Slashdot Mirror
Steve Jobs Hints At Theora Lawsuit
netcrawler writes "Steve Jobs' open letter on Flash has prompted someone at the Free Software Foundation Europe to ask him about his support of proprietary format H.264 over Theora. Jobs' pithy answer (email with headers) suggests Theora might infringe on existing patents and that 'a patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other "open source" codecs now.' Does he know something we don't?"
Update: 05/01 00:38 GMT by T : Monty Montgomery of Xiph (the group behind Theora, as well as Ogg Vorbis, and more) provides a pointed, skeptical response to the implicit legal threat, below.
Monty writes: "Thomson Multimedia made their first veiled patent threats against
Vorbis almost ten years ago. MPEG-LA has been rumbling for the
past few years. Maybe this time it will actually come to
something, but it hasn't yet. I'll get worried when the lawyers advise
me to; i.e., not yet.
The MPEG-LA has insinuated for some time that it is impossible to build any video codec without infringing on at least some of their patents. That is, they assert they have a monopoly on all digital video compression technology, period, and it is illegal to even attempt to compete with them. Of course, they've been careful not to say quite exactly that.
If Jobs's email is genuine, this is a powerful public gaffe ('All video codecs are covered by patents.') He'd be confirming MPEG's assertion in plain language anyone can understand. It would only strengthen the pushback against software patents and add to Apple's increasing PR mess. Macbooks and iPads may be pretty sweet, but creative individuals don't really like to give their business to jackbooted thugs."
The MPEG-LA has insinuated for some time that it is impossible to build any video codec without infringing on at least some of their patents. That is, they assert they have a monopoly on all digital video compression technology, period, and it is illegal to even attempt to compete with them. Of course, they've been careful not to say quite exactly that.
If Jobs's email is genuine, this is a powerful public gaffe ('All video codecs are covered by patents.') He'd be confirming MPEG's assertion in plain language anyone can understand. It would only strengthen the pushback against software patents and add to Apple's increasing PR mess. Macbooks and iPads may be pretty sweet, but creative individuals don't really like to give their business to jackbooted thugs."
He doesn't know anything that we don't already know.
However, he, on the other hand, thinks different. (TM).
Luckily, there are no software patents :-)
NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
Time for the Two Minute Hate!
Can we do this maybe just once a day?
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Apple's new slogan: "There's a patent for that."
zosxavius photography
The apple is the best computer. I don't care who he sues, it is for a good reason no doubt. Stop stealing from apple you dirty hippies.
for their legal expenses. Bugger Steve Jobs and the other patent trolls.
-- Programming with boost is like building a house with lego. It's a cool but I wouldn't want to live in it
Microsoft conspicuously said today that IE9 will only support H.264 for HTML5 video. Add in Apple and you have the two largest consumer OS vendors backing the same codec. I suspect they do know something the public doesn't, even if they themselves will not be a party to this patent challenge.
Theora will just end up becoming collateral damage in the coming war all of the large vendors are about to wage with Google. Follow the breadcrumbs and that's where you eventually end up.
All video codecs are covered by patents. A patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other “open source” codecs now.
Assembled by who, exactly? On what grounds? In regard to which patents in particular? It's easy to make claims, Steve. Proving them is harder.
/edit Open Source *codecs may be attacked
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
The same way Microsoft didn't sue Linux. They got SCO to do it for them.
Or hes just creating FUD to prevent people using Theora.
Lately Steve Jobs seems to be more and more like Steve "Sweaty" Ballmer.
And here comes Apple apologists. You know what, fuck you, fuck steve jobs and fuck my karma.
A long long time ago. I really hate people who try to put an end to anything open. I still can't believe this guy who has put himself in front of people waiting for over 5 years for a new liver now does something like this... Come on guy, you got a new chance, someone else probably died because you could BUY that liver in front of her away and now this... No, not much sympathy from me. You're a bitch Steve.
Looks to me, Steve Jobs just knows there are people looking into suing Theora. Not Steve Jobs (or Apple) is going to sue Theora.
Again, just because something's open sourced doesn't make it alright.
In the end, proprietary codecs win because content producers will only support those.
They learned their lesson with letting mp3 get out of control until it got big enough they couldn't stop it. They aren't about to make this mistake again for video.
Very much, except infinitely classier.
You gotta love how his open letter the other day simultaneously claimed that almost all flash videos are also available in H.264, and that almost all video sites were using non-H.264 codecs for their flvs. Not contradicting, exactly -- very impressive PR lying.
Read the books about Steve Jobs. Even people who like him say he is extremely abusive. My guess is that there is a connection between his abusiveness and his getting cancer at 53.
They need to move fast, clean VP8 up and push it into Chrome, Android and youtube. Firefox and Opera will follow quickly and the attempt to lock web multimedia into propietary formats from Apple and Microsoft will fail.
This move from Apple and the Microsoft's statement about only supporting H.264 are a reaction to Google's purchase of VP8. Both Apple and Microsoft are terrified of Google. They are willing to give up quicktime and wmv as long as Google doesn't succeed in pushing an open source, patent free solution to web video.
When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
Unlike other community things, it actually works and people will defend it, because they are using what they write themselves. Go after Open Source and you are basically dead, even when it may take you a long time dying. The time to play games of greed and power with software are over. This stuff is critical infrastructure, everybody needs it and it has to be both good quality and readily available. Open Source can do that. No other approach can. And this becomes harder and harder to ignore.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
If there was only a Richard Stallman for every Steve Jobs and Steve Ballmer.... On second thought, a global epidemic of athletes foot may not be the best scenario either.
Looks to me, Steve Jobs just knows there are people looking into suing Theora. Not Steve Jobs (or Apple) is going to sue Theora.
Even if that's the case he made the announcement in the form of a FUD attack on Theora and the other open source CODECs.
Now lots of potential adopters will instead be waiting for the other shoe to drop before considering an open source solution - and paying for proprietary stuff meanwhile. And if the shoe never drops they'll wait, and pay, a very long time. This is the magic of FUD.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Jobs is partly correct and part incorrect.
When he says "All video codecs are covered by patents" he is incorrect. Patents are limited by their claims and it is completely possible that there is a codec that does not fall under any patents. One such codec, the null codec that simply turns every input bit into itself, is probably free of any patents. Of course that would be a silly codec.
Just because something is open source does not mean that it does not infringe on one or more patents. A lot of folks confuse "copyright", which protects expression, with patent, which protects ideas. Under patent even an independent expression (an implementation), even an open source one, might impinge on a patented idea.
I suspect that pretty much everybody here, including myself, is of the belief that patents have been granted that are overbroad, that live too long, and that are simply reflective of prior or obvious practice that existed at or prior to the time of the patent filing. There is much that is broken in the patent system.
I can readily believe that ogg/theora might impinge on some patent in some country. Then again it might not. And whether that patent is itself valid is a question that would have to be answered once we knew what those putative patents were.
Since proving that something like ogg/theora doesn't infringe is like proving a negative, it is pretty hard to ever say that something is provably and undeniably free of patents.
But it would, in my opinion, be a good thing to have the matter fully debated in the context of a lawsuit. It would create a forum where the H.264 people (and other patent-codec people) could duke it out with the open source codec community in a place where we could get some definitive answers that ratchet and lock into place and thus give guidance to us in the future.
If Ogg/theora (or Google's VP8) violates a patent it is better to know it now so that we can work around the patent or obtain blanket community licenses.
My own guess is that if the Apple or the MPEG people engage in something more than sabre rattling that they will find the open source community a resourceful and dedicated opponent. Most particularly, the open source community is probably a very formidable opponent on the question of whether that patent on which the claim of infringement is based is itself valid.
Apple and the MPEG people could find that at the end of the battle that their own patents have fallen.
