I still think that someone should make a game called "Nazi Bastard" where you get to play WW2 backwards as a time-travelling, socially-unfit Nazi supersoldier who was sent from Adolf Hitler's secret command bunker on the inside of the hollow Earth. Postal meets Call of Duty's evil twin. Not because I think that Nazis are cool but because WW2 games are so goddamn annoyingly common that it's time to pay some serious disrespect. Not to the brave soldiers who fought the war but to the genre of WW2 FPSes.
Maybe the sequel, "Nazi Bastard Zwei, du Hurensohn" could be about the good Adolf Hitler from Vega waging war on he evil Adolf Hitler and his lizardman masters inside Earth (a big twist being that you were actually working for the bad guys in the first part). Features include real hydrodynamics for your piss, the ability to projectile vomit after looking at lizardman porn (enemies even slip on your vomit!) and a minigame where you put red warrior ants into the Omaha beach sand right before the Allies invade.
The problem is not realism, the problem is maturing. The gaming industry mtures and becomes more and more like the music and movie industries: Averse to experimentation and focused on ROI. Modern games are immensely expensive (because everyone expects superb graphics and cinema-level sound) and thus nobody wants, to quote a panel from this years' GCDC, to make a steampunk MMORPG about the French wine industry.
That's why every game has to be first-person or over-the-shoulder: Those games sell best so who cares about the bird's view fraction? The same applies to difficulty: Very few games can afford being really hard. Most people don't like that - and since things that force you to be careful and think a lot are especially hard that's what gets tossed out first. The result are games like BioShock - in System Shock 2 you were constantly worrying about the state of your weapons, ammunition, where to find nanites, whether to learn how to handle the crystal shard or how to repair your assault rifle... Even the individual actions were harder; hacking/repairing occured in realtime while enemies might sneak up on you and might leave you with no chance of success at all. In BioShock they got rid of most of that so that you can focus on shooting things. Realism actually took the back seat here gameplay-wise.
It's also the reason why I think that the Nintendo DS has a vastly superior lineup compared to the current-gen consoles: The NDS is very limited, so games have to make clever use of its assets rather than just throw pixel shaders at the problem. At the same time it's powerful enough for careful ports of last-gen games like Disgaea.
So yeah, realistic presentation does get in the way of creative games simply because it makes games hellishly expensive and nobody wants to burn ten million dollars on an experiment. Unrelated to that, most games try to be quite forgiving so as not to alienate anyone by being too hard.
At the same time the indie developers continue to release whatever they can come up with (giving us titles like World of Goo) and portables still aren't quite powerful enough to abandon clever design in favor of graphics. So that's where you find interesting games not desperately wanting to be like Halo.
By compiling the whole page from all kinds of formats into a single, unified format, anything that is possible in one format becomes possible in all formats.
Which, of course, means that you have to use a hybrid format that most likely will not work at all when you use your document with a software not based on that concept.
Also, I think that trying to mix not only syntactically but also conceptually very different languages like HTML and TeX could become a nightmare unless you are prepared to just throw half of each format out of the window. For example, TeX takes its time to generate very precise output, which would really conflict with not just HTML's approach of just trying to fit something somewhere (making HTML in TeX a bit of a headache) but especially with HTML that gets modified by JavaScript or CSS on-the-fly. A CSS:hover could cause an HTML element's box to resize, forcing the entire TeX part to be recompiled - which could, of course, result in the element you're hovering over to be moved from under the mouse.
Also, of course, if an object has a property n one supprted language it would have that property in all supported languages. This would be problematic if several languages use the same property in different ways and it certainly wouldn't make the DOM more usable if every object could have several dozen unused properties, depending on which enignes I have installed.
Your approach migh work if restricted to a set of very similar languages (like XML, HTML and SGML), but in that case a specific engine that targets the language family in question will most likely already yield good results.
Also note how the concept of using one generic intermediate language for programming language compilers was abandoned because the languages were found to be too conceptually different. Of course Microsoft is now fielding the.NET platform but they solved the problem by substantially changing every language until it fit in. I think we're looking at a very similar situation here.
I really get the feeling I'm feeding a troll here, but here goes anoher post with the exact same point...
That is not, however, the point of FLAC.
In that case we might agree that FLAC is unsuitable for replacing MP3, thus FLAC is unsuitable for becoming the default digital sudio format, thus the format they should make a label for is not FLAC. I already pointed out why the label needs to talk about a specific format.
MP3 isn't free. In either sense of the word, if you're encoding.
Well, in that case it's probably good that I never used it in the sentence where I talk about free formats. I admit that the "free" was not positioned optimally; "the only free other formats" would have been clearer in conveying what I meant: The only other formats that happen to be free.
