So the next time you download an Ogg formatted music file, watch out. When borrowing a mixed CD from a friend encodded in Ogg Vorbis, watch out. Because someone is surely watching you.
Yes, this is all true. We've got special plans to have Ogg Vorbis files Shock-Enabled[tm]; If you're listening to an Ogg Vorbis file and you think about copying it for a friend, a special patented algorithm will combine the electrical synapses in your brain and route the power directly to your spinal column, killing you instantly.
It's certainly a cost-savings over the all-weather troops that we've been using for the past few years.
Synchronization manager? Why the fuck would we want something like that? This gives me flashbacks to the pre-NexII days of the Rio sync manager! Why the hell not to just mount it as a removable drive and be done with it?
Well, gosh. Here I thought that an XML-aware database that would allow you to sync your XMMS playlists and things in addition to using it as a removable drive would be a useful feature. Seems people agree with me on this one.
It has a *very* limited range. Like you, and maybe the car next to you, if you both have your windows open and the other driver has a good antenna. Hell of a lot cleaner than a tape adapter, and easier than pulling your stereo out to add an RF modulator so that you can plug the thing directly in.
The Neuros has a port for an RF booster/antenna. Curious, no?:)
Thus Ogg doesn't have a "better audio", CD-quality Ogg just takes less space than CD-quality MP3. However with 20GB capacity in players, bitrate is quite irrelevant.
There is no such thing as 'CD-quality' when dealing with a lossy encoder like mp3 or Ogg Vorbis. True CD quality can only be attained with a lossless encoder, like FLAC or Shorten.
If you think Ogg Vorbis sounds better than mp3 at comparable bitrate or lower, then it's safe to say that you consider Ogg Vorbis representative of "better audio," or better reproduction of sound. If you do find this to be true, then you're in good company; Large amounts of double-blind testing agrees with you.
Bitrate is never irrelevant. Bitrate multiplied by time equals size, and anyone who has ever filled a hard drive could probably tell you about how some things can look very large indeed from far away, but hit their limit of usefulness in a curiously small amount of time.
No, I wasn't. I was promoted to the position of Editor-in-Chief of Linux.com, then I resigned from there a few months later citing editorial differences. Then I started a web publishing project called Binary Freedom which lives on at System Toolbox, which I still occasionally write for.
I started a little comic/animation studio on the side, and went back to work as a UNIX Admin (which is what I was doing before I got involved in the whole web-journalism biz) at Digital Island/Exodus for about a year. I got cut in a massive acquisition layoff, chilled out for about a month and then started at Xiph at the request of the team here.
Now I run Xiph full-time, and release free music on the 'net in my spare time.
Wow, that was more than you really needed to know. But knowing is half the battle, etc.
Name is kinda weird, League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (sounds more like a Monte Python parody) but the trailer looked pretty damn good. A bit gothic, but good.
That's probably because it's set in Victorian England.
Because Shorten is proprietary, that's why. Check out their license.
Here's a little meat for you:
2. RESTRICTIONS. Notwithstanding any provisions in this agreement to the contrary, Licensee may not (a) make, use or load into temporary memory any unapproved copies of the Licensed Materials without the appropriate license(s) for use on additional CPUs; (b) distribute the Licensed Materials; (c) modify, transmit, rent, lease or sublicense the Licensed Materials; (d) reverse-engineer, decompile or disassemble the Licensed Materials, except to the extent required to be permitted by applicable law; (e) disclose any source core or performance characteristics of the Licensed Materials to any person or entity; (f) use the Licensed Materials in a service bureau or "application service provider" environment or for the benefit of third parties; or (g) at any time do or permit to be done anything which shall adversely affect SoftSound's right, title or interest in the Licensed Materials. If the Licensed Materials are used within a country of the European Community, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as restricting any rights available under the EC Council Directive 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer programs.
Consequently, the music we hear today may not have been what Beethoven or Mozart intended.
And it doesn't end there. A modern violin does not sound like a violin that Mozart composed for. Why? Difference in materials in making one, and more importantly (even when you're dealing with Mozart-old violins) modern synthetics used in string making.
This is a bit of a hellaciously huge argument in the opera community, who strive to get recordings of pieces the way a composer intended. There's also a lot of little changes; The meaning of 'allegro' has changed over the years, as well as the 'note to tune by,' currently A 440.
I wonder which MPEG-4 they mean here. The MPEG-4 standard for desktop video? Or the one for broadcasting? Maybe they mean the MPEG-4 standard for mobile devices like cellphones and pocket PC's.