I'm ready to go "all-in" with a bet that says the second Google releases the source to VP8, every company with patents on video compression will begin examining VP8 source code for patents. They have their legal teams and engineers ramped up to start digging ASAP and I do believe that's what Steve Jobs means.
... Apple makes Microsoft look like saints.
It won't be chosen by the likes of Apple or Microsoft. I won't be chosen by potential lawsuits (at least not to a significant extent.)
Nope. There's one industry that will dictate the next standard. That industry is porn.
The porn industry had effectively chosen Blu-Ray as the de facto new standard for high def video: http://www.pcworld.com/article/125618/porn_industry_may_be_decider_in_bluray_hddvd_battle.html
The porn industry chooses its standards. Everyone else follows.
I don't think it's Apple who's assembling this set of patents. The lawsuit WILL happen sooner or later, inevitably. If Apple started distributing Theora, this lawsuit would happen within a month, even though they're in MPEG LA. Who knows what their contract with MPEG LA says, too. They might lose the right to distribute h264 as a consequence.
I understand SJ on this one, even if I think his "thoughts on flash" are utter and complete bullshit for the most part.
Bubbe, I probably know a lot you don't.
Like a city whose walls are broken down is a man who lacks self-control.
I don't know... but do I know that he's turning into a power hungry dirtbag who's getting more evil every time I turn around and that Apple is getting more predatory and monopolistic.
You ain't using it like I thought!!
Not yours,
Dead guy
This makes no sense to me. Lets run with your thought experiment for a moment. Google release a blinding implementation of VP8 support in Chrome next week, then FF and Opera pick it up and release browser updates the week after. Somehow, content providers decide this is a great idea and they all jump on the VP8 band wagon. How does this hurt Apple? What's to stop Apple from adding it to OS X and the iPhone OS along side H.264 and supporting both. How does this give google some kind of competitive edge over Apple that would make Apple "terrified"? They both have full access to H.264 and related tools today, so nothing would change with adoption of VP8: the status quo is maintained. You're just trying to blind people with FUD.
This isn't about Xiph ... this is about Google.
Apple is in a very similar position as Microsoft was a while ago, and they are using the EXACT same playbook ... FUD.
Planned lawsuit or no planned lawsuit did anyone expect "Steve" (probably someone he pays to respond to his e-mail) to respond differently? Even if they aren't planning on a lawsuit there's nothing like the threat of one to make us geeks go "OMG". This is nothing more than the typical Apple/Microsoft/SCO/InsertBiasedCompanyHere FUD.
i want to kick the first person that says apple is still not evil in the face. and not in a glamorous, bruce lee fashion. i mean good old fashioned dumb and dumber flat kick.
Read radical news here
as of late?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Wait for the dust to clear from the forthcoming Bilski ruling. Then you'll see sparks flying.
The porn industry chooses its standards. Everyone else follows.
It's interesting how often this myth gets repeated. If anything, the porn industry went with HD DVD in the high definition disc format wars. And we all know how well that worked out:
http://arstechnica.com/old/content/2007/01/8602.ars
I know it sucks by modern standards, but the claim that "all video codecs are covered by patents" is a bold one to make - surely MPEG 1 is either at or close to the end of its patent life (at least in the US)?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-1
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
Wow... so now lairs are lauded with adjectives like "classy" and "impressive"!
Does anybody still remember the days before Apple turned into a patent troll?
Did someone destroy Basil Hallward's painting of him?
Well that might have been the case with betamax over video2000, but Sony chose blue-ray... When they brought out the PS3. And that's why blue-ray is the format these days. And no, there was no porn on it... Then again, I only know people with a ps3 that actually use blue-ray. Dvd is fine. Back in the old days, there was no internet where you could get your porn. Big difference there.
Don't you JUST LOVE IT when some rich jerk tells the world something is wrong with the guys next to them while they have such problems?
Ah, that is very plausible.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
Open source codecs hurt the Apple MPEG LA connection. ;)
Everybody loves the manual prices, codec prices, lock in cash flow feel and Theora "like" lock out.
Apple, Real, MS ect all seem to want a codec to lock in developers and milk them at some workflow level eg. color correction, production software ect.
The idea that some free blog could set you up with a "good enough" Linux/Mac/Win guide to shoot 720/1080 HD media, edit, encode it and give/broadcast/sell to the world is just wrong to Apple, MS ect.
You should be buying Apple or MS low end software, learning via student discounts and then walking in and buying $1000 to 10000+ worth of software to start and then think about itunes ect to sell your art.
Theora is the main threat to this. People have the creativity, low end HD cams, friends, a codec and the web.
Nothing is stopping them from bypassing Apple, Hollywood, MS ect. and going to the consumer except a good free codec for real world web "sharing".
You still need a CC system for payments
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
I don't think Apple is somehow directly planning to sue Xiph or other open source codecs personally.
Especially not since Apple doesn't really hold many patents on video encoding in the first place.
He did not say that "we" or "Apple" are doing anything, you know. He's talking about someone else.
Hmm, I was under the impression that the porn industry was more pro HD-DVD since that format allowed for DRM free content (i.e. they didn't have to pay for royalties and AACS key for every porn title).
Apple doesn't have anything in particular to gain from pushing h.264 on others. They don't own it, and they own a single patent out of hundreds and hundreds in the patent pool. They are only interested in using it for themselves.
Anyone can use, work on and distribute theora. As long as enough people care to keep it going, a little lawsuit shouldn't be much of a problem.
So far as I can tell, the porn industry, as a whole, never went for either of them. Yes, some producers came down on one side or the other, but the industry is massive, and only a small portion ever bothered to look at either format.
Porn went with online high definition video. Holy crap, Lucid's Firefox doesn't have the word "online" in its dictionary. Not sure that beats its annoying habit of moving the page every other time you try to click on a link, but, anyway...
Uh, yeah, OK, anyway porn went with online video. I suspect, like the rest of us, they don't think plastic discs are the future of video.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I believe this was also true in the 3D specification argument, and in pushing DVD originally.
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
I got a blu-ray drive included in my cheap Sony laptop... so to be fair, the PS3 isn't the ONLY Sony product pushing blu-ray adoption.
I've often made the argument that Apple is far more evil than Microsoft in terms of pursuing vendor lock-in and coercively leveraging one product in order to drive sales of others to the detriment of real competition; the only thing that held Apple back was that it blew the marketing battle against Wintel a long time ago. Now that their fortunes are on the rise again, we can reasonably expect to see Apple flex its muscles in ways that are just as insidious as Microsoft during its rise to dominance. This being one of those occasions, I'll say it again: Apple was innocuous for so long because they simply didn't have the market share to abuse their customers (much).
Now, for the other half of this endless loop, I'll yield the floor and let the usual crowd of Mac fanboys explain to us how Apple's predatory stance towards Open Source is really insanely great. (And really, this should be a great occasion for nostalgia, since the release of the iPad gives Apple fans the first chance they've had in several years to argue that preemptive multitasking -- or, in this case, any multitasking -- is actually a good thing.)
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Assume this is genuine.
1) This isn't a threat, but as an assessment of what's happening or will be happening soon.
2) Jobs's probably right, Monty's defensiveness notwithstanding.
This isn't evil, kids. This is honest. Theora isn't gonna take over the web, and it never was, and if it started too, there'd be a lawsuit fest that would stop that dead in its tracks.
And VP8 isn't going to be any better. That too, doubtlessly, infringes on MPEG-LA patents, and Google's a business like any other. They're not going to indemnify everyone against lawsuits just to provide the world with an unlicensed video codec. You're naive if you think they are.
You dumbshits are whining about threats that Jobs isn't making, over something that's a pipe dream. Geez.
