And what people can't do is using open codecs without worrying that some users won't be able to access them.

josephlord 13y ago
AAC/AVC/MPEG4 are open. Your other points are arguing that it isn't that hard to do which I don't dispute but it isn't free and doesn't benefit them.
- shmerl 13y ago
  They are open as in "specs are available". They aren't open as in freedom to use them. Let's not start the semantics arguments, you know what was meant above. Whether that benefits them not to do it - you are correct. My point is, it benefits them to sabotage the industry and to hold back innovation. It's because they view control as their main benefit, not the innovation. And that's why they are a problem for the open Web (it defines the medium that diminishes control of the likes of Apple). That was in my original point, so we don't argue here.
  - josephlord 13y ago
    We have gone quite far off course but I thought I would summarise our polite disagreements which I doubt we will resolve: 1) How much effort it would be to introduce and support Vorbis over the long term. You seem to believe it is negligible in cost while I believe it is quite achievable if they wanted to do it but VERY far from free to support additional codecs. 2) Terminology. I don't like appropriation of words and think that terminology does matter. I was clear in an early post that I understood that the AAC/AVC/MPEG4 codecs are not free (or Free). I will continue to argue against claims (even implicit) that Open Standards are not open. 3) Innovation. Although I haven't responded to the point I don't see Vorbis as a significant innovation beyond AAC so I don't see Apple as holding back innovation by not supporting it. I don't see much innovation held back by the lack of Free codecs but perhaps you do. 4) "it benefits them to sabotage the industry and to hold back innovation" This is a really strange one to me. As (3) I'm not sure about the innovation. Also the idea that they have a duty to at their own expense (1) take actions that benefit other people seems odd to me. If they were using their own proprietary codec that would be different but I just don't see the duty that they are breaching. 5) My view is that there are advantages to the limited set of codec required to support virtually all devices that may even outweigh the disadvantages of them not being Free. This is probably our core disagreement. Until there is at least a factor of two improvement in coding efficiency it is unlikely to be worth making a leap in codecs. Vorbis, theora, VP8 all came too late (at least with hardware implementations) to win this generation and it is best that an open non-proprietary winner takes all. The presence of the Free codecs (and to an even greater degree VC-1 which at the time was pitched as royalty free) helped ensure reasonable licensing terms for AAC/AVC etc. (unlike MPEG4 part2/H.263) so for almost all use cases the cost of AAC/AVC/MPEG4 is negligible in business scenarios. (Shipping a free Linux distribution or other free player/encoder software is the only case that I can see being troubled but they mostly get around it by not including the codecs while making it easy for the user to obtain them elsewhere.)