And this isn't an entirely unheard of proposition. There are at least a few online stores that I buy from which have both MP3 and FLAC. Some also have Vorbis. And they can charge more for FLAC, anyway
Yes, but in the end all alternative formats fail in not being MP3. MP3 is the Windows of audio file formats: Not being compatible is seen as a flaw in itself and due to (near) 100% market penetration it is the standard period. If you want to change that you have to change the entire music player market (including portables, standalones, car radios...) AND change the entire userbase. Unless you significantly take both market share and brain share away from MP3 it's going to stay the default format because it's the default format.
To use another analogy: MP3 is DVD. FLAC is BluRay. Most people are using 20" CRT TVs and are perfectly happy with them. Good luck trying to upsell them on a new format that does nothing for them unless they buy expensive replacements for their perfectly-okay gear.
Ogg Vorbis would be XviD DVD. You can rip it to a smaller ISO than a regular DVD but it doesn't work with all players.
Not just the iPhone halo. For example, in my university's CS department Apple is among the most popular notebook brands, duking it out with Lenovo and - as of lately - the bulkiest Sony Vaio model (among the students; the lecturers tend to use mostly MBPs, followed by ThinkPads). A nice thing about Aple notebooks is that they're pretty price-competitive as long as you don't buy a bigger HDD/RAM from Apple.
Why is the Mac so popular? Because it not only has a really nice GUI but also is a hassle-free full-fledged Unix. And, of course, it gets stuff like Photoshop. Linux is a decent alternative (guess why everyone likes Thinkpads so much) but it requires much more time and energy to keep running... And with a student-discounted version of Parallels or VMWare you can still run it in a VM - or you use Boot Camp.
So with a Mac you get OS X, a nice bootloader that allows you do dual-or triple-boot into Linux and Windows, Unix goodness, big proprietary apps and decent hardware in a relatively compact form factor for a decent price.
So yeah, in some cases people buy Macs because Macs really are a good choice.
The amusing part is that Linux and OS X wouldn't even be neccessary for Microsoft to get unter competition pressure. Vista ended up being so bad that many users prefer XP over it. And tat, apart from external competition, is something Microsoft really has to fear: The end of the upgrade treadmill. If everything stagnated over an ever-evolving XP Mixrosoft couldn't continually upsell people on new versions of Windows.
It's be interesting to see whether the Vista Plus Pack - ahem - Windows 7 will be able to get the treadmill going faster again.
As the point is do become an immensely popular DRM-free digital music format and nothing else: No. FLAC's properties ensure that most will find it unsuitable because MP3 already faithfully-enough reproduces their overcompressed rock/pop/rap songs on their iPod with the $5 earphones and anything that adds further space requirement is essentially just dead weight.
It doesn't need to cite specific formats -- if it's the wrong one, it's easily converted, unlike a DRM'd version.
Who cares? The vast majority of people only cares about MP3 - it does everything they want, plays everywhere and is reasonably small. The only other free formats they could use are Ogg Vorbis (slightly smaller, doesn't run everywhere -> no deal) and FLAC (much larger, perhaps slightly better sound, doesn't run everywhere -> no deal) and those aren't attractive.
The only other format people care about is CD Audio and most people already know you can burn MP3s to a CD.
This is a point where the Free * world is disconnected from the general market: Most users neither care about MP3 being patent-encumbered nor do they care about MP3 being inferior to most other formats. Neither do they want to care. All they want is a way to get their latest Nickelback album onto their iPod Shuffle with the minimum of hassle and knowledge required. "MP3 is digital music" is all they want to have to know about the topic. Maybe "192 kilobytes are good, 320 kilobytes are CD-quality" for the "high-fidelity" crowd (read: those who actually spend $30 on their earphones).
Ogg Vorbis and FLAC are formats mostly Free * advocates and audiophiles care about. The rest of the world is happy with MP3, just like they were happy with VHS and not Betamax. And they are as interested in alternative formats as you are interested in an in-depth comparison of cotton vs. linen vs. cotton-linen mix vs. microfiber for dish towels.
- Penetration. Virtually every portable player, car stereo, PC and other device capale of audio playback supports MP3. FLAC is only found on certain jukeboxes, some PCs and some portable players. Yes, this is a feedback cycle.
- Recognition. Virtually everybody knows MP3 and associates it with unrestricted digital audio. Portable music players are even usually called "MP3 players". Most people have never even heard of FLAC.
- Efficiency. MP3 is Good Enough fr most users while consuming less space and resources than FLAC.
FLAC is nice but to most people it's simply not important whether their player supports it or not. MP3, on the other hand, is a definite requirement.
No, the question is, why did they give a specific format their logo?
