yea...just like how gmail took eons to catch on and make a dent in hotmail/yahoo's numbers, and did absolutely nothing to change the service provided by those companies...
Yeah, because a comparison of what Google with a completely different product in a completely different market is totally analogous to smartphone and desktop OSes.
You ask Apple if that's possible, as of November 2008 they were only a few percentage points behind RIM and Windows Mobile with ONE PRODUCT.
So are you actually trying to make Android sound even worse? So with 3 products it doesn't even have 1% market share for smartphone operating systems and I'm supposed to think that they are going to overtake both Symbian and Windows in a couple of years?
Obsoleted is the wrong word. Supplanted is more like it... CoreAVC is a decidedly superior product from everything I've heard about it.
It's superior to a few poorly optimized software decoders, but for anyone who bought an nVIDIA or ATI card in the last few years has had free hardware acceleration support built-in and could have used the free DXVA decoder that has been included with MPC Home Cinema.
Considering that Microsoft could have just made their stuff the default and not gone to extra work and made it more difficult for 3rd parties to change it, this smacks of them abusing their market control.
I never said what they were doing was right or wrong. The fact of the matter is that Media Foundation obsoletes the old DirectShow framework that CoreAVC relies on which in effect obsoletes their product.
Which was entirely my point. That ATI is still to this day unable to release a half-decent driver for Linux is their own fault since nVIDIA was clearly able to do so.
Fine on Windows you can use the free hardware-enabled H.264 decoder that comes with MPC Home Cinema. So why again should I pay for CoreAVC that I don't need vs a free open source solution?
This is the codec to use on Windows to play H.264 - its performance is unmatched
and allows for 1080p playback on some surprisingly weak hardware, where e.g. ffmpeg doesn't even come close.
And my hardware-enabled H.264 decoding video card does better and I don't have to buy any extra codecs. And the hardware decoding works on Linux with ffmpeg/mplayer as well through the VPDAU framework.
And in its recent versions, it even (finally) makes use of CUDA in nVidia GPUs, lowering the CPU load by quite
a bit again.
Wow so after 2 years of promising they finally got hardware decoding when there have already been hardware-enabled H.264 decoders already for quite some time both on Windows and more recently for Linux.
And it is absolutely decently priced
Or I could just use my free version of mplayer with VPDAU and not pay anything and get better performance.
Also: Does Microsoft even ship a H.264 codec?
In Windows 7 they do which is why CoreCodec is up in arms over the whole Media Foundation situation.
Just another graphics card upgrade that doesn't make the games any better.
And that's any different than any other incrementing of DirectX, how? Did DirectX 9 provide you improved gameplay over DirectX 8? Doubtful. It was just another graphics card update that didn't make the games any better.
Well whoopti-fucking-do how does that help ANYONE other than the fucking cell phone manufacturers and service providers?
Who says it's open and freeness were to do anymore than precisely that? I don't remember Google making any such claims. That was just the freetard interpretation.
That said, as I've said before, her RIAA chops are probably not what is really propelling her to this position and is not likely to have much bearing on any part of this nomination.
Except that the case that is supposedly the one who got her labeled as "pro-RIAA" had nothing to do with the RIAA to begin with which makes the original claim even more ridiculous.
Matroska is a container format that has existed for many years before CoreCodec co-opted it. The issue at heart for this topic though is about their proprietary DirectShow codec CoreAVC which will be obsoleted by the Windows Media Foundation which is why the company is whining and in arms.
Unfortunately, Microsoft may get away with this under the guise of concern for security.
There is nothing to "get away with". They are just attempting to obsolete DirectShow just as they did with VfW and this is a maker of a small-time directshow codec that is mad over this change. Last time I checked, Microsoft had no obligation to continue using and support DirectShow indefinitely.
How is that any different than what happens now? Very few average users are buying and using any of CoreCodec's projects. This is just some small-time company that has a tiny customer base whining that Microsoft is ditching DirectShow and obsoleting his company.
Except that the CoreAVC codec, the CorePlayer, the two main products of CoreCodec, and their media splitter that is bundled with the CoreAVC codec are proprietary software. This isn't some open source project being squelched by Microsoft. It's a proprietary software vendor who is mad that Microsoft is obsoleting his company's products.
Because people don't know the difference between the standard which is called H.264 and the open source encoder that is an implementation of that standard which is called x264 (note the lack of the . as is the common incorrect spelling of its name).
I think that if VLC runs on windows 7, 3rd party codecs will too.
VLC doesn't use external codecs. It uses the libavcodec library for playback. A completely different situation from that of CoreAVC which is an external directshow decoder.
However, Microsoft is making the new versions of media player less useful by not playing 3rd party codecs.
Well it can, it just requires some registry tweaks.
Slashdot Mirror
yea...just like how gmail took eons to catch on and make a dent in hotmail/yahoo's numbers, and did absolutely nothing to change the service provided by those companies...
Yeah, because a comparison of what Google with a completely different product in a completely different market is totally analogous to smartphone and desktop OSes.
You ask Apple if that's possible, as of November 2008 they were only a few percentage points behind RIM and Windows Mobile with ONE PRODUCT.
So are you actually trying to make Android sound even worse? So with 3 products it doesn't even have 1% market share for smartphone operating systems and I'm supposed to think that they are going to overtake both Symbian and Windows in a couple of years?
Probably not. It really doesn't make any sense that it was marked the way it is, but I figured I'd try to guess why it might have.
