Slashdot Mirror
Native Sorenson Playback Comes to Linux
Pivot writes: "With the release of Xine v0.9.11a, it is now possible to play back Quicktime movies encoded with the Sorenson SVQ1 encoding natively. There are still some minor issues with sound, and still no support for SVQ3 encoding, but overall this is a major achievement. Downloads are at xine.sf.net. I wonder what apple will do about this." Note: you may have to cut and paste that "movies" link into a new tab or browser.
and cry sour grapes whilst their own userbase is declining. They sure don't seem very receptive in expanding it in other areas.
QT sucks, DivX leads them all in compression and quality.
OK. I've configued my X server for multiple resolutions. I hit ctrl-alt-+ and I get a different resolution. Not a larger or smaller viewport at the same resolution. A different resolution. I can switch between 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x1024, and 1600x1200. At all resolutions I see the entire viewport (i.e. no scrolling). This implies that I am actually getting different resolutions, not different viewports at the same resolution.
Also, I think you've overlooked one VNC project named x0rfbserver. This runs an rfb server (the VNC protocol) on display 0 of your X server. Therefore it shares the current desktop over VNC (just like VNC on Windows and the Mac). This project has been around for years (I stumbled across it probably 5 years ago or thereabouts).
--Be human.
that the open source ethic seems to be "fuck copyright, let's put a lot of hard work into it now and get it banned later?"
I'm not being facetious here. Time and again I see hard work being done on projects that don't stand a chance of not being sued into oblivion. Doesn't anyone else see this as being the tiniest bit futile?
This is why the open-source movement seems approximately as honest as the October Revolution in many of its intentions and goals. They don't actually try to accomplish things which would be positive for all involved. Instead, they waste their time on things which are questionably legal to begin with and which wind up giving all open-source a bad name.
Why aren't more of these people focusing on things that would make open-source palatable, like a Linux with a UI that doesn't reek, or that you don't need to supply a zillion command-line inputs to to make a Plug and Play device work? Why are they putting all this effort into something which is probably just going to get a cease-and-desist slapped on them, and which is probably going to be echoed by someone else who actually has the right to develop this work? Why are they throwing their time and effort into a hole?
And don't be fooled by the friendliness of IBM and suchlike over Linux. IBM could care less about Linux; they care about selling computers and making money. Just because they sell servers with Linux installed doesn't mean they care one whit about what open source "implies." And why should they? Judging from the actions of a lot of people, all it seems to imply is that in the minds of a lot of people, intellectual property is bunk -- when it most certainly isn't.
The problem with open-source in a closed-source world is that it's not only untenable on a large scale, but misleading. I resent the idea that I am to be marched towards a future that requires me to give away the fruit of my labor. I don't ike the DMCA either, but since when has being a dick been an excuse?