Gosh, wouldn't it completely suck ass to be stuck with some idiot format that can't decide which one it wants to be, so it applies the same name to all of them, even though that they represent entirely different standards?
Wouldn't it suck even harder if you had to pay licensing fees to put that video that you shot using the camera you bought onto the webspace that you've paid for, and then be lost as to which standard they meant when they said 'MPEG-4?'
This is, of course, just the beginning. Wait until you have to pay them a licensing fee to convert one MPEG-4 format to another MPEG-4 format. Wait and see. Don't forget the most fun part... Licensing terms for MPEG-4 haven't even been set yet. It should be fun when Samsung sends you another bill.
The 'I am what I am' referred to by the gay community is not Popeye's mantra, but rather song lyrics from a musical. La Cage Aux Folles features the song 'I am what I am,' written by Jerry Herman.
I am what I am / I am my own special creation
So, come take a look / give me the hook or the ovation
It's my world / that I want to have a little pride in
My world / and it's not a place I have to hide in
Life's not worth a damn until you can say / I am what I am
'La Cage' was remade into a film called 'The Birdcage' that starred Robin Williams and Nathan Lane. It's about a couple of gay drag queens, a drag club in St. Tropez, and an uber-conservative (played by Gene Hackman). General hilarity ensues.
Now you know, and knowing is half the battle. By the way, no, I'm not gay. I just have too much damned useless trivia in my head.
Who says you have to buy the game? What you'd need to pay for is the ability to connect to the servers. Heck, the games can be open source, if you figure out how to do it without letting people cheat.
That's only in the context of having a non-profit company make games. You couldn't sell it as 'something that'll be really cool as long as you and everyone else signs on.' Initial development costs to produce a modern game that would attract the average buyers are unbelievably prohibitive.
I'm with you on Yankee Trader. Now I want to play some TradeWars 2002!:)
The point, then, is that every dollar earned in fees is returned to trying to improve the experience for the players. Granted, different non-profit companies could have varying levels of success, but that's natural - that's competition.
The problem is that the game market is larger than Hollywood, and nearly just as insane. The reason you see so many shooting, driving and fighting games at arcades today is because those genres have proven themselves as profitable. The stakes are simply too high to leave anything else to chance.
While the idea of a non-profit game company is interesting, the problem is that you need to raise an insane amount of capital to get one game on the shelves, raise an insane amount of capital again to promote it.
It may be possible to do this if you start with very small games, but even then you need to have a smash-hit tiny game to fund the next one. Still, I suspect it will all break down when you need to invest funds in order to promote and market the product.
Sony must be making a huge profit from EverQuest. Imagine if the profit were instead entirely turned around into actually improving the game (and releasing better games.)
I don't know how much it cost them to make the game, and I don't know how much they're making, so I couldn't tell you that they must be making money hand-over-fist. They do have a captive audience, and people like 'Mr. Victim' who posted the original story are still playing the game.
On the other hand, would you buy a game that got better based on how many people were playing it? Probably not. Everyone wants to buy a great game right away, not buy it and hope everyone plays so the game gets better. I really like the idea, but I don't think the universe is ready for this much maturity. It definitely worked back when people paid to play MUDs, but I think in the current state of the 'interactive entertainment' industry, it would be about as useful as a condom machine in the Vatican.
It's a commercial game, released and maintained by a commercial company in order to make money. Corporations exist to make and process money, in order to return value to their shareholders and/or investors.
Every commercial game produced is released in order to make money. The reality of this seems to have escaped the author of this review.
As a consumer, you have a number of choices. You can choose to buy the game and play it, or you can choose to buy the game and not play it. You can also choose not to buy the game, as well.
The problem that the author is trying to address has nothing to do with Everquest; It has everything to do with the perception of value. He wants you to know what you're getting into, and he obviously feels that EverQuest is not worth the money.
Some games are addictive; The only difference is that you're not spending $x every month to play Tetris. Saying that 'you can't win' doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There are a lot of games you can't win; I own several of them.
Spy Hunter (the arcade game) was a great game. It cost twenty-five cents, and there's no way to win. It goes on forever. If you want to play Spy Hunter as long as you want to play EverQuest, it'll cost a hell of a lot more, unless you have crazy-mad Spy Hunter skills.
