Ogg Vorbis Gaining Industry Support

An anonymous reader writes "While Ogg Vorbis format has not gained much adoption in music sales and portable players, it is not an unsupported format in the industry. Toy manufacturers (e.g. speaking dolls), voice warning systems, and reactive audio devices exploit Ogg Vorbis for its good quality at small bit-rates. As a sign of this, VLSI Solution Oy has just announced VS1000, the first 16 bits DSP device for playing Ogg Vorbis on low-power and high-volume products. Earlier Ogg Vorbis chips use 32 bits for decoding, which consumes more energy than a 16-bit device does. See the Xiph wiki page for a list of Ogg Vorbis chips."

Comments

Informal poll

[2.7182]

Ogg Vorbis is:

o An invading species
o The best audio format
o Can be bought at Ikea

Re:Informal poll

[cepler]

An invading species of audio format sold by Ikea!

No wonder it's not used in many audio players!

Run away! Run away!!!! :-P

Re:Informal poll

[straponego]

They're characters in Pratchett books. Okay, they claim that Ogg was from Netrek.

Re:Informal poll

[delire]

While the name is memorable, it does pose problems where 'branding' is concerned. I've heard people refer to it as "Ogg", "Egg", "Vorbis" and "Egg Vorbis".

IMHO they should drop the 'Vorbis' (clearly the despotic leader of the gentle Ogg race) and just go for 'Ogg'. This would also tie it neatly into the .ogg extension, which is of course the primary contact people have with the format itself.

The maddening problem of Ogg Theora having a .ogg extension also is, of course, another conversation altogether..

Re:Informal poll

[mrchaotica]

Hence, we should call them "ogg" files.

...when we're talking about the file format, that is. In this case, however, we're talking about chips designed specifically to decode the Vorbis audio stream, so "Vorbis" (without Ogg, unless the chip is capable of understanding the container format too) is the appropriate name to use in this thread.

Re:Informal poll

[Creepy Crawler]

Actually, that was "Noob Saibot".

Backwards, it spelled the name of two developers: Boon and Tobias.

As a note, he make his first appearance as a super-hard hidden fight. You had to fight 50 times in 2-player on Mortal Kombat 2, and then you fought the Noob.

The noob looked like Scorpion with the ninja garb, but completely black. He was just a "shadow". he also could kick your ass super-quick.

Re:Informal poll

[gbobeck]

The noob looked like Scorpion with the ninja garb, but completely black.

Actually, he looked more like Sub-Zero with the completely black ninja garb.

MP3 License

[Agent_Eight]

If you look at the price list for this chip it states that "Prices include MP3 license of Thomson Multimedia."

Wasn't the point of Ogg Vorbis to have a codec free of licensing?

Re:MP3 License

[mrchaotica]

Perhaps the chip can decode both Vorbis and MP3.

Re:MP3 License

[MBCook]

I think this is the whole reason. If someone is looking for a chip that does Ogg, they can choose this one. If they are looking for a chip that does MP3, they can choose this one.

Business wise, which is better? Selling an MP3 decoder chip for $0.10 each (just a guess), or selling an MP3/Ogg decoder chip for $0.10 each? Since there are no patents, adding Ogg support is free, but adds value. Lots of people may want chips that can play MP3s (GPS, Cell Phones, MP3 players, calculators, EVERYTHING plays MP3s), but how many would buy a chip that only did Ogg? I doubt that market is nearly as large. Added value.

That's my guess. Your product (possibly with a little bit of extra programming) could even use both. MP3 for things you want at a higher quality, Ogg for things less important. Maybe you are upgrading your old product. You can keep all the old samples MP3 and just add the new samples as Ogg. Who knows.

Re:MP3 License

[mrchaotica]

MP3 for things you want at a higher quality, Ogg for things less important.

You've got that backwards. Vorbis is a better codec (in terms of sound quality at a given level of compression) than MP3.

Re:MP3 License

[mrchaotica]

I was wondering about that. I've never used it.

Unless I'm mistaken, just about everything (e.g. Windows Media Audio, AAC, Vorbis) is better than MP3. What's debatable is how the former three compare to each other.