Always, but usually also followed by lawyer or politician
Why bother
Dealing with your competitor's FUD is the cost of doing business if you can't take the heat get out of the arena. Quit whining and re-implement without infringing patents.
Why bother
Nope. Porn went for VHS: it was more prosaic economics that did it for Betamax. Porn hasn't created the One Streaming Format yet, either. The porn industry went for HD-DVD over Bluray, an expensive mistake. The one thing they've done right is accepting and working with piracy to increase the size of the market.
[FUCK BETA]
Whoa dude where did you get those cool rose colored glasses.
Why bother
They need to move fast, clean VP8 up and push it into Chrome, Android and youtube
And then Android battery life starts horribly suffering due to lack of hardware support. Sounds like a winning idea!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Here's the perspective of Greg Maxwell from Xiph on Steve Jobs' claims:
http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/theora/2010-April/003769.html
I won't be chosen by potential lawsuits
You can only hope...
Why bother
No matter what is patented several things can occur and do in the arena of Patents:
1. All patents cease to have proprietary ownership 20 years after their filing date. Thus some will easily go out of date in the next 5-10 years.
2. Patents are ONLY valid in the countries that the patent is issued in. Thus if it is only a U.S. patent and you are producing software in Germany, the creator of the software may not be liable for infringement, but an actual U.S. user might be (Just what I want to have happen: being sued by my idol S. Jobs).
3. ANY patent may be challenged by showing prior art that is demonstrable from a date prior to the patent filing and paying a small nominal fee for reexamination. This is the "silent patent killer" that every patent holder fears. This can come from a published piece of information from ANYWHERE in the world. It can come from privately developed and non-public sources, too, if it can be substantiated, if I remember right (such as in an invenstion documentation book).
4. A successful patent challenge may cause only one or a few claims in an existing patent to be thrown out, though sometimes they all get tossed.
5. The whole arena is so fraught with uncertainty that any group putting together an "open source" software tool, had better be filing its own patents so they have bargaining chips when the legal eagles fly.
6. Any open source creator for something like a video codec better have one heck of a good patent attorney firm that can give real world advice on patents from day one. "Open Source" software can easily be an "Open invitation" to suits over patent infringement and it typically takes many millions to litigate a single patent. It is better to be able to cross license when the threats arise.
Porn went with online high definition video
While true, Porn didn't pick the technology standard there either. They were all about WMV until years after YouTube and other mainstream sites popularized Flash video.
The creepy sperm-smelly geek community really need to put this "porn set standards" thing to rest. It didn't happen with VHS either.
I use a macbook daily and even I can't stomach steve's never ending line of crap.
Apple is turning evil.. what is happening?
- Theora Lawsuit,
- Raise Ebook Prices,
- Shut down Laja,
- Battling Flash,
- Nailing the Engineer who dropped the iPhone,
Where is their PR department?
And that's why blue-ray is the format these days. And no, there was no porn on it...
Porn has been available on bluray since the first quarter of 2007, over 9 months before HD-DVD imploded in early 2008.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Ok I don't agree with that either please people be civil. Oh never mind it's an AC...
Why bother
Dissing someone else's product in a specific way without specific evidence is libelous, right? Or is this an anti-competition violation?
That's what I said, ps3 is from 2006. Japanese release.
hmmm ... personal email = an announcement?
You guys are making announcements all day long.
Now that Apple is the new Microsoft {big, evil, power-greedy, corporation}, this is an expected dick move.
I wonder what could even be the advantage here for Jobs? I mean what does he have to gain from this? Because even a control-freak has a inner purpose and logic that he bases his actions on, doesn’t he?
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Apple doesn't have anything in particular to gain from pushing h.264 on others. They don't own it, and they own a single patent out of hundreds and hundreds in the patent pool.
They don't need to own the patents to h.264. If they can create the perception that their products will remain on the market and supported (because they have or can get licenses to any component that is open to a patent suit) while the open source alternatives might expose their users to lawsuits, they can drive users away from those alternatives.
Target isn't just the end users of the products. It's also the content providers.
If you were putting out program material to sell to users for pennies or single-digit dollars or serve on the web for some monitization scheme that pays pennies per view, would you use a format that might open you to a patent lawsuit claim that might cost you hundreds of dollars per unit of "content" sold or served? Doesn't matter if the risk is real: It's enough to create the perception of risk, and that's what FUD does.
VHS beat Betamax, despite Betamax's higher technical quality, because most prerecorded movies were available on VHS and few on Beta. Now we have another format war...
Meanwhile, open source tools can form the basis for competitors to iTunes that would provide better customer service, content quality, etc. Why not spike them to keep the gravy train rolling?
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
He attacked the Church of Apple! Stone him. No, no, better yet. Let's throw him in the river. If he floats we'll burn him at the stake, but if he sinks than he's innocent (may Job rest his soul).
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
only slightly less than Microsoft...
Until people wake up and realize that ALL IP laws are BS, human civilization will continue to grind down into the mud until only the lawyers remain, scrabbling like nude female mud wrestlers (without the sexual attractiveness, if any - I've never like nude mud wrestling.)
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
Seriously, fuck Steve Jobs.
* Yes, it does seem likely that he knows something that "we" don't. For most of "us" this sort of thing is idle speculation and opinion. For him, its information that he uses to run one of the largest tech companies in the world. I'm going to guess that he wants that information to be as accurate and up-to-date as possible.
* For all the anger directed towards Steve (and Apple) for his "threat"... I'd ask the following questions:
1. For those who believe that Apple is the one preparing for a lawsuit: Is it possible that Apple is not the one starting a lawsuit? Rather, that SJ chose H.264 because he knew a lawsuit was coming and didn't want Apple to be caught in the middle?
2. For those who believe that this is classic FUD, is it possible that SJ was simply responding to the only question actually implied in the original email (why H.264 instead of Theora)? If he really believed that adopting Theora was legally unreasonable, how else would he answer the question?
3. Generally speaking - what would Apple have to gain by suing Theora? Do they stand to gain more money from mass adoption of H.264 than mass adoption of Theora? Do they stand to lose money from mass adoption of Theora over H.264? What if they just adopted both? Do they own patents in use by either codec?
Every since they were the "Jobs" Apple. Initially, Apple was the "Woz" Apple. Products centered around what he, as a geek, liked. Jobs just marketed them (and marketed them well I might add). However that lasted only until around the mid 80s. Then the "Jobs" Apple took over.
Well that Apple has always been about control, about lock in. They want to tell you what you are going to do on your computer. When you want more power, they want you to throw it away and buy a new one. They will tell you what technologies to use and when the decide one is obsolete (like ADB) they'll just drop it and leave you to struggle or purchase new equipment. It is their way or no way.
I don't see any change in Apple behavior now that they are popular again, they've nearly always acted this way. It is just more people are noticing, and people who aren't so accustomed to it. The hard core Mac heads are used to what Apple does, since that's how they've always done it. They either accept it, or rationalize it. The thing is, now we have people buying Apple gadgets because they are shiny and trendy. However they are not so used to this "We are going to tell you what it is," idea.
Personally, I say if you don't like it, don't shop Apple. You don't lack for choices in the tech market. If you disagree with their strategies, go elsewhere. I do not at all care for the way they do things, so I own no Apple products. This is no great loss to me, I'm not excluding myself from anything I want. I love my computer, I love my Blackberry, I've got the devices I want that do what I want. I can live with the fact that they aren't trendy.
Adolf is an incompetent near you. You learned a lot with him and you are better than Adolf.
From your references, the AVC/H.264 Patent List is a 49 page pdf file. Each page shows about 10 to 20 patent numbers, or around 700 by a quick calculation.
Interestingly, Apple has only one patent.
Unfortunately, just because something is open source, it doesn’t mean or guarantee that it doesn’t infringe on others patents.
