At the low rates, Vorbis quality is about the same as WMA. By low rates I assume you mean the rates lower than 128Kbps.
Now with devices like iPod, the capacity from 10GB to 40GB, there is no reason *not* to encode at the rates of 160Kbps and higher, and this is where AAC and even MP3 beats Ogg.
This is correct that Vorbis was created primarily for the low rates (as defined above) to compete with WMA and their likes, but once again, with harddrive based devices doing something like LAME with default settings (VBR, 200Kbps on average) or AAC (160Kbps CBR and higher) seems reasonable enough, and this also eliminates the majority of artifacts.
With respect to Vorbis will be free, I frankly get tired of this mantra. Free for whom? For users? How much do you pay for MP3? How much do you pay for AAC? You may say 'hidden license charges'? This is a few bucks per device, which costs $200-300 and higher to begin with, drop in a bucket, don't you agree? For manufacturer? As i've mentioned, in addition to free software you need a good support. Also Ogg Vorbis binary is large, and not easily fit into many of the portables, so the code needs to be optimized, and then of course, the manufacturer has to support this extra work.
So - before you repeat the slashdot favority mantra 'Vorbis is free', think a bit first.
well, at least not even significant minority. As far as quality concerned, Vorbis is mediocre to say the least. There was enough tests done in this respect. Check hydrogenaudio.org for more information. It is also not well supported. Remember how slashdotters rejoiced when there was the announcement that BBC has adopted vorbis as its streaming protocol. I don't remember any news on slashdot when BBC dropped it, primarily because of lack of any decent support.
AAC is the state of the art compression technology, and it is *standard* part of MPEG4 protocol suite. it is a natural extension and improvement of MP3. Remember my words: you'll see more and more vendors jumping on AAC bandwagon. Ogg Vorbis? Don't expect a lot. may be a few, like Karma.
once SUSE is acquired by Novell. Personally experiencing two cases of acquisitions of smaller company by the larger one, I know how much those promises worth. Less than 'my 2 cents'.
is that there are so many of them, and most are written with a single intent - just to get published. You know that academia rule: Publish or perish.
So there are lots of outstanding papers, with brilliant ideas. with many practical implications, yet there are more papers who leave your mind completely blank. You study such a paper and at the end ask yourself: Have I been cheated? I recently went through this experience while doing research in a field of 802.11. Approximately 1% of all the papers I've read had some interesting results and practical implications. The rest was essentially moving the air.
So the researches either have to spend incredible amount of time reading the already published staff, or reinventing the wheel.
There are two problems with CD Red Book Format. One is for real: 16 bit resolution is not enough. According to the research, the threashold of numan hearing requires 18 bit resolution. Normally recording at 20 or 24 bits, and then reducing to 16 bits and applying dithering gets around this problem (more or less). Another problem I would say is mostly imaginary, deals with the high frequencies, CD records at 44.1Khz sanpling frequency, meaning it cuts off at about 22.05 Khz. There are some comletely unsubstantiated claims that humans can hear up to 25Khz. I would say having the source recorded with 24bits resolution, and then downcoverted to 16 bits, and properly mastered is fully adequate.
So CD is perfectly all right. The fact that there are some alternatives formats are being pushed (SACD and DVD-A) has mostly to do with multichannel recording, and copyright protection, than improved quality.
To those who claim that companies use the private addresses not because of security considerations, but because they are short of address: I have worked for two companies (BBN and IBM) which had several A-class addresses assigned to them at some point. They have *returned* several of those A-class address, completely voluntarily back to IANA, and this is simply because they have converted their internal address structure to private addresses. The main reason? Security. That's the point 1. Point 2 is those who claim that in a future every appliance in our houses will need an IP address haven't got a clue. Most likely, there will be some proxy device, and in turn it will comunicate with house applicance via some other non-IP protocol.
Finally, from the horse' mouth so to speak. A conversation with a guy who was one of the IETF chair. Won't give up his name because he's still IETF chair but different division. What he told me is the following. The whole idea of IPv6 was originally to comfort those who claimed there woud be a shortage of IP addresses, back to the time when IP was just becoming more popular. The exact quote: " we were pushing IP, and then there were some voices saying that in a future 32-bit addressing scheme would limit the scope of IP. So we've invented 128-bit address scheme, just to got those folks shut up. But noone really considered at that time conversion from IPv4 to IPv6 would take place any time soon. If ever. The main reason is still the cost of conversion. As the time goes by, and IP keeps proliferating, Internet-wide conversion to IPv6 becomes more and more problematic. Meanwhile that dreaded address shortage is like a horizon - it just keeps moving away from us as we approach the presumed date.