Perhaps Ogg for all internal sounds to a device, and the MP3 capability for sounds the user wants to add so they don't have to use a "weird custom proprietary" format (despite the the fact it's not).

That makes sense, since even if the user has heard of Vorbis he doesn't necessarily want to re-encode (and certainly doesn't want to transcode, as the resulting file would sound worse because the previous encoding to MP3 would have thrown away information that Vorbis would need).

Re:MP3 License

[Myopic]

That price list is for lots and lots of different chips and packages. Presumably, some of them (maybe many or most, I don't know the company, I just looked at the price list because of your comment) have MP3 capability. Also presumably, from what I know of Ogg Vorbis, the license cost would not apply to the Ogg-only chip(s).

Re:MP3 License

[Rufus211]

If you look at the price list for this chip it states that "Prices include MP3 license of Thomson Multimedia."

If you actually read the price list, you'll see that the VS1000 isn't included on there. All the other chips they produce are MP3 playback, so have to pay the MP3 license. Presumably when they update the price list to include the VS1000, they'll modify the wording.

Re:MP3 License

[maeka]

Repeated double-blind listening tests performed at/by HydrogenAudio show that Vorbis and MP3 achieve [i]transparency[/i] at about the same bitrate.
Vorbis and AAC are both superior formats when compared to MP3 on their technical merits. LAME, however, is the leveler.

Never underestimate the impact of a mature encoder when it comes to lossy codecs.

Re:MP3 License

[k8to]

It all depends upon the bitrates and the application. Also mp3 is not as static a target as you might think, with the advancements in lame over time.

If you believe the folks on hydrogen audio, when strong music fidelity is a concern, WMA has unpleasant artifacts at most bitrates, save the very high where even still mp3 is probably your best bet for transparent lossy compression. Well, maybe wavepack if you're really hardcore, but mp3 seems "good enough" for most ears, while wma does not.

At lower bitrates (128kbs down to 40kbps or so) mp3 isn't as competitive, and the winners at different bitrates seem to be AAC and Vorbis AoTuV. This is really impressive for Vorbis because it is a _much_ simpler format, without various special tweaks and features to help out at certain format ranges. The specialized features of AAC help it hit certain windows, but also cost overall in format complexity, which has a minor effect on size overall, and a major effect on implementability. Vorbis by contrast is much simpler and therefore re-implementable, although market forces have not pushed as hard for tuned implementations.

Once you start heading south of 40kbps, you probably aren't really so interested in music anymore, and other more focused audio codecs, probably for speech, are what you'll want to look at.

But the point is mp3 still has some application domains (~200-300kbps, full spectrum music) where it is probably the best format in terms of fidelity and certainly implementatability, primarily because of the maturity of the encoder sourcebase. Surprising, but true.

Personally, for portable music replay, I use Vorbis AoTuV at around 160kbps, because while in testing on my portable player I could often tell the difference, the differences were never offensive. It's possible that some form of aac encoder could achieve this as well for me, but FAAC could not, and I am not willing to pirate and run windows or mac binaries just to encode music in formats that aren't broadly supported anyway on current devices (especially mine). WMA had an unpalatable flat quality at all rates I tested. Maybe it's improved but I was really testing for novelty. That format is even worse than AAC, which at least has an open specification.

OGG is the Game Industry's Favorite Format

[StaticEngine]

OGG Vorbis is used all over the place in the Video Game Industry, since it's free, well documented, sounds great, and has source code available. I think MP3 is only in the forefront of people's minds because the news media coopted the name of that format to encompass all lossy compressed audio schemes, the way "Kleenex" is used by some people to refer to generic facial tissues.

That said, I've used Vorbis playback in an audio library I wrote, and thought it was probably the easiest part of the whole project.

Re:OGG is the Game Industry's Favorite Format

[acidrain]

I mentioned ogg to the lead sound programmer at the last games company I worked at and they started using it at their generic format. It still had to be converted to a console specific format for the runtime, because the hardware was designed to handle certain types of streams, and audio isn't cheap to transform cpu-wise. Of course that was ps2/xbox/gc and I'm under the impression that they were able to do a lot more runtime processing of the audio on the "next gen" consoles, but I don't know what role ogg played. Certainly the memory bandwidth savings off ogg in the runtime may outweigh the cpu costs, but again, that's probably something most companies are still working out and I don't know from experience.