It's amazing how some people can read that and think it says "I hate all open source and I'm trying to control your life."
I read that and I think it says "I wish it wasn't true, but the risk is too big for Apple to take."
Eben Moglen explained the software patent FUD best: the be very afraid tour.
This isn't about Xiph ... this is about Google.
Apple is in a very similar position as Microsoft was a while ago, and they are using the EXACT same playbook ... FUD.
Attacking Theora is an attack on Google how exactly?
There is one other threat to all of the closed/patented codecs that nobody's mentioned yet ...
Increasing bandwidth and computing power ...
10 years from now we won't need codecs. We'll be able to decompose images into photo-realistic vector graphics, send them over 1gb/s connections to the home, and recreate them in resolutions that make HD look like crap.
Heck, we had graphical bulletin boards that did almost the same thing in 640x480x256 back when modems were 1200 baud and 8mhz cpus. Jobs has to achieve lock-in this decade or it doesn't happen ever. And the iPad is not the device to do it. Hitching his hopes on an alliance with dead-tree media was a mistake.
Besides, Steve has said that, "we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open." There's no way that Steve would go against his word!
(Yes, this is sarcasm.)
I can't wait for Google to squash him like the little Apple worm he is.
Open = good. Apple = closed = bad.
Free = good. Apple = expensive = bad.
Developer Friendly = good. Apple = Developer Antagonistic = bad.
Fair = good. Apple = selfish, evil = bad.
Axiom Apple = bad.
Only if they're photos of solid-color polygons and circles.
Facts and reality need not apply.
We're talking about Steve Jobs, he of the Reality Distortion Field(tm). It goes without saying that facts and reality need not apply.
Anybody want my mod points?
Had anybody noticed before that FUD is a brand of processed meat, akin to SPAM? (like ham, beacon and sausages)
http://www.sigma-alimentos.com/eng/marcas.php?bnr=carnes
who gives a fuck....
The porn industry chooses its standards. Everyone else follows.
Yeah? Then how do you explain that box out in my garage filled with porn on Betamax tapes?
This ain't rocket surgery.
Yeah, but your cheap laptop wasn't nearly as popular as the over-priced PS3, which wasn't nearly as popular as it would have been without blue-ray to jack the price up so high.
Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
One thing I've noticed of late is Apple and Microsoft appear to be in bed together these days. This supports that. I believe there are direct ties to MPEG-LA for both Microsoft and Apple. They stand to gain from H.264 being THE web standard and as Microsoft did early on and Apple is attempting to do now, snuff out the competition.
...then any remaining arguments against Apple being pure evil (right up there with Microsoft) have just evaporated.
This has been known for quite some time, but the reality distortion field appears to have prevented some people (not just the raving fanboys) from seeing it.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Oh wow they have some open source stuff, just like Microsoft, they're totally absolved of all those entirely unrelated things I talked about in my post, oh how wrong I was about them, they're total saints because the core of their OSes and some other doodads are open source.
If robots running OSS destroy humanity I will rejoice, for our death would be righteous.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
He should have said:
But I guess Steve doesn't see the writing on the wall for software patents. There are only so many lawyers in the world (too many, really) and there aren't nearly enough for this bullshit.
agreed. FUCK APPLE
Not even apple thinks xserves are worth a shit
I freaking knew it
REM Old programmers don't die. They just GOSUB without RETURN.
All video codecs are covered by patents. A patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other “open source” codecs now
(emphasis mine)
Google recently acquired On2 and plans to Open Source the VP8 codec.
"..."
This is the last straw. If this happens, I will no longer support customers who rely on Apple products.
FUCK THOSE NAZIS!!!
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
Silly troll, ad-hominems are for 4chan!
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I've been saying this for a couple of years now. When even your cell phone has 1024 cores and memory chips are measured in petabytes, nobody is going to give a rat's ass about video codecs. Treat the data streaming off the video sensor with some RLE and anything else laying around that's patent-free or patent-expired, then shove it into a nearly infinite storage medium. The MPEG patent holders can while away their time sucking each other off and dreaming of the golden era when they could afford expensive hookers and BMWs.
You can call H.264 "proprietary" but it is not.
The Ogg vs MPEG-4 debate happened in the 1990's. Having it now is like complaining about DVD Players in 2005.
There's no reason why shading can't be added. Or do you think that we must not extend any technology? Think, for example, of a square. 4 points. Now pick a 2-color blend. Your total data size is only 2 points for the bounding box (total of 8 bytes), 2 rgba 32-bit colours (total of 8 bytes), the start and end-point for the line to paint the shading (to give the direction - 4 bytes), and, say, a 4-byte opcode. Total, no matter how big the box, is 24 bytes.
There's no reason we can't extend the technique to libraries that cover all sorts of irregular shapes, as well as for laying down rules for deforming/transforming base shapes. It's easier to say "use this eye and apply these transforms" than it is to describe a new eye from scratch - and it's how we actually perceive things, so to both the eye and the mind the perceived quality will be better than it actually is.
We don't know for sure, but H.264 is in such wide use that any patent holder would either have asserted its patents or risk having its claims estopped by laches. (Laches is legalese for "you snooze, you lose.") Theora doesn't have this advantage.
Google images for "apple" and the number one hit is not from mother nature - it is a bite from the forbidden fruit confirming that mankind has left the maker to reinvent himself in his own image. I wonder why the rainbow got left behind and is just white now..
While I don't disagree with you, I'm curious what exactly you're basing this on. Is there some case of where a non-open source company went after some open source software via patents and lost?
I agree 100%. Those days are coming fast, thanks to the reduced energy requirements of adding more cores compared to more complex cores. Video is one of those things that is comparatively easily parallelized. And bandwidth is getting better and better, cheaper and cheaper. 1 ghz to the curb is a reasonable goal for 2020. And considering that the average home probably has over a terabyte of storage right now, a petabyte by 2020 is probably a very conservative estimate.
My bet is - not from the same Apple shop you are buying your yellow ones.
In the good old days of film, there was no "open source" and the entire ecosystem was patent encumbered. That did not prevent the development of independent film.
The patent regime behind the tools has nothing to do with the freedom of authorship using those tools. What patents covered the technologies used to make "Casablanca" or "Reservoir Dogs?" Does anyone care? No.
To content creators, patents show up as costs when they buy their tools. Even taking those into account, it's still cheaper and easier today to shoot, produce, and distribute films than ever before.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
There are no patents for mpeg-1 video or audio.
You are worse than a patent troll. PTs at lesat have something to troll. You, you cast your ignorance and waste everybody's time. You are a worthless sack of shit! Just sayin'.
I usually never post on here, though from time to time I do browse the site. However, some of the commenters seem to be mistakened. All video codecs are not protected by patents, as far I a know. All video codecs worth using, however, are patented. At this time we do NOT know if Theora does indeed include patented technology. The legal department here is currently looking into it. I also stand by my word and for as long as control of the company remains in capable hands, there shall be no Flash support on our mobile devices.
Sent from my Mac Pro.
The summary nicely illustrates what I have been saying for a while, and that is that the big players in the multimedia game just don't want Theora to succeed. Widespread support for H.264 but not Theora could have been for any number of reasons, but a patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other "open source" codecs now sends a pretty clear message that "we don't want you here".
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
H.261 is clear, MPEG-1 is still encumbered until ~mid 2014 due to submarine patents that didn't surface until the end of 1995.
Regardless- the primary argument against using theora has been that it is inefficient compared to the best (h.264)... yet theora is something like 10x better than MPEG-1... so thats the kind of suggestion that mpegla would make. "Here, use this known useless thing if you want free!"
John Gruber disapproves your comment. Oh well, he doesn't let *any* comments anyway!
Uhm... Why?
