That is not a rescue. If you are using FFMPEG you can be sued for patent violations.
Bullshit. You can't get sued for USING ffmpeg. That's not how the law works. You can get sued for DISTRIBUTING it in the without a proper license in areas in which the software patents are in effect, but that's a completely different thing.
Yep, they were just posturing which is why if they were really going to do it they would have already done it by now. Google was just trying to use the whole WebM vs H.264 thing to push Google TV and all that but when that fell through it's amazing how we heard no more news about H.264 support being dropped.
I'm not so sure, Google has to pay a licensing fee for the codecs that handle the encoding and decoding process.
Yeah, at max they will pay a "whopping" $6.5 million a year which is less than a fraction of 1% of their yearly revenue. Secondly, mobile devices do not have hardware acceleration for WebM and there are no future models that list that as something to be included so are they going to force people to use a software decoder and draing their battery many times faster? Doubtful.
Also, didn't they dump the codec only to have MS provide a workaround on Windows computers?
No, they didn't dump it as I already said. Microsoft was goign to release an extension or something for Chrome if they had dropped it to provide H.264 support but I have no such thing installed. Just go to the HTML5 test and you can see that Chrome still lists H.264 support. Also go: here which is an HTML5 video in H.264 which plays just fine even in the most up-to-date dev version of Chrome.
H.264 requires people to pay a licensing fee to use.
Not true. For non-commercial streaming use it's royalty-free and if you ship an encoder and/or decoder you only pay royalties for any units over 100,000 that you ship. Outside of a Google it is pretty much free for anyone. And even for someone like Google the royalties cap out at like $6 million dollars a year which is a pittance to someone pulling in 10s of billions of dollars in revenue.
In what way is it a standard? Is it an ISO standard? Is it an ECMA standard? Is it a W3C standard? Right, it's not a standard of any standards body. Just because something is open source does not make it a "standard".
Even still they won't drop H.264 then unless they are planning to fuck over people using the youtube app that gets streamed H.264 video due to the hardware accelerated playback. And I wasn't talking about Youtube when I was playing the video, anyway. The whole H.264 thing with Google is mostly posturing anyway otherwise they would have dropped it in Chrome months ago.
No, last January they said they were planning to drop it. But, no, they haven't done so. I just tested it by playing an H.264 video in an HTML5 player.
And by "plenty" you mean pretty much the entirety of their revenue streams, right? The only things that Google or Facebook put out as FOSS are things they can't monetize. Now if Google were to open source its search engine or ad platform then you might have a point.
Oracle made their operations profitable within a year without any significant changes to their open source projects.
And by "significant changes" you mean dumping most of the loser projects and monetizing most of the open source projects with proprietary extensions?
IBM contributes heavily to open source, and in fact might be the biggest contributor to open source, and they are quite profitable.
Due to their proprietary hardware and software that they sell. Not due to open source. The open source part is just leveraged to sell more proprietary hardware and software.
Google contributes heavily to open source, and they are quite profitable.
Due to their proprietary search engine and ad networks. Not due to their open source projects.
Because the contractor billing rates published by GSA include not only salaries but also other costs including benefits contractors provide their employees,[66] POGO added OPM’s 36.25 percent benefit rate to federal employee salaries[67] and BLS’s 33.5 percent loading to private sector employee salaries to reflect the full fringe benefit package paid to full-time employees in service-providing organizations that employ 500 or more workers.[68] All supporting data for this study are found in Table 1 and Appendices B through D.[69]
Straight from the study where they outline their methodology. So even with a 36.25% benefit rate added to their salaries these contractors were still nearly 2 times more expensive.
Actually they factored in the extra 40% cost of benefits on top of the government employees salaries and the private contractors were still 1.5-2 times more expensive. The people doing this study weren't so dumb as to not factor that in:
Because the contractor billing rates published by GSA include not only salaries but also other costs including benefits contractors provide their employees,[66] POGO added OPM’s 36.25 percent benefit rate to federal employee salaries[67] and BLS’s 33.5 percent loading to private sector employee salaries to reflect the full fringe benefit package paid to full-time employees in service-providing organizations that employ 500 or more workers.[68] All supporting data for this study are found in Table 1 and Appendices B through D.[69]
No, actually they aren't. If you had bothered to read their methodology on their study you would know this:
Because the contractor billing rates published by GSA include not only salaries but also other costs including benefits contractors provide their employees,[66] POGO added OPM’s 36.25 percent benefit rate to federal employee salaries[67] and BLS’s 33.5 percent loading to private sector employee salaries to reflect the full fringe benefit package paid to full-time employees in service-providing organizations that employ 500 or more workers.[68] All supporting data for this study are found in Table 1 and Appendices B through D.[69]
Yes, you can't which is why they factored in benefits and everything else into the salaries they quote for government workers.