Obsoleted is the wrong word. Supplanted is more like it... CoreAVC is a decidedly superior product from everything I've heard about it.
It's superior to a few poorly optimized software decoders, but for anyone who bought an nVIDIA or ATI card in the last few years has had free hardware acceleration support built-in and could have used the free DXVA decoder that has been included with MPC Home Cinema.
Considering that Microsoft could have just made their stuff the default and not gone to extra work and made it more difficult for 3rd parties to change it, this smacks of them abusing their market control.
I never said what they were doing was right or wrong. The fact of the matter is that Media Foundation obsoletes the old DirectShow framework that CoreAVC relies on which in effect obsoletes their product.
ATI did the same except with less success.
Which was entirely my point. That ATI is still to this day unable to release a half-decent driver for Linux is their own fault since nVIDIA was clearly able to do so.
Because it's widely used on BSDs as the DE?
So you wouldn't vote for someone that represents your views almost perfectly, simply because they associate themselves with a party?
Yep, because those political parties are just lackeys of special interests that I have none of my interests at heart.
Wow. That's sad.
Oh well. I'll try not to lose sleep over it too much.
KDE is a powerful Open Source graphical desktop environment for Unix and Unix-like workstations.
http://freebsd.kde.org/
Fine on Windows you can use the free hardware-enabled H.264 decoder that comes with MPC Home Cinema. So why again should I pay for CoreAVC that I don't need vs a free open source solution?
It's not BS as he isn't even remotely the only one experiencing the bug. Again, just cause you don't experience a bug doesn't make it not real.
Not even if the views of the Republican party changed such that they reflected your own views with near-perfect accuracy?
Nope.
Never say never. Remember, overall Republican (and Democrat) views have changed numerous times over the last several decades.
I wouldn't vote for either of those parties or the Libertarians, so it doesn't really matter to me.
That might also be a Linux community's fault. Linux never provided solid driver development kit.
Doesn't seem to have stopped nVIDIA from making a pretty solid driver for Linux.
Have you ever used CoreAVC?
Yeah. It was okay.
This is the codec to use on Windows to play H.264 - its performance is unmatched and allows for 1080p playback on some surprisingly weak hardware, where e.g. ffmpeg doesn't even come close.
And my hardware-enabled H.264 decoding video card does better and I don't have to buy any extra codecs. And the hardware decoding works on Linux with ffmpeg/mplayer as well through the VPDAU framework.
And in its recent versions, it even (finally) makes use of CUDA in nVidia GPUs, lowering the CPU load by quite a bit again.
Wow so after 2 years of promising they finally got hardware decoding when there have already been hardware-enabled H.264 decoders already for quite some time both on Windows and more recently for Linux.
And it is absolutely decently priced
Or I could just use my free version of mplayer with VPDAU and not pay anything and get better performance.
Also: Does Microsoft even ship a H.264 codec?
In Windows 7 they do which is why CoreCodec is up in arms over the whole Media Foundation situation.
15fps on max settings with Crysis?
Just another graphics card upgrade that doesn't make the games any better.
And that's any different than any other incrementing of DirectX, how? Did DirectX 9 provide you improved gameplay over DirectX 8? Doubtful. It was just another graphics card update that didn't make the games any better.
I certainly wouldn't say NDA's have "absolutely nothing to do with" this probe.
We were talking about non-compete clauses not NDAs. Those are two separate things.
When has ATI ever had solid Linux drivers?
Well whoopti-fucking-do how does that help ANYONE other than the fucking cell phone manufacturers and service providers?
Who says it's open and freeness were to do anymore than precisely that? I don't remember Google making any such claims. That was just the freetard interpretation.
That said, as I've said before, her RIAA chops are probably not what is really propelling her to this position and is not likely to have much bearing on any part of this nomination.
Except that the case that is supposedly the one who got her labeled as "pro-RIAA" had nothing to do with the RIAA to begin with which makes the original claim even more ridiculous.
Matroska is a container format that has existed for many years before CoreCodec co-opted it. The issue at heart for this topic though is about their proprietary DirectShow codec CoreAVC which will be obsoleted by the Windows Media Foundation which is why the company is whining and in arms.
Unfortunately, Microsoft may get away with this under the guise of concern for security.
There is nothing to "get away with". They are just attempting to obsolete DirectShow just as they did with VfW and this is a maker of a small-time directshow codec that is mad over this change. Last time I checked, Microsoft had no obligation to continue using and support DirectShow indefinitely.
How is that any different than what happens now? Very few average users are buying and using any of CoreCodec's projects. This is just some small-time company that has a tiny customer base whining that Microsoft is ditching DirectShow and obsoleting his company.
Except that the CoreAVC codec, the CorePlayer, the two main products of CoreCodec, and their media splitter that is bundled with the CoreAVC codec are proprietary software. This isn't some open source project being squelched by Microsoft. It's a proprietary software vendor who is mad that Microsoft is obsoleting his company's products.
Because people don't know the difference between the standard which is called H.264 and the open source encoder that is an implementation of that standard which is called x264 (note the lack of the . as is the common incorrect spelling of its name).
I think that if VLC runs on windows 7, 3rd party codecs will too.
VLC doesn't use external codecs. It uses the libavcodec library for playback. A completely different situation from that of CoreAVC which is an external directshow decoder.
However, Microsoft is making the new versions of media player less useful by not playing 3rd party codecs.
Well it can, it just requires some registry tweaks.