Re:OGG is the Game Industry's Favorite Format

[Anonymous Coward]

Another advantage with ogg over mp3 is that it supports more than 2 channels. The video game industry, especially those doing dev on next-gen consoles, are quite aware of this.

Re:OGG is the Game Industry's Favorite Format

[ewhac]

Also, Ogg Vorbis is much more predictable.

Apparently, you can't take apart an MP3 in a deterministic way. That is, if you hand a compressed block to the MP3 decoder, you could get back an uncompressed block of any size, and it's not possible to determine this size ahead of time. You can partially decode blocks ("Decompress in to this buffer up to a maximum of N bytes,"), but then you can't restart the decoder from exactly where you left off. This means you have to either re-decode the entire block and throw away what you've already used, or blindly move on to the next block and hope no one notices the pop. This sort of sloppiness is generally frowned upon in game programming circles.

Vorbis apparently doesn't suffer from these shortcomings. And it sounds better.

This imparted to me by an experienced console game programmer, as relayed through my highly imperfect memory.

Schwab

Re:OGG is the Game Industry's Favorite Format

[Dutch Gun]

Consoles have hardware-accelerated ADPCM compression for normal sfx, but audio streams can certainly be compressed with Vorbis. All the commercial audio libraries support it at this point, or else it's easy enough to add the support yourself. The next-gen engines have plenty of horsepower to spare for vorbis decoders - it's really not that expensive as long as you don't go too crazy with simultaneous decodes.

Our company is switching from mp3 to vorbis for our upcoming projects - it's definitely a better format for a closed system such as games. As is oft-mentioned here, it's a better-sounding codec at lower bitrates, which is important for MMOs, since occasional updates are expected - and saving bandwidth wherever possible certainly matters. And, it has a few technical benefits such as sample-accurate decoding (MP3 decodes in blocks, so you have to write additional kludges to get around this), which is helpful for loops.

It's nice to hear the format is picking up a bit of steam. I've had my eye on it for a long time, and have been impressed with the steady progress that has been made.

Re:OGG is the Game Industry's Favorite Format

[CryoPenguin]

There's no problem with decoding MP3 in a fixed buffer size. Each frame contains exactly 1152 audio samples.

The MP3 problem you might be thinking of is the bit reservoir: Constant bitrate MP3 only pretends to be constant bitrate. If you look at the spacing between MP3 frame headers it looks like each frame is exactly the same size. But they're really not: frames can borrow bits from nearby frames, so the compressed data at one place in the stream doesn't necessarily decode to the decompressed samples that nominally correspond with that frame. Thus it's tricky to determine where you have to start decoding if you want to seek to a given sample number, and the naive seeking method could be off by about +/- 0.25 seconds.

That problem is specific to MP3; I don't know of any other audio format that suffers from it. All Vorbis had to do to fix it was be logical and put each bit in the frame it's supposed to be in, not in some random other frame.

Re:OGG is the Game Industry's Favorite Format

[evilviper]

Another advantage with ogg over mp3 is that it supports more than 2 channels.

Vorbis can encode to as many channels as you want, but nobody has ever worked on the multi-channel joint encoding, so the bitrate is rather poor on more than 2 channels, and codecs like decades-old AC3 are superior.

Storage vs processing vs quality

[EmbeddedJanitor]

There will always be some sort of trade off between cost effectiveness of storage vs processing and cost effectiveness. There are no obvious winners, and the best solution will change as the memory vs micro prices change.

Many voice mail systems only use 32kbps sampling and achieve fine results for that purpose, and the algorithms are easy enough to render on a 8-bit micro costing 50c.

When it comes to medium quality sound then there are basically two routes you can take: 8 bit micro (or even some dumb logic)running less fancy algorithms and a bit more flash/rom to store more verbose sound data; or more compressed sound and a flashier micro to run a heavier algorithm. You can now get 32-bit ARM micros for less than $1 making the second option reasonably feasible at low cost.

However flash is very cheap. NAND flash only costs approx 2c per MB (for multi-MB chips, so small chips are going to cost more per MB). You can fit a lot of "mama" phrases in a couple of MB. As a result you don't want to spend too much money on micros to save on flash.