I can see how Microsoft would want to force everyone to use WMV, so they can make money and do DRM and all that good stuff. Apple has already given up Quicktime as a format some time ago for most purposes, and they use H.264 too for most everything. Google's been using it here and there. It's a decent standard, and has open source reference implementations. Yeah it has patents and licensing fees, but that's not the most evil thing in the world, particularly because the fees are charged by a committee, not one single company - and the license is available on RAND terms.
Now let's say VP8 succeeds beyond our wildest imaginations, and that google isn't evil. They open source it and let everyone use it for free, and promote it as a standard, etc. How much would change? Not much. Ok, maybe it wouldn't have patents, but H.264 having patents doesn't in itself cause anyone problems. Ok, maybe they would license it for free - but most people who pay for H.264 now can more than afford to, so that's not a huge factor either. There is no reason for Microsoft or Apple to be "terrified" of VP8, even if it is the "best" codec, and wins, because Google will likely open it up for everyone to use at least as much as H.264 is.
He's producing FUD while possibly trying to launch an abusive lawsuit based on software patents...
The impression I got from Jobs' message was not at all that Apple intends to sue anyone over Theora. Rather, he seems to be justly concerned about litigation from patent trolls/corporate enemies in case they were to adopt it. c.f. Alcatel-Lucent v. Microsoft, a legal battle over MP3 that Microsoft has been fighting for the last seven years. Microsoft at one point lost the case and was ordered to fork over $1.5 billion (which was later overturned, but the case is still in limbo, as far as i can tell).
Microsoft more than likely violated the MP3 patents unintentionally, and look at where it got them. If it truly is the case that Jobs is fully aware that Theora is a legal trap, it would be beyond irresponsible for him to step into it.
Microsoft was the "modern, young, alternative" to IBM. Then Apple, then Next, Google, and so many others. It's pointless - companies are run for profit, and letting opportunities for profit pass is not what they do. Morality or legality of actions is an issue, but the profit is quite the issue. The alternative would be for us to give our money to open source programmers, but we keep shooting our feet and not doing that.
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
I can't believe what I'm reading here today. The video codec "war" is over; Google doesn't really even have a horse in the race. Apple devices support H.264 and Microsoft is putting it into the next IE version. Between Apple and Microsoft that covers an overwhelming majority of the video players and that's what any sensible web site will be using to encode their video files.
VP8 may be very cool and Theora is nice, too. But see the above and realize that even if all of the "me too" web browsers use open source codecs exclusively they'll insure that they'll remain a "me too" browser. I'm sure that the Firefox users here (like me) have noticed the (still) large number of web sites that are reduced in function or unusable to that browser. If those sites can't even be troubled to write HTML that works on all browsers, what makes anyone think they'll maintain multiple copies (encoded in multiple formats) of each video file so that when some uncommon / open source web browser comes along it'll be able to view the videos? Even mighty Google isn't in a position where they can force a video codec on us.
If open source zealots want to engage in battles like this, they need to pick their battles better. And those intellectually dishonest postings trying to blame Apple for the way things are don't serve anyone. Put some of that time and effort into making a difference instead, OK?
Here's something to think about: is it possible to write a codec that plays H.264 files without infringing any patents? Don't assume it's impossible - it could very well be possible and that could lead to an open source codec that is compatible with what the big boys use. That's a worthy goal; who's going to give it a try?
Now that Apple is spreading FUD against open source projects their transformation into the next Microsoft seems to be almost complete.
"When in doubt, use brute force." Ken Thompson
Stop feeding this troll already. By buying Apple products you essentially finance a war against your freedom.
If we look how patent pools have been used recently, we can conclude that they are used in the "pay or we sue" way often without disclosure of the patent. A lawsuit is costly and bad for PR so companies are just paying instead of fighting the patent troll. If Jobs can use h264 instead of Theora without the risk of being sued he will choose the safe choice.
This is truly insightful. I dont often mod ACs up, but I would mod this one up if I had em. Just quoting it because a lot of people dont even see AC posts, and this one deserves to be read.
If you have mod points, please use them on the parent, not me.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
/.
Not even apple thinks xserves are worth a shit
I freaking knew it
Right, because the Xserve with its maximum of 8 cores and 48 GB is clearly targeted at exactly the same class of installations as, say, the 24-core/256GB Intel-based SunFire X4450 or the 64-core/1TB SPARC Enterprise M8000. This complaint could just as well have been "Not even apple thinks ipads are worth a shit," since they've chosen not to use that either.
troll.
And for the same reasons, Theora is fine too. What? It only works one way???
When you buy Windows?
you had me at #!
And I wonder what you mean by that? The apps some users might experience as 'free' is a source of income for Google. You know, they use some of your privacy to sell this thing called adverts, which I don't see the likes of xiph.org do.
The more you know, the less you need. [Admin added: from me.]
So you'll indemnify us over patent suits? Cool.
The only difference between Apple and Microsoft's business methods was that Microsoft happened to piggyback on a much bigger, more rapacious partner until they could put them in their place (IBM).
Both companies and their practices (as well as their founders) are equally rapacious. It's just that it's REALLY hard to be a humongous asshat when you're only holding a fraction of a percent of the market. Now that Apple has near-control over several markets and the money is falling like rain from the sky, Stevie is feeling free to flap his gums and make noise about how you should "kneel before Jobs".
Unfortunately, people who tend to run their mouths aimlessly and aggressively tend to get smacked eventually.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Xserves are hardware, Sun Messaging Server is a piece of software written in C.
Steve Jobs and Apple were ALWAYS the same as Microsoft, just not as succesful. They are Musolini to Hitler (Godwin be damned). Both were vicious dictators who had people killed but Musolini just never got the same "success" in his nastyness as his ally. But only a fool would throw himself at the mercy of Musolini.
There are a lot of not so nice companies out there, typically the companies run by single individual for to long yet also a shareholder company. It is a mix of isolation and duty bound greed. Somebody like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Richard Branson will never ever have been told. "You are wrong". If you rise in power, you tend to get surrounded by yes-men, people who tell you what you want to hear and because most people find that pleasing, you promote them with you so as you rise you leave the nay-sayers behind you.
And since you have share-holders you always have to grow, always find yet one more cent of profit to squeeze out of the company to please your share-holders. Who will then tell you "yes".
The idea that Steve "Disney" Jobs is somehow a savior battling Bill Gates is silly to the extreme. Human beings love to think in heroes vs baddies, and because real heroes are difficult to follow (Stallman) we tend to latch on the first baddie who isn't kicking puppies, at this very moment at least.
The move against Flash had nothing to do with Open vs Closed, but with dependency. Adobe has for years (and still) been extremely bad with support for non-windows platforms, Flash on Mac sucks. Flash on AMD64 linux is absent. BSD? That has hurt Apple, they had a hard time selling their Mac's for years for the lack of flash. Now there product happens to be popular enough they don't need flash, so why should they not use the opportunity to control the supply chain of their products? Remember, Vista failed partially because of the lack of 3rd party drivers. You NEVER want YOUR product to fail because a 3rd party doesn't supply for it. Electric cars face the same dillema, you can design all kinds of wonderful alternative fuel systems, but if their are no refueling stations out there, you are screwed. That is why car-makers are now developing re-fueling stations themselves, even starting to operate them, to break the dependency on 3rd parties (petrol companies).
But to get back to Apple. If Apple had been as succesful as MS, then we would have had no cheap Compaq clones making home computing affordable. Either we would still have the home computers (Amiga, Commodre, Sinclair) or computing would start with a Mac Pro. There would be far less opensource available (Stallman started his work on Unixes, machines that make even Apples seem cheap) (Oh and please note that this is not saying Apples are TO expensive, but that Apple does not sell cheapo computers) because there would be fewer people with a computer at home to mess around on.