Because the contractor billing rates published by GSA include not only salaries but also other costs including benefits contractors provide their employees,[66] POGO added OPM’s 36.25 percent benefit rate to federal employee salaries[67] and BLS’s 33.5 percent loading to private sector employee salaries to reflect the full fringe benefit package paid to full-time employees in service-providing organizations that employ 500 or more workers.[68] All supporting data for this study are found in Table 1 and Appendices B through D.[69]
Did you even bother to read the summary? This a cap on using your phone as a wifi hot spot. They still have unlimited data plans and this doesn't change that.
And does your girlfriend have any actual data to back that up or is this like when nerds say "i don't know anyone who uses windows" to try to claim that linux was a success on the desktop?
In what way? By making less and less profits quarter over quarter as its only way to compete is by making their phones cheaper by continually decreasing the profit margins on their devices? Apple now gets 2/3rds of the global smartphone profits while HTC is now fighting amongst a half dozen other big companies for an ever shrinking pool of profits and is fighting a similar race to the bottom that has led to HP to ditch its PC division.
What position is that? A race to the bottom of thin margins with all the other Android companies who are continually getting less and less of the global smartphone profits whilst Apple continually gets more and more of the profits quarter over quarter? That's a pretty shitty position to be in. HTC probably wants to differentiate itself in a way that they can actually get higher margin devices sold rather than fighting over a continually shrinking pool of profits.
This article highlights exactly why Toms Hardware sucks so much for the better part of a decade. The video in no way says they have a 2TB thumb drive just that when the flash gets scaled down further it could support 2TB. And as always, the Slashtard "editors" make no effort to actually find any of this shit out before posting a misleading summary to a stupid and misleading article.
Slashdot Mirror
That is not a rescue. If you are using FFMPEG you can be sued for patent violations.
Bullshit. You can't get sued for USING ffmpeg. That's not how the law works. You can get sued for DISTRIBUTING it in the without a proper license in areas in which the software patents are in effect, but that's a completely different thing.
Yep, they were just posturing which is why if they were really going to do it they would have already done it by now. Google was just trying to use the whole WebM vs H.264 thing to push Google TV and all that but when that fell through it's amazing how we heard no more news about H.264 support being dropped.
Oh and if you still don't believe me that Google isn't dropping H.264 here:
A Google Spokesperson tells Webmonkey that the announcement is related to "Chrome only and does not affect Android or YouTube."
H.264 is still going to live on.
I'm not so sure, Google has to pay a licensing fee for the codecs that handle the encoding and decoding process.
Yeah, at max they will pay a "whopping" $6.5 million a year which is less than a fraction of 1% of their yearly revenue. Secondly, mobile devices do not have hardware acceleration for WebM and there are no future models that list that as something to be included so are they going to force people to use a software decoder and draing their battery many times faster? Doubtful.
Also, didn't they dump the codec only to have MS provide a workaround on Windows computers?
No, they didn't dump it as I already said. Microsoft was goign to release an extension or something for Chrome if they had dropped it to provide H.264 support but I have no such thing installed. Just go to the HTML5 test and you can see that Chrome still lists H.264 support. Also go: here which is an HTML5 video in H.264 which plays just fine even in the most up-to-date dev version of Chrome.
H.264 requires people to pay a licensing fee to use.
Not true. For non-commercial streaming use it's royalty-free and if you ship an encoder and/or decoder you only pay royalties for any units over 100,000 that you ship. Outside of a Google it is pretty much free for anyone. And even for someone like Google the royalties cap out at like $6 million dollars a year which is a pittance to someone pulling in 10s of billions of dollars in revenue.
WebM is a standard, it just isn't standard.
In what way is it a standard? Is it an ISO standard? Is it an ECMA standard? Is it a W3C standard? Right, it's not a standard of any standards body. Just because something is open source does not make it a "standard".
Except for the fact that there are already websites and programs that are international that use patented software but don't pay royalties?
Even still they won't drop H.264 then unless they are planning to fuck over people using the youtube app that gets streamed H.264 video due to the hardware accelerated playback. And I wasn't talking about Youtube when I was playing the video, anyway. The whole H.264 thing with Google is mostly posturing anyway otherwise they would have dropped it in Chrome months ago.
No, last January they said they were planning to drop it. But, no, they haven't done so. I just tested it by playing an H.264 video in an HTML5 player.
But Google supports only the WebM (VP8) and Ogg Theora codecs.