TCP/IP is a technology trap. Let each hardware/software vendor adopt its own communication protocol and have gazillion protocol converters. THis surely will keep programmers busy. Choice, my ass. Consumers want the choice of *applications*, not the choice of low-level standards, such as OO XML-based document layout.
Why? Interoperability with DoD is not a concern of a private sector. Other than that, is there any particular reason why private sector has to move to IPV6? To satisfy your curiosity? Are you paying for the cost of conversion?
AAC essentially starts with improvement MP3 such as 100% MDCT (whereas MP3 is a hybrid solution), increased length of windows, all those things which should have been in MP3 in a first place, and now they can't be implemented because of incompatibility issues. So it is perfectly all right to think of AAC is like MP3 only better. It *is* better.
AAC used by Apple is a part of MPEG specifications. There is a number of alternative AAC encoders/decoders. OTOH, Microsoft format is 100% microsoft-only.
I know KDE (and its related tools) support both Hebrew and Arabic, but does OpenOffice do it as well? If not, what are the alternatives?
Slightly off-topic: I've recently tried OpenOffice the latest version and was very impressed how well it converted PowerPoint presentation. I really *hate* when some scientific presentations use PPT format (and give no other alternatives). It doesn't happen that often, but unfortunately it *does* happen. I wish scientific community were a bit more aware of the 'open vs closed standards' issue.
simply because one day he says something and another day he says something else, and then he says he didn't mean what he said, and so forth, and so forth... it's becoming so boring, really, why anyone should care about reading this staff is above and beyound me.
The term "any key" does not refer to a particular key on the keyboard. It simply means to strike any one of the keys on your keyboard or handheld screen.
Still not clear *which* of any one of the keys.
Yet it is certainly a step in the right direction.
Re:Are you thinking what I'm thinking....?
on
New Treo Reviewed
·
· Score: 1
just don't look at pr0n while you're measuring the humidity level...
Slashdot Mirror
At the low rates, Vorbis quality is about the same as WMA. By low rates I assume you mean the rates lower than 128Kbps.
Now with devices like iPod, the capacity from 10GB to 40GB, there is no reason *not* to encode at the rates of 160Kbps and higher, and this is where AAC and even MP3 beats Ogg.
This is correct that Vorbis was created primarily for the low rates (as defined above) to compete with WMA and their likes, but once again, with harddrive based devices doing something like LAME with default settings (VBR, 200Kbps on average) or AAC (160Kbps CBR and higher) seems reasonable enough, and this also eliminates the majority of artifacts.
With respect to Vorbis will be free, I frankly get tired of this mantra. Free for whom? For users? How much do you pay for MP3? How much do you pay for AAC? You may say 'hidden license charges'? This is a few bucks per device, which costs $200-300 and higher to begin with, drop in a bucket, don't you agree? For manufacturer? As i've mentioned, in addition to free software you need a good support. Also Ogg Vorbis binary is large, and not easily fit into many of the portables, so the code needs to be optimized, and then of course, the manufacturer has to support this extra work.
So - before you repeat the slashdot favority mantra 'Vorbis is free', think a bit first.
well, at least not even significant minority. As far as quality concerned, Vorbis is mediocre to say the least. There was enough tests done in this respect. Check hydrogenaudio.org for more information. It is also not well supported. Remember how slashdotters rejoiced when there was the announcement that BBC has adopted vorbis as its streaming protocol. I don't remember any news on slashdot when BBC dropped it, primarily because of lack of any decent support.
AAC is the state of the art compression technology, and it is *standard* part of MPEG4 protocol suite. it is a natural extension and improvement of MP3. Remember my words: you'll see more and more vendors jumping on AAC bandwagon. Ogg Vorbis? Don't expect a lot. may be a few, like Karma.
can't imagine Beowulf of this ...
once SUSE is acquired by Novell. Personally experiencing two cases of acquisitions of smaller company by the larger one, I know how much those promises worth. Less than 'my 2 cents'.
IPv6 is 128-bit addresses, so first we have to see the advent of 128bit PCs. Right?
'Java64' architecture based ...
is that there are so many of them, and most are written with a single intent - just to get published. You know that academia rule: Publish or perish.
So there are lots of outstanding papers, with brilliant ideas. with many practical implications, yet there are more papers who leave your mind completely blank. You study such a paper and at the end ask yourself: Have I been cheated? I recently went through this experience while doing research in a field of 802.11. Approximately 1% of all the papers I've read had some interesting results and practical implications. The rest was essentially moving the air.