EverQuest offers a flat monthly rate. Some people pay something like $10 an hour for this, because they only play a couple hours a month. Some people are logged in sixteen hours a day. From an entertainment point of view, the people who are 'addicted to the game' are actually getting more value for their money. Read that again. Addicted to EverQuest: Hopeless gamer, or thifty shopper?
Maybe they don't update their site as often as they should. Are site updates part of the cost, or can anyone access them? If you're not paying for it, it does not apply to the 'value for money' problem. Poor updates, inefficient game masters... If you don't want to deal with this, don't buy the game, I suppose. On the other hand, I wouldn't rush out and buy a game that claims 'Kick-Ass Support!' and 'EXTREME GAME-MASTERING.' Game companies in the future will likely feel the same way, and just keep putting hot chicks on the boxes in the store.
All in all, I do appreciate the honesty of the rant, and I do believe that many people may not understand the value proposition of EverQuest before they buy the game and start playing. On the other hand, caveat emptor, baby!
Get your ham radio license today! In Canada, at least, they can't stop you from putting up any tower, as long as it is safe, should you be fully licensed.;-) I'm sure the USA has similar laws (heck, you guys are allowed to put up satellite dishes 1m in diameter anywhere, unlike us!).
Well, no. Since we're talking about apartments, it's all about who owns that building. Sure, you can mount a dish on the outside of your window. You'll be able to see it from the street, which is where you'll be sleeping when your landlord kicks you out.
The United States has all sorts of goofy local statutes regarding things like this. Here in Philadelphia, there are certain things you cannot put on certain buildings even if you own them, because they're part of a 'historical area' or something like that. In many housing developments, you need to have changes to your house that you own including (but not limited to) building a deck, painting the front a different color, etc checked by a local or county zoning commission.
Some places are a little less nuts, but they're becoming more and more rare. Two people are neighbors, three people are a zoning commission.
This story is incorrect as much as a first-person interpretation of events can be construed as 'incorrect.'
Apple does not support the Ogg Vorbis format in iTunes. There is a QuickTime component available that will enable you to play Vorbis files in iTunes, but due to it being a QuickTime hack (as opposed to format support within the application itself), certain things do not work as expected, and OS X will not properly associate Ogg Vorbis files as 'iTunes-compatible.'
So, there's the straight dope. I'm sorry if people are confused and irritated about this; We didn't submit this story.
If you do need help playing Vorbis files, please drop in on #vorbis on irc.xiph.org; Our crack team of off-topic ranters and audio illuminati are standing by 24/7, even during this busy holiday season.:)
As a side note, we're hacking like crazy this week! Want to help out? Stop by the IRC server and join #xiphtech for a quick run-down. Thanks!
1. Why not set up a donation fund for each product? E.g. you would have a "Donate to Ogg Tarkin", "Donate to Ogg Vorbis", etc. and in Traffic provide brief estimates and updates as to how much time and money may be needed for initial release, specific feature, etc. This way, people will actually know what their money goes into, and what becomes of it. I think Namesys is doing something similar, but not quite the same. Theirs is more like if you need a feature that is not planned, pay us and we'll implement it.
The problem with this specific approach is that it lets the people with money invariably decide what we work on. This is not inherently a bad thing, especially if everyone gets access to the new code written, but it also means that we'd have to throw out a lot of good engineering implementing features that Joe Pocketbook wants. We make software for everyone.
2. Just like with Vorbis, keep everything GPL until stable 1.0 production release is reached. Then switch to BSD license. Distribute development releases under GPL only.
Vorbis went BSD long before 1.0. The problem is that I think that's kind of a bait-and-switch; Come work on this GPL product, surprise! We're making it BSD! This was easier to do with Vorbis in particular, because the number of developers on it was so small. I don't see a benefit (development or otherwise) to playing a licensure shell game, but maybe you're seeing something I'm not?
I am by no means comparing Xiph.org to Mandrake, but I do believe that same principle applies of how people view their support by donation. Ogg Vorbis is by far the best lossy compression format available today. Can't wait for Tarkin.
I agree, but the line between 'donate to a worthy cause' and 'bail out a company' is sufficiently blurred here. By the way, you should check out Theora if you're interested in video. Due out in June of 2003.
The very idea of offering products and services as a for-profit corporation is that by selling those you create a distinct product in the market that generates revenue and in the longer run gives you some income. If you cannot sustain such process, or convince investors that in the long-run you will earn profit, it's no surprise that your "business" is dead.
Yes, exactly. By being a for-profit company, Mandrake has decided to play by those for-profit rules. Remember: For-profit companies are officially 'in it for the money,' no matter what they choose to give away.