Wrong. It still plays HTML5 video that is H.264.
They both do plenty of proprietary;
And by "plenty" you mean pretty much the entirety of their revenue streams, right? The only things that Google or Facebook put out as FOSS are things they can't monetize. Now if Google were to open source its search engine or ad platform then you might have a point.
Oracle made their operations profitable within a year without any significant changes to their open source projects.
And by "significant changes" you mean dumping most of the loser projects and monetizing most of the open source projects with proprietary extensions?
IBM contributes heavily to open source, and in fact might be the biggest contributor to open source, and they are quite profitable.
Due to their proprietary hardware and software that they sell. Not due to open source. The open source part is just leveraged to sell more proprietary hardware and software.
Google contributes heavily to open source, and they are quite profitable.
Due to their proprietary search engine and ad networks. Not due to their open source projects.
It's almost as if they were joking... Nah couldn't be.
Because the contractor billing rates published by GSA include not only salaries but also other costs including benefits contractors provide their employees,[66] POGO added OPM’s 36.25 percent benefit rate to federal employee salaries[67] and BLS’s 33.5 percent loading to private sector employee salaries to reflect the full fringe benefit package paid to full-time employees in service-providing organizations that employ 500 or more workers.[68] All supporting data for this study are found in Table 1 and Appendices B through D.[69]
Straight from the study where they outline their methodology. So even with a 36.25% benefit rate added to their salaries these contractors were still nearly 2 times more expensive.
Actually they factored in the extra 40% cost of benefits on top of the government employees salaries and the private contractors were still 1.5-2 times more expensive. The people doing this study weren't so dumb as to not factor that in:
Because the contractor billing rates published by GSA include not only salaries but also other costs including benefits contractors provide their employees,[66] POGO added OPM’s 36.25 percent benefit rate to federal employee salaries[67] and BLS’s 33.5 percent loading to private sector employee salaries to reflect the full fringe benefit package paid to full-time employees in service-providing organizations that employ 500 or more workers.[68] All supporting data for this study are found in Table 1 and Appendices B through D.[69]
No, actually they aren't. If you had bothered to read their methodology on their study you would know this:
Because the contractor billing rates published by GSA include not only salaries but also other costs including benefits contractors provide their employees,[66] POGO added OPM’s 36.25 percent benefit rate to federal employee salaries[67] and BLS’s 33.5 percent loading to private sector employee salaries to reflect the full fringe benefit package paid to full-time employees in service-providing organizations that employ 500 or more workers.[68] All supporting data for this study are found in Table 1 and Appendices B through D.[69]
Yes, you can't which is why they factored in benefits and everything else into the salaries they quote for government workers.
Because the contractor billing rates published by GSA include not only salaries but also other costs including benefits contractors provide their employees,[66] POGO added OPM’s 36.25 percent benefit rate to federal employee salaries[67] and BLS’s 33.5 percent loading to private sector employee salaries to reflect the full fringe benefit package paid to full-time employees in service-providing organizations that employ 500 or more workers.[68] All supporting data for this study are found in Table 1 and Appendices B through D.[69]
You aren't being as clever as you think you are.
I know you're trolling but most supercomputers these days are computing clusters.
This is only when using the hotspot addon. The data plan is still unlimited otherwise.
Did you even bother to read the summary? This a cap on using your phone as a wifi hot spot. They still have unlimited data plans and this doesn't change that.
And does your girlfriend have any actual data to back that up or is this like when nerds say "i don't know anyone who uses windows" to try to claim that linux was a success on the desktop?
Their stock didn't go up due to that. In fact it went down more than $100 a share, or16%, from the time google+ launched to that milestone.
Using Android IS benefiting them.
In what way? By making less and less profits quarter over quarter as its only way to compete is by making their phones cheaper by continually decreasing the profit margins on their devices? Apple now gets 2/3rds of the global smartphone profits while HTC is now fighting amongst a half dozen other big companies for an ever shrinking pool of profits and is fighting a similar race to the bottom that has led to HP to ditch its PC division.
What position is that? A race to the bottom of thin margins with all the other Android companies who are continually getting less and less of the global smartphone profits whilst Apple continually gets more and more of the profits quarter over quarter? That's a pretty shitty position to be in. HTC probably wants to differentiate itself in a way that they can actually get higher margin devices sold rather than fighting over a continually shrinking pool of profits.
This article highlights exactly why Toms Hardware sucks so much for the better part of a decade. The video in no way says they have a 2TB thumb drive just that when the flash gets scaled down further it could support 2TB. And as always, the Slashtard "editors" make no effort to actually find any of this shit out before posting a misleading summary to a stupid and misleading article.