See "Recognition" above. They want to distinguish their offering from that of others by not using DRM. MP3 has a strong reputation as being not only DRM-free but also the audio format of choice. Telling people that they sell "100% compatible MP3s" sends a much clearer signal than telling them they sell "100% compatible audio".
If you want the industry to use a "100% compatible FLAC" logo to inform people of their DRM-free tracks you have to get to a point where FLAC is a household term, people are running around with "FLAC players" and any player not supporting FLAC will simply be rejected by the market. You need to put FLAC into the position currently occupied by MP3. That's my entire point.
Flac is royalty-free and open source. What more could they do to get into portable media players?
Make it so that FLAC does not require more powerful hardware than MP3. And make FLAC as important as MP3.
We're talking about a full-fledged MP3 replacement here. Remember, this is not about "this would be nice as a parallel thing" but about "why did they give MP3 and not FLAC their logo". And the answer is that FLAC is neither universally supported nor universally used. Everyone knows MP3, most people find it sufficient and virtually every device can play it.
FLAC is nice and I think it's good when a device supports it, but it's not an MP3 replacement.
Well, some life-support is neccessary - not only does the shuttle need a bit of time to reach the space station, there might also be a problem that keeps the shuttle from immediately re-entering/reaching the station.
Think of the Space Shuttle Columbia: It would have been possible (and was recommended by certain people) to check the hull of the shuttle before entering the athmosphere and, in case of a fault (which we now know existed) attempt a rough patch-up or wait for another shuttle to rescue the astronauts. Any shuttle could find itself in a similar situation and it needs to be able to sustain life onboard for a few days longer than strictly neccessary so the engineers on the ground can attempt to find a solution besides "suffocate" and "burn up".
Ogg support is greater than 0% but it's also lower than 100%. I know that my last player didn't do Ogg even though one of its selling points was that Ogg support would come with a later firmware patch (it turned out the processor wasn't fast enough for Tremor). There still are players around that don't do anything but MP3 - but even on players designed for AAC or WMV, MP3 is no problem.
That's nice. Now show me a generic $20 portable MP3 player that also pays FLAC. "Generic" means "I type 'music player' into the eBay search box and select a random result", not "I have to buy a particular model or brand".
The problem is that people want to share their files between all of their devices without any hassle at all. Buying specific hardware for compatibility reasons is acceptable for the average Linux user but most people expect things to Just Work. When a format is not supported by all devices on the market that's not a fault of the device but of the format.
FLAC is probably nice for the people who buy home jukeboxes but it can't be an MP3 replacement unless it is at least as commonly suported as MP3. That means 100% market penetration everywhere, which seems impossible as FLAC requires more powerful hardware than MP3 and thus can't compete in the ultra-low cost sector.
If someone decides to start an anti-DRM alliance I think something like "Customers First" would be a good name for a logo/certificate/etc. Essentially something that implies that a) the music is not considered to be consumed by the end user and b) the members consider the customer more important than the distributor.
It's the old "good vs. good enough" thing again. MP3 is good enough. If you want realy high quality then 320 kbps MP3 is good enough. If you want even more quality you're someone who thinks 5000 bucks is not too much to spend on a new sound system and thus aren't representative for the average listener.
OTOH, Mastroska is pretty complex and I don't know whether they can guarantee it's patent-free. Of course, not being involved with codec of Firefox development I have no idea whether those concerns are of, well, concern to Fx/Opera devs.
At a local shopping center town (in American terms it's a big mall; in German terms it's a small town made up solely of warehouses) the music department uses hard plastic shells with built-in wireless chips (this system predated RFID). The cashiers there know how to open them - it's a function built into the register and works essentially like the one that removes the antitheft tag from clothes. There are no slowdowns and buying there only takes marginally more time than buying somewhere else. We're talking five seconds tops.
As the trend goes to software being sold with nothing much besides the DVD we might very well just give people the jewel case and put an antitheft shell around it. And then we use bigger shells with the same locking mechanism for hardware. Bam, immediately training transfers between the music, software and hardware departments.
If your cashiers are too stupid to know how to operate the detagging device on the register - what the hell are you doing emplying such morons? The fact that they're cheap doesn't mean they're cost-effective.
Slashdot Mirror
I still think that someone should make a game called "Nazi Bastard" where you get to play WW2 backwards as a time-travelling, socially-unfit Nazi supersoldier who was sent from Adolf Hitler's secret command bunker on the inside of the hollow Earth. Postal meets Call of Duty's evil twin. Not because I think that Nazis are cool but because WW2 games are so goddamn annoyingly common that it's time to pay some serious disrespect. Not to the brave soldiers who fought the war but to the genre of WW2 FPSes.