And all I'm saying is, 'Gosh, it would be really nice if you'd think about donating to smaller projects instead of bailing out a for-profit company again.'
Xiph could have followed a similiar route that Mandrake did. They hired the wrong people and made some bad decisions. I realize you are bitter, but your post does not help the situation.
What situation? The situation that a company that has bled millions of dollars is once again asking for more cash from their captive audience? You're right, I am powerless to bail out MandrakeSoft. As far as 'following a similar route,' I doubt it. We never had millions to burn in the first place, and it's never been our goal to start a company and turn a massive profit.
I cannot and will not feel sorry for any company that burns through insane amounts of money like MandrakeSoft has. Just because they sell Linux services does not mean they get special dispensation; When they opted to jump into the corporate fray, all bets were off. You compete, or you die. It is often vicious. It is often difficult. It is often unfair. But that's the game.
The Linux world will be a poorer place without Mandrake. This call for help was directed at the existing community of Mandrake users. If you do not want to support Mandrake, then don't. But don't use your position to degrade them and discourage others from supporting them. That makes you a very ugly person in my eyes.
Call me crazy, but this isn't the first time that MandrakeSoft has done this. I think it's irresponsible. Where are they spending this money? How are they going through this much cash, this quickly?
While you may be a huge fan of the Mandrake distribution, please understand that while they're a for-profit corporation, they're playing the for-profit game. When my phone bill comes, I don't ask my friends and family to help me pay it, just because I am a brilliant conversationalist. I have my own debts, I take on my own responsibilities. MandrakeSoft is acting like a college kid, calling home for pizza money.
Imagine if all companies did this. Wouldn't you find it extremely offensive if McDonald's employees came up to you during your meal, asking you to help them out with some of their expenses?
"Hi, how are you? I hope you're enjoying that Big Mac. You know, we work really hard on the Big Mac, and we'd like to continue making Big Macs for the next few years. Unfortunately, the current economy hasn't been too kind to us, and we're feeling a little less like Ronald, and more like Grimace."
You would find it irritating. You would find it annoying. You might not ever go back there again, and you'd tell your friends about it. I'm just asking you to consider the nice little diner down the street when you're tired of being shaken down by the clown.
You know what? I've had enough. These people have burned through how many millions of dollars already? Meanwhile, we work our asses off, and I'm still concerned about how to pay my rent next month. If we had the kind of money that Mandrake has likely paid in taxes alone, we would be producing ungodly amounts of software.
By my watch, with the amount of money that Mandrake has already spent, they should have the absolute best commercial distribution of Linux available. There should be no question as to the performance of Mandrake compared to any other commercial version. They should be kicking ass and taking names. Unfortunately, the only ass they're kicking is the collective behind of the Linux community, and the only names they're taking are followed by credit card numbers.
Meanwhile, we're a non-profit company that produces the absolute best-of-class general-purpose audio compression codec in the world, proprietary or otherwise. We've been through recessions and poor economic times before; Hopefully we'll live through this one, too. Everybody and their brother has a Linux distribution; Why don't you support the smaller projects that actually make a difference?
^^ Listen to this man, for he invented Ogg Vorbis.
Hate to disappoint, but I didn't. Ogg Vorbis is the invention of Christopher Montgomery, our technical director. I'm just the paperwork monkey, gadabout and bon-vivant that runs the company. Xiph produces Ogg Vorbis (and a laundry list of other cool stuff), though.
the article is a bit misleading. Actually it is MPEG-4 which is being pushed. MPEG-4 is pretty save standard. Lots of chip vendors are incorporating it and this will kind of save it from patent troubles. As of now there is no liscensing/patent problem for this. If MPEG-4 is adopted as an industry standard it will be a big win for consumers..... Now only if they adopted ogg too!
Hey there. Please place the crackpipe down, and listen to me for a moment. MPEG-4 is not a 'safe' standard. Hell, it's not even a standard. It is the same proprietary crap you've been spoon-fed for the past ten years (or more), but with a lot more companies involved, looking for their piece of the action. How will they get at it? Oh, yes. With patents. Quelle surprise.
If you really want people like Texas Instruments to do something that would make a lot more sense, you would push for them to release an expanded line of DSP's and hardware that is container and codec agnostic. Demand more from your chips. Don't tell TI 'design a chip for MPEG-4,' tell them to stop making chips that require hideously expensive compilers and NDA's.