So the researches either have to spend incredible amount of time reading the already published staff, or reinventing the wheel.
whatever ...
There are two problems with CD Red Book Format. One is for real: 16 bit resolution is not enough. According to the research, the threashold of numan hearing requires 18 bit resolution. Normally recording at 20 or 24 bits, and then reducing to 16 bits and applying dithering gets around this problem (more or less). Another problem I would say is mostly imaginary, deals with the high frequencies, CD records at 44.1Khz sanpling frequency, meaning it cuts off at about 22.05 Khz. There are some comletely unsubstantiated claims that humans can hear up to 25Khz. I would say having the source recorded with 24bits resolution, and then downcoverted to 16 bits, and properly mastered is fully adequate.
So CD is perfectly all right. The fact that there are some alternatives formats are being pushed (SACD and DVD-A) has mostly to do with multichannel recording, and copyright protection, than improved quality.
"Fedora released. Imagine Beowulf of this."
To those who claim that companies use the private addresses not because of security considerations, but because they are short of address: I have worked for two companies (BBN and IBM) which had several A-class addresses assigned to them at some point. They have *returned* several of those A-class address, completely voluntarily back to IANA, and this is simply because they have converted their internal address structure to private addresses. The main reason? Security. That's the point 1. Point 2 is those who claim that in a future every appliance in our houses will need an IP address haven't got a clue. Most likely, there will be some proxy device, and in turn it will comunicate with house applicance via some other non-IP protocol.
Finally, from the horse' mouth so to speak. A conversation with a guy who was one of the IETF chair. Won't give up his name because he's still IETF chair but different division. What he told me is the following. The whole idea of IPv6 was originally to comfort those who claimed there woud be a shortage of IP addresses, back to the time when IP was just becoming more popular. The exact quote: " we were pushing IP, and then there were some voices saying that in a future 32-bit addressing scheme would limit the scope of IP. So we've invented 128-bit address scheme, just to got those folks shut up. But noone really considered at that time conversion from IPv4 to IPv6 would take place any time soon. If ever. The main reason is still the cost of conversion. As the time goes by, and IP keeps proliferating, Internet-wide conversion to IPv6 becomes more and more problematic. Meanwhile that dreaded address shortage is like a horizon - it just keeps moving away from us as we approach the presumed date.
nt
the Dvorak's Symphony No. 8 first?
Me, I would rather looking up net porn.
to conquer the world. Imagine beowulf of marching Penguins, armed to their teeth ...
TCP/IP is a technology trap. Let each hardware/software vendor adopt its own communication protocol and have gazillion protocol converters. THis surely will keep programmers busy. Choice, my ass. Consumers want the choice of *applications*, not the choice of low-level standards, such as OO XML-based document layout.
Why? Interoperability with DoD is not a concern of a private sector. Other than that, is there any particular reason why private sector has to move to IPV6? To satisfy your curiosity? Are you paying for the cost of conversion?
AAC essentially starts with improvement MP3 such as 100% MDCT (whereas MP3 is a hybrid solution), increased length of windows, all those things which should have been in MP3 in a first place, and now they can't be implemented because of incompatibility issues. So it is perfectly all right to think of AAC is like MP3 only better. It *is* better.
AAC used by Apple is a part of MPEG specifications. There is a number of alternative AAC encoders/decoders. OTOH, Microsoft format is 100% microsoft-only.
I know KDE (and its related tools) support both Hebrew and Arabic, but does OpenOffice do it as well? If not, what are the alternatives?
Slightly off-topic: I've recently tried OpenOffice the latest version and was very impressed how well it converted PowerPoint presentation. I really *hate* when some scientific presentations use PPT format (and give no other alternatives). It doesn't happen that often, but unfortunately it *does* happen. I wish scientific community were a bit more aware of the 'open vs closed standards' issue.
simply because one day he says something and another day he says something else, and then he says he didn't mean what he said, and so forth, and so forth ... it's becoming so boring, really, why anyone should care about reading this staff is above and beyound me.
imagining the Beowulf of those :-(
Imagine Beowulf of this ...
The answer says:
The term "any key" does not refer to a particular key on the keyboard. It simply means to strike any one of the keys on your keyboard or handheld screen.
Still not clear *which* of any one of the keys.
Yet it is certainly a step in the right direction.
just don't look at pr0n while you're measuring the humidity level ...
you support Bin Laden.
...
or whatever