Re:Storage vs processing vs quality

[mrchaotica]

Many voice mail systems only use 32kbps sampling and achieve fine results for that purpose, and the algorithms are easy enough to render on a 8-bit micro costing 50c.

I'm not sure exactly how lightweight the algorithm is, but Speex would be more appropriate for that than a general-purpose audio codec, and has the same "no license fees" advantage as Vorbis. I wonder how Speex is doing in "the industry?"

money talks

[joe_bruin]

Ogg Vorbis is gaining popularity mostly because of the price per unit. When you make millions of dolls a year and you have to pay a $0.10 licensing fee per unit if it plays voice prompts in MP3 format, that starts to get pretty expensive. If WMA, AAC, MP3, or any other codec was cheaper and did not require significanly more flash memory to store, they'd be using that instead.

Re:money talks

[Technician]

It is no longer a dime anymore. The IC prices are not listed online, but the per device prices are for hardware items.

http://www.mp3licensing.com/royalty/hardware.html

At the bottom of the page is tha item that unless you buy chips with the license, the minimum for doing it yourself is $15,000 USD. If you are making a limited quanity of an item, the minimum can be a showstopper unless you buy chips from someone else, which may also be a little expensive. Dropping MP3 can save a chunk of change since a free alternative exists.

It's the PNG/GIF thing all over again.

Re:Worthless for hobbyists

[MightyYar]

There's an LQFP version pictured. You don't have to use the BGA.

Openness == Interoperability

[headkase]

This highlights the reasoning that large corporations such as IBM, Novell, and Sun have adopted open source methods: it lowers their bottom line. They pay programmers to work on open-source projects and they more than recoup the costs through savings in other areas such as interoperability. Open-source breeds open-standards and when basic infrastructure such as audio support is basically "free" then costs are lowered more by using common-infrastructure between manufacturers vs. constantly reinventing-the-wheel or developing your own library of common code/components. Reiterating simply, it's cheaper to pay programmers to develop free infrastructure code and give it away to reap higher profits from reduced costs in other areas such as interoperability.

Read the specs, it is more than for toys

[markdavis]

The "article" (actually the spec page) shows the device is much more that just a chip for toys. Otherwise, they would not have tone controls, stereo output, customizable firmware, "spacial processing", and most especially a FULL SPEED USB interface!

The unit looks like something that is much more useful as something like an iPod shuffle (since there is no display controller). And in reasonable quantity- the sucker only costs $4! Add a several more dollars of flash, battery, case, connectors, and buttons, and "ta da", you have a reasonable, cheap, portable audio stereo device.

Re:Worthless for hobbyists

[Overzeetop]

a toaster oven, a meat thermostat and a stopwatch.

Interesting...and I think I can picture it...but is it really any better than a midget, a trapeze and a running start?

Branding: "Ogg" vs. "Vorbis"

[mrchaotica]

Well, the problem is that you don't understand what "Ogg" and "Vorbis" (and "Theora") actually are. There's actually two different things here: codecs and container formats. "Ogg" refers to the container format; it's comparable to Quicktime, AVI, or Matroska. "Vorbis" and "Theora" refer to codecs (audio and video respectively); Vorbis is comparable to MPEG 1 layer 3 (aka MP3) or Advanced Audio Codec (AAC) and Theora is comparable to MPEG 2, DivX or H.264.

So, when people say "Ogg Vorbis" what they're actually referring to is a Vorbis audio stream inside an Ogg container. Presumably, it's possible to have a file with a raw Vorbis bitstream (without the Ogg container), and it's certainly possible to have an Ogg container without a Vorbis bitstream. This is also why Ogg Theora files have an .ogg extension; they're actually files with a Theora video stream and (probably) Vorbis audio stream, inside an Ogg container.

Re:Branding: "Ogg" vs. "Vorbis"

[karnal]

And this explanation above is exactly why the common consumer could give a shit about .ogg

When someone talks about YouTube at work, I know they don't care about the codec or container. That's why ogg needs to be simpler name-wise.