The biggest win for the consumer is a chip manufacturer that lets the consumer decide, not a chip manufacturer that does what it's told by Dorky Portable Magazine.
I don't want TI to make chips that just support Ogg. I want TI to make chips that support stuff today, and give me at least a fighting chance on supporting tomorrow's Codec du Jour. People freak out if they buy a home computer that won't last them for a year. I encourage people to think the same way about their portable technology, as well. You shouldn't settle for less, and you shouldn't buy from companies that do, either.
"Please use our ham-fisted standard so that the other guys with a different ham-fisted standard won't win the Battle of the Ham-Fisted Standards."
Interesting thing about that MPEG4 'standard.' There isn't one. MPEG4 for mobile devices is a lot different than MPEG4 for desktop computers, which is a lot different than MPEG4 for the professional video market. With every new iteration of MPEG, there's some company trying to shoehorn their proprietary standard into it so they can collect money on their intellectual property in licensing fees.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, while these companies fight tooth-and-nail with each other to get every little piece of tech they can into each 'standard,' they're all hoping that Philips doesn't come along and price the technology out of a reasonable profit margin.
I'm biased in that I work for Xiph, but selling a technology based on 'If you don't buy our crap, Microsoft will own your asses' is not exactly a proper technical evaluation criterion. It's like saying, 'Please buy Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, or TWIX WILL RULE THE WORLD!'
This is technology, not a run for Student Council. Whatever happened to releasing better technology and pimping the hell out of it? Sigh.
Slashdot Mirror
"It will never come out."
"It will never be as good as mp3."
"It will never be better than mp3."
"No one will use it but Linux folks."
"Now that you've lost funding, you'll never survive."
"You'll be shut down by Thomson/Fraunhofer."
"No hardware company will ever be interested in it."
Xiph.org Foundation - Proving assholes wrong since 1993.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
Yes, this is all true. We've got special plans to have Ogg Vorbis files Shock-Enabled[tm]; If you're listening to an Ogg Vorbis file and you think about copying it for a friend, a special patented algorithm will combine the electrical synapses in your brain and route the power directly to your spinal column, killing you instantly.
It's certainly a cost-savings over the all-weather troops that we've been using for the past few years.
Remember to keep your tinfoil hat on tight. :)
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
Well, gosh. Here I thought that an XML-aware database that would allow you to sync your XMMS playlists and things in addition to using it as a removable drive would be a useful feature. Seems people agree with me on this one.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
The Neuros has a port for an RF booster/antenna. Curious, no? :)
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
There is no such thing as 'CD-quality' when dealing with a lossy encoder like mp3 or Ogg Vorbis. True CD quality can only be attained with a lossless encoder, like FLAC or Shorten.
If you think Ogg Vorbis sounds better than mp3 at comparable bitrate or lower, then it's safe to say that you consider Ogg Vorbis representative of "better audio," or better reproduction of sound. If you do find this to be true, then you're in good company; Large amounts of double-blind testing agrees with you.
Bitrate is never irrelevant. Bitrate multiplied by time equals size, and anyone who has ever filled a hard drive could probably tell you about how some things can look very large indeed from far away, but hit their limit of usefulness in a curiously small amount of time.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
No, I wasn't. I was promoted to the position of Editor-in-Chief of Linux.com, then I resigned from there a few months later citing editorial differences. Then I started a web publishing project called Binary Freedom which lives on at System Toolbox, which I still occasionally write for.
I started a little comic/animation studio on the side, and went back to work as a UNIX Admin (which is what I was doing before I got involved in the whole web-journalism biz) at Digital Island/Exodus for about a year. I got cut in a massive acquisition layoff, chilled out for about a month and then started at Xiph at the request of the team here.
Now I run Xiph full-time, and release free music on the 'net in my spare time.
Wow, that was more than you really needed to know. But knowing is half the battle, etc.