DRM might be stronger, or absent. With fewer computers around and those who have one being richer, there would be less reason and less to file share.
But a dominant Apple would NOT be a beacon of light and reason and freedom. It would be just another MS, but controlling both hardware and the software.
Is this particular story genuine? It seems odd. Not because I think Steve Jobs is a nice guy but precisly because I don't think he is a nice guy. But he isn't a psycho. What is there in it for him to be AGAINST Theora? Nothing.
So unless he has gone mental, I doubt he is going to be involved in an attack on an open codec. There simply is nothing to gain and a to lose. He might not want openess but he certainly doesn't want to be perceived as being against it and Theora doesn't really threathen him. If it becomes the dominant video codec, then so what? No big loss.
The only thing I could imagine if Apples .mov format and quicktime player were not just accidents but willfull attempts to create a video codec that is annoying as hell to deal with. Could be the reason why it is so hard to get just the codec, without a
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
As a Theora developer, this is news to me. Would you mind mentioning who this buddy is so I can go back through my mail queue and verify that you're just making shit up?
I know you're lying, as regardless of what our response would have been it most certainly would _not_ have been, "ssshhh don't tell anyone".
That's exactly how I feel. It's like being humiliated day after day until you reach a point where can't take it anymore.
Why do you keep mentioning electroconvulsive therapy (etc) although at the end of a list including apple, hollywood and MS etc. perhaps it was intentional.
Many tried closed codecs :)
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
fuck steve jobs
The Apple fanboys just wet themselves with excitement
Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
I highly doubt that. If there's one thing I'm certain of, it's that human desire will always exceed our resources. Give us faster connections and bigger hard drives, we're going to be looking at true 3D 100 gigapixel video with lossless audio in surround sound.
There's always going to be a need for compression, as long as we're pushing the limits of technology.
We'll probably still be using it for efficiency as well - after all, we could be using wav and raw right now, but we still have mp3/flac and jpg/png.
Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
If they can create the perception that their products will remain on the market and supported (because they have or can get licenses to any component that is open to a patent suit) while the open source alternatives might expose their users to lawsuits, they can drive users away from those alternatives.
Apple's products are hardware. There aren't any "open-source alternatives" to those, so this argument makes little sense.
Actually, the email *was* sent from an ipad. RTFS.
on how well the video decode acceleration hardware in, say,
a TI DaVinci chip would support Theora (as opposed to
H264). That's tough to find out because TI keeps the details
under NDA.
I just glanced at every comment on here. Slashdot, you cannot read: after twelve years of readership I am leaving this site now.
It is so clearly, blindingly obvious from Jobs' letter that Apple was NOT one of the pool "being assembled." It is also blindingly obvious that as a service he just told the guy the same thing his lawyers told him. He happens to know of this developing action by others making a pool, and that, legally they are a problem for Apple. I can't believe no one here has an reading comprehension whatsoever.
Dup post! You've already posted this a mere 428 days ago!
It ended with a really really slow adaption rate of BR...
Porn BR is not selling and porn houses are doing things over multiple DVDs instead.
What more is there to say?
Macbooks and iPads may be pretty sweet, but creative individuals don't really like to give their business to jackbooted thugs.
Thanks for the laughs. If the creative individuals aren't prevented from being creative, they (for the most part) don't really care -- just like anyone else.
Two possible ways.
Google ships Chrome with Theora support, increasing the market share of browsers playing Theora and the likelihood of webpages that won't "just work" on Apple devices. Google is the easiest target as they can ship H.264 where Mozilla and Opera would fight harder. Pretty far fetched.
More likely it's actually a message to Google about VP8 piggybacking on Theora. It goes out of its way to mention "all video codecs" and specifically "open source" ones after all.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
Let me tell you a story.
There was a company called Microsoft that among other things developed their own video and audio codecs. The codecs were proprietary to the company and the specs weren't available to the general public. One day Microsoft decided that they wanted to expand their influence on the video market. They would take their newest video encoding technology, picked a subset they considered usefull and submit it to the SMPTE for standardization (VC-1). They would give that codec away for free, no licensing fees at all, so that it would be widely used.
Since Microsoft had been working on the format for a long time the quality of their implementation would be better than others. It was also already integrated in their software giving them further advantages. The public would also benefit from that move. There'd be a video codec almost as advanced as H.264 while being a little less CPU intensive that everyone could freely use.
Unfortunately the plan didn't com to fruition. Shortly after the standardization process it turned out that VC-1 violated patents of 17 other companies. Today you can acquire a license for VC-1 from the MPEG-LA under pretty much the same terms that you can get H.264 for, with H.264 gaining more traction in the industry than the former.
tl;dr
Google may open source VP8, but that doesn't mean we can use it for free. I certainly hope we can, if only because then we can finally toss that outdated, mismanaged piece of garbage that is Theora into the trash where it belongs.
MPEG-LA is not Apple. If lawsuits are going to happen and plans are being made what Jobs has done is leak inside knowledge as to what MPEG-LA is planning or wanting to do. Apple does not own MPEG-LA or control their actions.
What is unusual about MPEG-LA is that it is a 3rd party group that members belong to or pay fees to; while most stuff in the past was more of a mutually assured destruction pact between corps who owned each other's ideas - which allowed them to shut out bit players - but somehow doesn't seem as "evil" as creating an industry holding group - is this the future of widely held "I.P." - outsourced Patent trolling law firms that "represent" everybody?
Sounds like the mob... but all lawyers. You don't belong to the MPEG "union"? How you going to protect yourself? (from us...)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
I would side with people if they not INCORRECT. Apple or Jobs has little say in MPEG-LA or the broken patent system. If anything this is Jobs leaking out some rumors he is privy to - and if it was his own employee mistakenly leaking this rumor (and unplanned) that employee would be GONE.
MPEG-LA won't punish Apple for this like Apple does to their partners who leak information - but if the tables were turned...
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
We can put linux in a watch - but for most, a laptop is "good enough."
Same thing with TVs - the 27" color TV was the staple for a whole generation - and it went from almost the price of a new car to $200 during that time (and there are still all those people who haven't moved on to hi-def tv).
Yes, doubling the screen size was nice, but I'm not trading in my 50" for a 100" any time soon - where would I put it? That's becoming a problem. Same as you can only cram so many screens (or a screen of a certain size) on your desk. Do you really want to have to stand while working on your computer, like those faked interactive screens on the TV crime shows?
The MPEG-LA has insinuated for some time that it is impossible to build any video codec without infringing on at least some of their patents.
Then I guess it's time for some anti-trust litigation ...
If Theora is violating Apples patents, they should sue Theora. I for one, enjoy using my iPad, and don't want to see competing standards destroy my ability to use and purchase future Apple products. If Steve says Theora should be sued, then he is right. I agree with him protecting us, the Apple users.
And here comes Apple apologists. You know what, fuck you, fuck steve jobs and fuck my karma.
Ouch; I think you've upset His Holiness with your wanton rant. No iPod for you this holiday season!
Typical: Apple developed none of the basic coding technology in h.264 but they are getting litigious over patents.
All video codecs are covered by patents. A patent pool is being assembled to go after Theora and other “open source” codecs now
(emphasis mine)
Emphasis mine.
In other words, the amount of reading between the lines and such required to reach your interpretation is rather excessive.
For example, what difference does it make that VP8 is going to be Open Source? And how does VP8 threaten Apple in the first place? If it becomes popular, and if it's superior to H.264, Apple will license it (and if it's fully Open Source in the way people are thinking, Apple won't even *have* to license it).
Apple's objections to Theora aren't strictly financial (outside of the uncertainty of the codec's legal status), they're practical. In terms of quality, level of adoption and hardware support (specifically as it affects battery and heat), Theora is vastly inferior to H.264. The only real advantage of Theora is that it's (presently) free and open.