Seriously though, I understand that it has it's uses, but for the "present time", mp3 is where it's at. Hopefully this chip makes a dent, but I'd bet money that mp3 will remain the name of the game for music for the masses for years to come.

Re:Branding: "Ogg" vs. "Vorbis"

[iabervon]

The real issue is that people use extensions based on the container format, which is totally irrelevant to anything. Why would you ever care that your file uses the Ogg container, but not care what codec it uses or even what sort of media is encoded in it? I give all of my Ogg Vorbis files the extension ".audio", same as my mp3 files. Any software that's likely to be able to play them is going to be able to tell from the file contents what container format it uses. But it's useful to me to know whether I should be playing a file with a music player or a video player.

Of course, I think most people would be more comfortable giving their Ogg Vorbis files the extension ".mp3", since that's commonly and unambiguously used for files containing only audio.

Re:Branding: "Ogg" vs. "Vorbis"

[toleraen]

Can you name a portable music player (generally referred to as an "mp3 player") that doesn't play mp3s? Even if it isn't superior in every way, it is where it's at. And that's the problem.

Re:Branding: "Ogg" vs. "Vorbis"

[maeglin]

> generally referred to as an "mp3 player"

MP3 player? What's that? Is that like an iPod or something?

Re:Branding: "Ogg" vs. "Vorbis"

[zsau]

Why bother with extensions at all? On my Linux computer, I have all my Ogg Vorbis music with filenames like "Nochnye Snajpery/2004 - SMS/16. 1/2 chasa na vojnu", and my filemanager and music player work out from the contents that it's an Ogg Vorbis player. Same deal occurs with my movies, so I have a video clip named "Nochnye Snajpery/2002 - Ty darila mne rozy". I don't know and don't care what format it's in, ROX-Filer works out it's a movie, and mplayer works out the format...

For my part, I only choose to use extensions when I'm going to have lots of files in one directory with the same name, like "essay.tex", "essay.toc", "essay.aux", "essay.pdf" etc. And I *never* launch a program, then open a file; the filemanager always does it.

(For some reason, neither ROX-Filer nor the "file" command line utility can't work MP3's out without the .mp3 extension. But music players can. If anyone knows what magic I could tell my computer to work them out, I'd be happy)

Re:Branding: "Ogg" vs. "Vorbis"

[donaldm]

> Because the vast majority of file managers need one. HTTP servers need one. Browser plug-ins need one. Programs like ffmpeg need one. etc.

That is only true in MS Windows OS's and some other non *nix OS's. All Linux/Unix OS's have a file called /etc/magic that allows any *nix application to determine what the file type is. While it is possible to setup *nix file managers to look at extensions it is rather pointless if the "magic" file is properly configured although the user can do what they feel comfortable with. Back in the late 1970's I actually used the ".doc" and ".text" extensions for textual documents. Where extensions are used extensively in *nix is in programming (LaTeX/TeX also do this and there are others) because this is an acceptable convention and enables the programmer or user to distinguish between different files without the need for a file manager.

In reality MS OS's have too much dependence on extensions that are a carry over from the DOS days. Unfortunately this dependency makes programs that are written for MS Windows require an extension and this usually carries over to *nix systems when porting is required.

Re:Branding: "Ogg" vs. "Vorbis"

[xtracto]

Perhaps someone can try to explain why I should care, or an actual good reason to use ogg...

One of the advantages OGG has advantages over MP3 is that it sounds *better* at less bitrate. This is great for me, as I can put more music on my Samsung YP-Z5 (which of course plays OGG) in less space.

You can try it, from a CD create an mp3 at 128kbps and a OGG q3 (112kbps) or even q2(96kbps) and the sound will be equivalent. Of course the size of the file will be smaller in the OGG.

(not that I can hear the difference at normal bitrates), b
You have an inherently advantage there, as you can not hear small differences, you will benefit the most with OGG lesser bitrates (but similar quality as mp3 higher bitrates).

The only problem I had was finding an OGG player, but the one I mentioned is *really* good (and for the "cool" guys, it was designed by the same guy who designed the iPod, go figure).