Emmett
That's probably because it's set in Victorian England.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.Org Foundation
Here's a little meat for you:
2. RESTRICTIONS. Notwithstanding any provisions in this agreement to the contrary, Licensee may not (a) make, use or load into temporary memory any unapproved copies of the Licensed Materials without the appropriate license(s) for use on additional CPUs; (b) distribute the Licensed Materials; (c) modify, transmit, rent, lease or sublicense the Licensed Materials; (d) reverse-engineer, decompile or disassemble the Licensed Materials, except to the extent required to be permitted by applicable law; (e) disclose any source core or performance characteristics of the Licensed Materials to any person or entity; (f) use the Licensed Materials in a service bureau or "application service provider" environment or for the benefit of third parties; or (g) at any time do or permit to be done anything which shall adversely affect SoftSound's right, title or interest in the Licensed Materials. If the Licensed Materials are used within a country of the European Community, nothing in this Agreement shall be construed as restricting any rights available under the EC Council Directive 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer programs.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.Org Foundation
Except that Microsoft Word and Excel were actually Macintosh applications that were ported to Windows. Thank you for playing.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
And it doesn't end there. A modern violin does not sound like a violin that Mozart composed for. Why? Difference in materials in making one, and more importantly (even when you're dealing with Mozart-old violins) modern synthetics used in string making.
This is a bit of a hellaciously huge argument in the opera community, who strive to get recordings of pieces the way a composer intended. There's also a lot of little changes; The meaning of 'allegro' has changed over the years, as well as the 'note to tune by,' currently A 440.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
Oh, of course I'm biased, no doubt. But people should still know what they could be in for with MPEG-4. Emmett
Gosh, wouldn't it completely suck ass to be stuck with some idiot format that can't decide which one it wants to be, so it applies the same name to all of them, even though that they represent entirely different standards?
Wouldn't it suck even harder if you had to pay licensing fees to put that video that you shot using the camera you bought onto the webspace that you've paid for, and then be lost as to which standard they meant when they said 'MPEG-4?'
This is, of course, just the beginning. Wait until you have to pay them a licensing fee to convert one MPEG-4 format to another MPEG-4 format. Wait and see. Don't forget the most fun part... Licensing terms for MPEG-4 haven't even been set yet. It should be fun when Samsung sends you another bill.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.Org Foundation
I am what I am / I am my own special creation
So, come take a look / give me the hook or the ovation
It's my world / that I want to have a little pride in
My world / and it's not a place I have to hide in
Life's not worth a damn until you can say / I am what I am
'La Cage' was remade into a film called 'The Birdcage' that starred Robin Williams and Nathan Lane. It's about a couple of gay drag queens, a drag club in St. Tropez, and an uber-conservative (played by Gene Hackman). General hilarity ensues.
Now you know, and knowing is half the battle. By the way, no, I'm not gay. I just have too much damned useless trivia in my head.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
That's only in the context of having a non-profit company make games. You couldn't sell it as 'something that'll be really cool as long as you and everyone else signs on.' Initial development costs to produce a modern game that would attract the average buyers are unbelievably prohibitive.
I'm with you on Yankee Trader. Now I want to play some TradeWars 2002! :)
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
The problem is that the game market is larger than Hollywood, and nearly just as insane. The reason you see so many shooting, driving and fighting games at arcades today is because those genres have proven themselves as profitable. The stakes are simply too high to leave anything else to chance.
While the idea of a non-profit game company is interesting, the problem is that you need to raise an insane amount of capital to get one game on the shelves, raise an insane amount of capital again to promote it.
It may be possible to do this if you start with very small games, but even then you need to have a smash-hit tiny game to fund the next one. Still, I suspect it will all break down when you need to invest funds in order to promote and market the product.
Sony must be making a huge profit from EverQuest. Imagine if the profit were instead entirely turned around into actually improving the game (and releasing better games.)
I don't know how much it cost them to make the game, and I don't know how much they're making, so I couldn't tell you that they must be making money hand-over-fist. They do have a captive audience, and people like 'Mr. Victim' who posted the original story are still playing the game.
On the other hand, would you buy a game that got better based on how many people were playing it? Probably not. Everyone wants to buy a great game right away, not buy it and hope everyone plays so the game gets better. I really like the idea, but I don't think the universe is ready for this much maturity. It definitely worked back when people paid to play MUDs, but I think in the current state of the 'interactive entertainment' industry, it would be about as useful as a condom machine in the Vatican.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
Every commercial game produced is released in order to make money. The reality of this seems to have escaped the author of this review.
As a consumer, you have a number of choices. You can choose to buy the game and play it, or you can choose to buy the game and not play it. You can also choose not to buy the game, as well.
The problem that the author is trying to address has nothing to do with Everquest; It has everything to do with the perception of value. He wants you to know what you're getting into, and he obviously feels that EverQuest is not worth the money.
Some games are addictive; The only difference is that you're not spending $x every month to play Tetris. Saying that 'you can't win' doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There are a lot of games you can't win; I own several of them.