In other words, the amount of reading between the lines and such required to reach your interpretation is rather excessive.
Things read the same with and without emphasis.
For example, what difference does it make that VP8 is going to be Open Source? And how does VP8 threaten Apple in the first place? If it becomes popular, and if it's superior to H.264, Apple will license it (and if it's fully Open Source in the way people are thinking, Apple won't even *have* to license it).
Who said anything about Apple being threatened? It's the MPEG-LA and their revenue stream that is being threatened; and probably them who are assembling the patent pool. Or are trying to see which of the patents apply to VP8 and Theora
Oh, btw Apple is a part of MPEG-LA as a licensor of patents(they hold one patent) so I guess part of their revenue is threatened too.
It does not take any stretch of imagination at all to see why MPEG-LA would want to try and prevent any MPEG-LA-patent-free video codecs from being released for royalty-free use. The fight is not for a wide-spread free video codec right now. The fight is for 2016.
Apple's objections to Theora aren't strictly financial (outside of the uncertainty of the codec's legal status),
Financial objections? What, the price is too low?
they're practical. In terms of quality, level of adoption and hardware support (specifically as it affects battery and heat)
I wonder how valid that objection is... It turns out that most of the savings are done by using the generic DSP hardware available. So VP8 would also benefit in the same way.
Theora is vastly inferior to H.264.
"Vastly"? How can you just make a sweeping claim like that without anything to back it up? I would say MPEG-2 is vastly inferior to MPEG-4; but Theora is somewhere in the middle. On the other hand, VP8 is supposed to be better than h.264. But I won't pass that judgment until I can see for myself.
The only real advantage of Theora is that it's (presently) free and open.
And that isn't enough? Of course, we still have till 2016 to avert this disaster.
"..."
Looks to me, Steve Jobs just knows there are people looking into suing Theora. Not Steve Jobs (or Apple) is going to sue Theora.
Even if that's the case he made the announcement in the form of a FUD attack on Theora and the other open source CODECs.
Okay, stop right there - he made the "announcement" in the form of an email directly to the guy who wrote an "open" email to him, and who then published that answer without asking Jobs first because his email was open.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
Deeply nested replies on Slashdot look shite on my iPhone.
And ogg vorbis will never get mainstream acceptance. Never, never, never!!!
----
Sent from my iPhone
Financial objections? What, the price is too low?
You still have to pay people to implement Theora. You have to integrate it into players and browsers, if you offer Theora then you'll likely have to reencode,...
"Vastly"? How can you just make a sweeping claim like that without anything to back it up?
How about using google? There are countless comparisons pitting H.264 and Theora against each other. Basically Xiph says it's more or less on par and everyone else says it's vastly inferior. This comparison is pretty well done and easily reproducible: KeyJ comparison
There is some criticism. The Theora camp complains that the Theora 1.2 alpha version wasn't tested. The H.264 camp complains that insanely slow settings that more than doubled encoding time while giving less than 1% additional quality were used. If you go by metrics Theora needs about twice the bitrate of H.264 High Profile and around 25% more bitrate than H.264 Baseline Profile. If you take visual quality into account the situation looks worse for Theora.
I would say MPEG-2 is vastly inferior to MPEG-4; but Theora is somewhere in the middle.
Depends on the bitrate. For low bitrates Theora is about halfway between H.264 Baseline Profile and MPEG-2. As bitrates get higher MPEG-2 gains on Theora and they come out more or less the same. From the screenshots in the comparison I linked the 1000 kbps MPEG-2 screenshot looks better than the equivalent Theora screenshot. By they way if you read the comments in your bemasc.net link you'll see that there are also links to MPEG-2 beating Theora.
On the other hand, VP8 is supposed to be better than h.264.
This is purely marketing. No settings are given and only screenshots and a reencoded comparison video are available. Since VP8 has never been puplicly available there are no independent comparisons, so we'll have to wait for that until we can really determine how good it is.
From what I've seen VP8 should still be pretty good. It is basically VP7 adaped to be more easily implemented in hardware. I'd guess you could get better quality than H.264 Baseline Profile out of it. It can probably be improved in the future by optimizing the encoders. On2 own codec implementations are notorious smoothing the image too much during encoding thus killing details, a problem the Theora developers have addressed somwhat in their current work.
But I won't pass that judgment until I can see for myself.
You can easily test it yourself. Theora and x264 binaries are easy to find if you just google them.
And that isn't enough? [bemasc.net] Of course, we still have till 2016 to avert this disaster.
This would be the same disaster that only last year people said was inevitable in 2011. Given the MPEG-LAs history it's more likely that nothing will change in 2016.
You shoudn't be too surprised that people won't just switch over to Theora on a whim. If you take Youtube for instance they don't pay a cent for H.264 use so cost isn't a factor. (Although Google pays H.264 licensing fees for the decoder they ship with Chrome.) Switching to Theora would mean loss of wide compatibility, loss of quality or increase of filesizes, switching from a highly optimized and configurable (for speed or quality; speed in the case of Youtube) H.264 encoder, x264, to a slow, slighly buggy Theora encoder while gaining no business advantages.
What you're describing is an advanced codec. It's different from conventional methods of today, but it's not some transcodec thing.
You can easily test it yourself. Theora and x264 binaries are easy to find if you just google them.
I was talking about VP8 vs H.264. The technical limitations of Theora are moot if VP8 is released and turns out to be better than (or equivalent to) h.264. Also, you misrepresented my position and ignored 2/3rds of my post. In total you did a classical strawman attack on my reply.
To be honest, I hate Theora because it is a shitty video codec (in comparison to h.264). My entire post was about making it better or finding a replacement + making it wide-spread before 2016
This would be the same disaster that only last year people said was inevitable in 2011. Given the MPEG-LAs history it's more likely that nothing will change in 2016.
Don't forget that the last h.264 codec expires in 2028, and there will probably be MPEG-5 and MPEG-6 to counter too. I don't know about you, but I'm not comfortable being held hostage by a consortium of corporations.
I think this is the best time for Google/Mozilla/Opera/etc to fund work on VP8 or Theora-based video codecs (which don't infringe on MPEG-LA's patents) so we can be rid of all this software-patent-sponsored monopoly nonsense.
"..."
fuck apple.
simple as that
Damn this site looks like shit on my iPhone. But you wouldn't care about that since I use a closed product like an iPhone. But you might consider who your users are.
Best regards prince iPhone ;P
With the SCO mess and Groklaw I remember reading that it is actionable libel to claim bad IP in the form of FUD. There may be better references but here is one:
http://blog.ebusinesslawgroup.com/labels/Libel.html
But the Lanham Act provides a remedy for something called "trade libel". It says, in pertinent part, the following:
"Any person who...in connection with any goods or services...uses in commerce any...false or misleading description of fact, which...in commercial advertising or promotion, misrepresents the nature, characteristics, or qualities...of his or her or another person's goods, services or commercial activities...shall be liable in a civil action by any person who believes that he or she is likely to be damaged by such act."
Did you read that carefully?
Read it again.
What it essentially means that if someone in your company says something misleading or false about another company, you could be in BIG trouble.
If it really was Steve Jobs, I think Xiph and maybe others would have a claim. I'd support a lawsuit. The depositions could get very interesting.
At least it would stop the rumbling and FUD and make them put-up or shut-up.
I can't wait to see this shit posted again (and modded up) in a few months!
TO START
PRESS ANY KEY
Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...
Things read the same with and without emphasis.
Then why'd you add it? Because no where at all in the actual words did it mention Google. Not even indirectly.
Who said anything about Apple being threatened?
The person who I was replying to when you first replied to me.