Another rant I listen often is that people argue there is no point in having acceptable bitrates for portable music, as you are going to listen in the bus, metro or any other high ambient noise place. In that case, I would suggest you one of the in-ear earbuds that are now quite popular (you can buy expensive ones like the Shure brands, some Sony or better yet, the not-so-expensive Phillips).

Re:Branding: "Ogg" vs. "Vorbis"

[Delkster]

The only thing Vorbis has over AAC is that it's not patent encumbered, and if you live in a jurisdiction where algorithmic patents are not valid (such as the EU, for now at least) then it doesn't even have this advantage.

This isn't even entirely true. So far the EU has not ruled over the patentability of algoritms, so currently the matter is in the hands of the member countries, at least as far as patentability through local patent offices and enforceability go.

IANAL and IANG (I am not German) but if my memory serves software patents have been granted for example in Germany. I don't know if that pertains to algorithms per se. Here in Finland it seems that software patents are at least somewhat valid (AFAIK some have been granted by the patent office but I don't suppose their validity has been tested in court), even though the legislation would seem to either deny patentability of algorithms or not say anything about it.

Not to mention that even if the patents aren't valid in the EU, they still hinder competition in the global market, and I believe competition in the market would benefit us all in the long run.

Again, IANAL so there may be mistakes and misunderstandings in my knowledge of software patentability in the EU. I also even see your point, but while interesting, it may not be correct in all parts.

Re:Branding: "Ogg" vs. "Vorbis"

[zsau]

Because the vast majority of file managers need one. HTTP servers need one. Browser plug-ins need one. Programs like ffmpeg need one. etc.

None of them need them; it's just that the majority have been written to use them. They can use some other mechanism such as autodetermining the format or, when that fails, a command-line argument. TeX needs extensions and so I use them with it.

But as for cases like HTTP servers where efficiency is a significant concern ... , I wasn't arguing that we should abolish extensions entirely. Just that there's times when it's neater & easier to avoid them: If the PP was using undifferentiated .audio, there's probably no reason to use an extension in the first place. (With so many filemanagers nowadays opening most files to make a preview of them, I think it's pretty obvious most people find convenience more important than efficiency there.)

(For my part, I haven't found any file where my filemanager inaccurately guesses the type; only when it doesn't try (mp3s) or it insufficiently distinguishes (Office documents). In fact, if I have "movie.ogg" and "audio.ogg", then it doesn't attempt to distinguish them, but if I have "movie" and "audio", it does somehow manage to work out that one's Ogg Theora and the others Ogg Vorbis, so it works a bit both ways. And I have no files MPlayer's refused to play without extensions that it does play with them---lucky me I guess.)

Speex works excellently.

[jbn-o]

Quite well as far as I'm concerned; Speex is useful with Asterisk (a popular and extensible open source telephone system), I use it to make high-quality low-bandwidth encodings of talk shows I work with, and a lot of players play it (including VideoLAN Client which works on many operating systems). I never have to worry about patent hassles, proprietary software hassles, or losing control of my audio to digital restrictions management.

Re:Speex works excellently.

[jZnat]

I've heard that Microsoft uses (used?) it for Xbox Live headset communication, and it works very well in that regard. I doubt they're using a chip, so it's all software-transcoded.

WTF

[Anonymous Coward]

What moron modded that insightful?

Windows Media Player is a media player, ogg vorbis is an audio codec. You can play ogg files with WMP11 if you install the codec.

No, Worse because M$ Squished it.

[twitter]

It's the PNG/GIF thing all over again.

Except in this case M$ gave music player makers a choice: our way or the highway. The Janus DRM license actually forbade the use of ogg. Though this was shot down by the EU, you might imagine the pressure is still there. Well, it was until M$ hosed every one of them over by dumping the former "Plays for Sure" for whatever their new "service" is. You would think they would revolt given they can't win in the M$ world.

call it og3

[chrwei]

.avi and .mpg have the same problem. avi and mpeg are also the containers that can contain many different codecs; like XViD, DivX, raw DV, MPEG version 1, 2, and 4, motion JPEG and many others; some are somewhat compatible like XViD, DivX, and Mpeg4, some not. the containers have their own ways of allowing a player to know what codec is in the file so that it can be played.