Spy Hunter (the arcade game) was a great game. It cost twenty-five cents, and there's no way to win. It goes on forever. If you want to play Spy Hunter as long as you want to play EverQuest, it'll cost a hell of a lot more, unless you have crazy-mad Spy Hunter skills.
EverQuest offers a flat monthly rate. Some people pay something like $10 an hour for this, because they only play a couple hours a month. Some people are logged in sixteen hours a day. From an entertainment point of view, the people who are 'addicted to the game' are actually getting more value for their money. Read that again. Addicted to EverQuest: Hopeless gamer, or thifty shopper?
Maybe they don't update their site as often as they should. Are site updates part of the cost, or can anyone access them? If you're not paying for it, it does not apply to the 'value for money' problem. Poor updates, inefficient game masters... If you don't want to deal with this, don't buy the game, I suppose. On the other hand, I wouldn't rush out and buy a game that claims 'Kick-Ass Support!' and 'EXTREME GAME-MASTERING.' Game companies in the future will likely feel the same way, and just keep putting hot chicks on the boxes in the store.
All in all, I do appreciate the honesty of the rant, and I do believe that many people may not understand the value proposition of EverQuest before they buy the game and start playing. On the other hand, caveat emptor, baby!
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
Well, no. Since we're talking about apartments, it's all about who owns that building. Sure, you can mount a dish on the outside of your window. You'll be able to see it from the street, which is where you'll be sleeping when your landlord kicks you out.
The United States has all sorts of goofy local statutes regarding things like this. Here in Philadelphia, there are certain things you cannot put on certain buildings even if you own them, because they're part of a 'historical area' or something like that. In many housing developments, you need to have changes to your house that you own including (but not limited to) building a deck, painting the front a different color, etc checked by a local or county zoning commission.
Some places are a little less nuts, but they're becoming more and more rare. Two people are neighbors, three people are a zoning commission.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
Apple does not support the Ogg Vorbis format in iTunes. There is a QuickTime component available that will enable you to play Vorbis files in iTunes, but due to it being a QuickTime hack (as opposed to format support within the application itself), certain things do not work as expected, and OS X will not properly associate Ogg Vorbis files as 'iTunes-compatible.'
So, there's the straight dope. I'm sorry if people are confused and irritated about this; We didn't submit this story.
If you do need help playing Vorbis files, please drop in on #vorbis on irc.xiph.org; Our crack team of off-topic ranters and audio illuminati are standing by 24/7, even during this busy holiday season. :)
As a side note, we're hacking like crazy this week! Want to help out? Stop by the IRC server and join #xiphtech for a quick run-down. Thanks!
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
The problem with this specific approach is that it lets the people with money invariably decide what we work on. This is not inherently a bad thing, especially if everyone gets access to the new code written, but it also means that we'd have to throw out a lot of good engineering implementing features that Joe Pocketbook wants. We make software for everyone.
2. Just like with Vorbis, keep everything GPL until stable 1.0 production release is reached. Then switch to BSD license. Distribute development releases under GPL only.
Vorbis went BSD long before 1.0. The problem is that I think that's kind of a bait-and-switch; Come work on this GPL product, surprise! We're making it BSD! This was easier to do with Vorbis in particular, because the number of developers on it was so small. I don't see a benefit (development or otherwise) to playing a licensure shell game, but maybe you're seeing something I'm not?
I am by no means comparing Xiph.org to Mandrake, but I do believe that same principle applies of how people view their support by donation. Ogg Vorbis is by far the best lossy compression format available today. Can't wait for Tarkin.
I agree, but the line between 'donate to a worthy cause' and 'bail out a company' is sufficiently blurred here. By the way, you should check out Theora if you're interested in video. Due out in June of 2003.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
Yes, exactly. By being a for-profit company, Mandrake has decided to play by those for-profit rules. Remember: For-profit companies are officially 'in it for the money,' no matter what they choose to give away.
And all I'm saying is, 'Gosh, it would be really nice if you'd think about donating to smaller projects instead of bailing out a for-profit company again.'
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
What situation? The situation that a company that has bled millions of dollars is once again asking for more cash from their captive audience? You're right, I am powerless to bail out MandrakeSoft. As far as 'following a similar route,' I doubt it. We never had millions to burn in the first place, and it's never been our goal to start a company and turn a massive profit.
I cannot and will not feel sorry for any company that burns through insane amounts of money like MandrakeSoft has. Just because they sell Linux services does not mean they get special dispensation; When they opted to jump into the corporate fray, all bets were off. You compete, or you die. It is often vicious. It is often difficult. It is often unfair. But that's the game.