Oh, btw Apple is a part of MPEG-LA as a licensor of patents (they hold one patent) so I guess part of their revenue is threatened too.
If you're going to complain about me putting words into your mouth, it belies your sincerity to then espouse the exact thing you just objected to.
It does not take any stretch of imagination at all to see why MPEG-LA would want to try and prevent any MPEG-LA-patent-free video codecs from being released for royalty-free use.
I never said otherwise. In fact, it was rather strongly implied that it's the MPEG-LA who is getting ready to sue (they are the most likely candidate).
While Apple is a member of the MPEG-LA, the MPEG-LA's interests are not necessarily Apple's interests. Whether the MPEG-LA makes profit or not isn't all that important to Apple. What is important to Apple is that they have access to a high-quality, industry standard codec.
"Vastly"? How can you just make a sweeping claim like that without anything to back it up?
Oh please complain about something I wrote, then immediately do exactly that yourself.
I would say MPEG-2 is vastly inferior to MPEG-4;
Thanks!
but Theora is somewhere in the middle.
In other words, it's inferior to H.264. By "vastly", I was referring to both breadth and depth. Quality and bitrate, hardware support and battery life, wide adoption, industry standard, openly licensed. The only thing Theora has in its favor is the codec is fully open source.
So, yeah, vastly inferior.
The only real advantage of Theora is that it's (presently) free and open.
And that isn't enough? Of course, we still have till 2016 to avert this disaster.
No, it's not enough. If you want me to support a "free" codec, make one better than H.264!
I don't want to watch video in shittier quality, I don't want to store my family videos in shittier quality, I don't want my portable devices to run hotter and have lower battery lives, just so that my codec is "free".
Why would I want any of that when I don't have to accept such crap? I don't give a shit that my computer costs $0.05 more (or whatever) for this. The whole point of buying computers is for what they can do. You pay for functionality. If I can have the option for the superior codec at an acceptable price, why should I settle for the inferior one?
The critical missing piece in your comment is, who is going to pay the lawyer? In SCO v. IBM, IBM was being attacked, not open source (directly), but IBM paid the lawyers even if they had input from the open source community. Is the OSS crowd going to financially support a legal team to protect Theora devs from MPEG-LA, Apple, etc., if they come calling?
It is not like this whole conversations was Steve's idea. FSF made a statement about something they were not really involved in so SJ responded about why they would not implement Theora. If you want to blame someone, look to the FSF.
Your link points to Sun Java System Message Server. Oddly enough, this is written in Java. It is an implementation of the JMS API that comes with J2EE. There is a C/C++ API for it, but it isn't a full features as the Java API is.
Dealing with your competitors FUD is the price of doing business
... but at what point is Theora trying to make money?
Some businesses/corporations are not-for-profit. For example the Xiph.org Foundation that owns Theora. Theora is doing business, and that business is to help support and develop FOSS. The GP is correct, FUD should be expected. FUD is not even specific to for-profit businesses, FOSS projects use FUD too.
--
Perpenso Calc for iPhone and iPod touch, scientific and bill/tip calculator, fractions, complex numbers, RPN
This is a really good example of why software patents are inherently a problem. Companies are working on this stuff, sometimes for years, without knowledge of what the other guy's doing. A few of the things they come up with are real "inventions" in the classic sense. Far more are pretty obvious things, just, there's this huge prize for being the first to fill out the patent paperwork.
And you need a bunch of lawyers and engineers to even figure out whether one patent reads on a specific thing, much less dozens. The problem is, patents are often very poorly written, by experts in patent law, so that they seem to cover little-to-nothing for the purpose of appeasing the patent examiner, then they cover pretty much everything, for the purpose of suing some other guy's ass off.
On2 released VP3 in 2000, with a set of patents behind it (for various optimizations.. none of these are actually necessary to implement VP3). This was one year after the first MPEG-4 Part 2 work was released, but of course, MPEG-4 Part 2 was based on H.263, which was finalized in 1995. The H.26L committee actually produced its first draft in 1999, though the final H.264 spec wasn't released until 2003. So there's a really good chance everything in VP3 pre-dates H.264, but there is some actual overlap. And of course, VP3 would have to be clear of any patents filed from H.263 or Part 2 work. And of course, On2's TrueMotion goes back to 1992, but it's questionable if anything from TrueMotion was actually used in VP3.
Just that can make your head explode... and it's why this is such an hard thing to know... is there any patent exposure in VP3? On2 and Google believe "no", but the ultimate test is market exposure. Of course, VP3 not so much, but VP6 certainly has had crazy levels of market exposure, between its use in Flash, JavaFX, and lots of Chinese projects. You'd think any exposure would be known, but did On2 have patents on this? Did they cross-license with the MPEG LA or other patent holders? That's the thing you have to know. VP8 may have similar issues, even if Google willing to open source the code and grant perpetual free patent licensing of some acceptable sort.
And to Theora as well. Theora is based on VP3, everyone believes that to be true. But is that all it is? I mean, libtheora came out in 2004, and really hasn't seen much action until recently. They say the bitstream format was frozen, so maybe there's no change over VP3, just optimization... though even that can be patent-entangled, if not a mandatory part of the CODEC. Any improvements might turn out to be patent issues. Now, why would anyone bother going after Theora? Well, they might risk the appearance of patent abandonment if they had patents on Theora and didn't go after it. Of course, they could grant coverage to the project, but that might cause licensing issues. And it's pretty clear, there are companies out there that don't want options. In fact, the only people who want options seem to the be the users... and maybe Google. Everyone else is adopting the "one video only" position. Which is just going to keep HTML5 from taking over from Flash in the first place.
And it's not just the video CODECs.. some of the audio formats are in these patents, and the streaming containers (MPEG-TS, MPEG-4, etc). Obviously the Theora people use Ogg, but Ogg is totally brain damaged, never intended for anything but audio, and it wasn't very good at that. The obvious way forward is Matroska, but there, again... more patent issues may apply.
-Dave Haynie
Apple's products are hardware. There aren't any "open-source alternatives" to those, so this argument makes little sense.
But Apple's products are distinguished from other similar products by two things: Appearance and software.
For instance: The iPad is Apple's all-or-nothing bet to stay viable thorugh the next decade. But it's just a general purpose portable computer (with a typical compliment of storage and peripherals for a portable) in a big touch tablet, with Apple's software and service infrastructure behind it. Other vendors produce such devices (and the more successful iPad is the more will appear on the market). If they can run open source software that provides all the things Apple provides but for far less money and/or with significantly improved features and/or with additional functionality Apple doesn't supply and/or unlocked and controllable by the user, Apple loses market share. Each of those improvements, if large enough, will pull a segment of their customer base and combinations of them will pull additional segments.
Drive vendors away from using Open Source software on their tablet devices or providing content they can play in open formats via nebulous fear of patent suits and Apple protects a "purely hardware" product's market share.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Okay, stop right there - he made the "announcement" in the form of an email directly to the guy who wrote an "open" email to him, and who then published that answer without asking Jobs first because his email was open.
And if Guinnes rated mastery of getting free PR via leaks, Apple would probably be the current top dog and certainly in the top handfull.
Why should PR by leak be limited to just product announcements? The principle applies in general and there are lots of other memes a company benefits by promulgating.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Apple Schmapple Did you read what he said?
Why bother
Other way around. Theora was apparently released in 2004. H.264 (according to Wikipedia), was formally approved in March 2003, but it had already been worked on since at least 2000.
My other first post is car post.
Along with On2, they'll have also acquired all the patents On2 owned. If it is so difficult to implement a modern codec without violating patents, what are the chances that h.264 violates patents Google now owns. If Google really wants to get a open source codec out and h.264 patents holders come after Google, things could get interesting.
Is it me or is Steve Jobs really positioning himself to be the next Bill Gates?