Hell, .mp3 is an mpeg as well, they(0) just gave it a different extension so as to not confuse people. Why not do the same thing with ogg vorbis? Call it .og3, the masses might even think it's a new version of mp3 and take to it very quickly.

(0) - you know, they, those people that do things.

flash support

[bcrowell]

It would be really nice if Adobe would support ogg in the next version of flash player. Currently the only audio codec supported is mp3, which helps to make flash a more closed platform.

AVI does the same thing.

[cduffy]

AVI is a container format; you can have any number of codecs stored within an AVI file. Same thing for WAV.

Why is this a problem for Ogg but not AVI?

Re:AVI does the same thing.

[jZnat]

It's the same problem for Ogg (commonly associated with Vorbis), AVI (ass. with DivX and Xvid), WMV (different versions of WMV, WMA, MS-MPEG4, etc.), QuickTime (ass. with Sorenson and now H.264/AAC), and pretty much any other container that holds more than one type of audio and video codec. The non audio/video geeks rarely if ever understand the difference, and the only time it hits them is when they get example files and can't play some of them due to a lack of codecs or software.

Re:AVI does the same thing.

[k8to]

And you blame this on the existence of container formats?

Blame the user interfaces of the toosl and shells for being so unhelpful that users are forced to rely on extensions to guess what files contain.

Oh my god, zip files can contain *anything*!

Re:AVI does the same thing.

[TheRaven64]

There's nothing to stop you using .vorbis.ogg or .theora.ogg as extensions. Then, if Tarkin is ever finished, you can just start labelling video .tarkin.ogg. I've seen a few AVIs recently that have this naming convention (.h264.avi, or .XviD.avi for example), so it wouldn't be too difficult.

The only exception is MP3, which didn't have a container format, it was just a raw byte-stream.

Sirius Stiletto has ogg support, I believe

[pyite69]

I was researching mp3 players, and I was pleasantly surprised to see Ogg listed as a format that the Stiletto can use.

Re:Ogg Vorbis

[dave420]

I haven't heard those artifacts with MP3s since Xing fell into the dust and people started using the LAME encoder. I don't care about formats too much, so I keep my music in MP3. I like to choose my player for my media, not have my media choose my player. iTunes is pretty good.

Ah yes, Vorbis

[Trogre]

Ogg Vorbis is a wonderful format with lots of nifty features. My little Samsung YP-U1 plays my oggs perfectly well, but my Pioneer car stereo won't.

Does anyone here remember back in 2001 when Ogg Vorbis proponents were touting Bitrate Peeling as a big must-have feature? Well it's 2007 and I'm still waiting to see a single workable implementation of it.

Re:that breaks file extension association

[cduffy]

What kind of idiot OS uses file extensions for application association? That means you can't convert a file to a different format without renaming it (and breaking all external links/shortcuts/references) -- stupid! And why should the filename (which is fully user-modifiable even for my grandma^WCEO) be lumped in with the type metadata (which should be user-modifiable only by people who know what they're doing)?

Linux has magic (and xattr support, perfect for storing MIME types); MacOS has had filesystem-level metadata for ages, long before it got the X on the end of its name. I'd hope Microsoft would support something else by now -- after all, don't they typically get things moderately right by 3.0? Let the stupid convention die; the folks who care about finding an elegant solution are doing something else already. [Obviously, on Linux this only refers to a subset of file managers and desktop libraries].

(Just to be clear, I'm only half serious. But then, I *am* half serious).

even MacOS is using file extensions now

[r00t]

The old way is still supported on Apple-specific filesystems, but Apple has learned to deal with the non-Apple world. Apple even ships MacOS X with many files being single-fork (data only) with file extensions, where formerly this was not done. An example is fonts, many of which now bear .otf extensions.

Windows shares, FAT-formatted media, and Joliet (Windows CD-ROM format) media are all common.

As for Linux, both magic and xattr are lame. They both cause extra disk seeks. At 5 ms per seek, a directory with 200 files will take an extra second to examine. With 2000 files, that's an extra 10 seconds. File magic is inaccurate and, worse yet, fundamentally unfixable by the user. The xattr feature is usually disabled, doesn't work on all filesystems (hello FAT), isn't even remotely portable, and suffers from xattr marks getting lost by unaware tools.