The Linux world will be a poorer place without Mandrake. This call for help was directed at the existing community of Mandrake users. If you do not want to support Mandrake, then don't. But don't use your position to degrade them and discourage others from supporting them. That makes you a very ugly person in my eyes.
Call me crazy, but this isn't the first time that MandrakeSoft has done this. I think it's irresponsible. Where are they spending this money? How are they going through this much cash, this quickly?
While you may be a huge fan of the Mandrake distribution, please understand that while they're a for-profit corporation, they're playing the for-profit game. When my phone bill comes, I don't ask my friends and family to help me pay it, just because I am a brilliant conversationalist. I have my own debts, I take on my own responsibilities. MandrakeSoft is acting like a college kid, calling home for pizza money.
Imagine if all companies did this. Wouldn't you find it extremely offensive if McDonald's employees came up to you during your meal, asking you to help them out with some of their expenses?
"Hi, how are you? I hope you're enjoying that Big Mac. You know, we work really hard on the Big Mac, and we'd like to continue making Big Macs for the next few years. Unfortunately, the current economy hasn't been too kind to us, and we're feeling a little less like Ronald, and more like Grimace."
You would find it irritating. You would find it annoying. You might not ever go back there again, and you'd tell your friends about it. I'm just asking you to consider the nice little diner down the street when you're tired of being shaken down by the clown.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
By my watch, with the amount of money that Mandrake has already spent, they should have the absolute best commercial distribution of Linux available. There should be no question as to the performance of Mandrake compared to any other commercial version. They should be kicking ass and taking names. Unfortunately, the only ass they're kicking is the collective behind of the Linux community, and the only names they're taking are followed by credit card numbers.
Meanwhile, we're a non-profit company that produces the absolute best-of-class general-purpose audio compression codec in the world, proprietary or otherwise. We've been through recessions and poor economic times before; Hopefully we'll live through this one, too. Everybody and their brother has a Linux distribution; Why don't you support the smaller projects that actually make a difference?
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
Hate to disappoint, but I didn't. Ogg Vorbis is the invention of Christopher Montgomery, our technical director. I'm just the paperwork monkey, gadabout and bon-vivant that runs the company. Xiph produces Ogg Vorbis (and a laundry list of other cool stuff), though.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.Org Foundation
Hey there. Please place the crackpipe down, and listen to me for a moment. MPEG-4 is not a 'safe' standard. Hell, it's not even a standard. It is the same proprietary crap you've been spoon-fed for the past ten years (or more), but with a lot more companies involved, looking for their piece of the action. How will they get at it? Oh, yes. With patents. Quelle surprise.
If you really want people like Texas Instruments to do something that would make a lot more sense, you would push for them to release an expanded line of DSP's and hardware that is container and codec agnostic. Demand more from your chips. Don't tell TI 'design a chip for MPEG-4,' tell them to stop making chips that require hideously expensive compilers and NDA's.
The biggest win for the consumer is a chip manufacturer that lets the consumer decide, not a chip manufacturer that does what it's told by Dorky Portable Magazine.
I don't want TI to make chips that just support Ogg. I want TI to make chips that support stuff today, and give me at least a fighting chance on supporting tomorrow's Codec du Jour. People freak out if they buy a home computer that won't last them for a year. I encourage people to think the same way about their portable technology, as well. You shouldn't settle for less, and you shouldn't buy from companies that do, either.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.org Foundation
Interesting thing about that MPEG4 'standard.' There isn't one. MPEG4 for mobile devices is a lot different than MPEG4 for desktop computers, which is a lot different than MPEG4 for the professional video market. With every new iteration of MPEG, there's some company trying to shoehorn their proprietary standard into it so they can collect money on their intellectual property in licensing fees.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, while these companies fight tooth-and-nail with each other to get every little piece of tech they can into each 'standard,' they're all hoping that Philips doesn't come along and price the technology out of a reasonable profit margin.
I'm biased in that I work for Xiph, but selling a technology based on 'If you don't buy our crap, Microsoft will own your asses' is not exactly a proper technical evaluation criterion. It's like saying, 'Please buy Reese's Peanut Butter Cups, or TWIX WILL RULE THE WORLD!'
This is technology, not a run for Student Council. Whatever happened to releasing better technology and pimping the hell out of it? Sigh.
Emmett Plant
CEO, Xiph.Org Foundation
Go get yourself some free music.