Maybe the sequel, "Nazi Bastard Zwei, du Hurensohn" could be about the good Adolf Hitler from Vega waging war on he evil Adolf Hitler and his lizardman masters inside Earth (a big twist being that you were actually working for the bad guys in the first part). Features include real hydrodynamics for your piss, the ability to projectile vomit after looking at lizardman porn (enemies even slip on your vomit!) and a minigame where you put red warrior ants into the Omaha beach sand right before the Allies invade.
The problem is not realism, the problem is maturing. The gaming industry mtures and becomes more and more like the music and movie industries: Averse to experimentation and focused on ROI. Modern games are immensely expensive (because everyone expects superb graphics and cinema-level sound) and thus nobody wants, to quote a panel from this years' GCDC, to make a steampunk MMORPG about the French wine industry.
That's why every game has to be first-person or over-the-shoulder: Those games sell best so who cares about the bird's view fraction? The same applies to difficulty: Very few games can afford being really hard. Most people don't like that - and since things that force you to be careful and think a lot are especially hard that's what gets tossed out first. The result are games like BioShock - in System Shock 2 you were constantly worrying about the state of your weapons, ammunition, where to find nanites, whether to learn how to handle the crystal shard or how to repair your assault rifle... Even the individual actions were harder; hacking/repairing occured in realtime while enemies might sneak up on you and might leave you with no chance of success at all. In BioShock they got rid of most of that so that you can focus on shooting things. Realism actually took the back seat here gameplay-wise.
It's also the reason why I think that the Nintendo DS has a vastly superior lineup compared to the current-gen consoles: The NDS is very limited, so games have to make clever use of its assets rather than just throw pixel shaders at the problem. At the same time it's powerful enough for careful ports of last-gen games like Disgaea.
So yeah, realistic presentation does get in the way of creative games simply because it makes games hellishly expensive and nobody wants to burn ten million dollars on an experiment. Unrelated to that, most games try to be quite forgiving so as not to alienate anyone by being too hard.
At the same time the indie developers continue to release whatever they can come up with (giving us titles like World of Goo) and portables still aren't quite powerful enough to abandon clever design in favor of graphics. So that's where you find interesting games not desperately wanting to be like Halo.
I'm not sure whether the logo says "100% MP3 compatible" or "MP3 - 100% compatible", but a DRM'd MP3 would not meet those requirements either way.
*whooosh*
Which, of course, means that you have to use a hybrid format that most likely will not work at all when you use your document with a software not based on that concept.
:hover could cause an HTML element's box to resize, forcing the entire TeX part to be recompiled - which could, of course, result in the element you're hovering over to be moved from under the mouse.
.NET platform but they solved the problem by substantially changing every language until it fit in. I think we're looking at a very similar situation here.
Also, I think that trying to mix not only syntactically but also conceptually very different languages like HTML and TeX could become a nightmare unless you are prepared to just throw half of each format out of the window. For example, TeX takes its time to generate very precise output, which would really conflict with not just HTML's approach of just trying to fit something somewhere (making HTML in TeX a bit of a headache) but especially with HTML that gets modified by JavaScript or CSS on-the-fly. A CSS
Also, of course, if an object has a property n one supprted language it would have that property in all supported languages. This would be problematic if several languages use the same property in different ways and it certainly wouldn't make the DOM more usable if every object could have several dozen unused properties, depending on which enignes I have installed.
Your approach migh work if restricted to a set of very similar languages (like XML, HTML and SGML), but in that case a specific engine that targets the language family in question will most likely already yield good results.
Also note how the concept of using one generic intermediate language for programming language compilers was abandoned because the languages were found to be too conceptually different. Of course Microsoft is now fielding the
1. Get VLC
2. Make VLC the default application for MP3s
3. Open your MP3s from the Finder (which is what you want to do anyway)
Also, "Audiocock" is not a much worse name for a music player than the ones already in use.
In that case we might agree that FLAC is unsuitable for replacing MP3, thus FLAC is unsuitable for becoming the default digital sudio format, thus the format they should make a label for is not FLAC. I already pointed out why the label needs to talk about a specific format.
Well, in that case it's probably good that I never used it in the sentence where I talk about free formats. I admit that the "free" was not positioned optimally; "the only free other formats" would have been clearer in conveying what I meant: The only other formats that happen to be free.
Yes, but in the end all alternative formats fail in not being MP3. MP3 is the Windows of audio file formats: Not being compatible is seen as a flaw in itself and due to (near) 100% market penetration it is the standard period. If you want to change that you have to change the entire music player market (including portables, standalones, car radios...) AND change the entire userbase. Unless you significantly take both market share and brain share away from MP3 it's going to stay the default format because it's the default format.
To use another analogy: MP3 is DVD. FLAC is BluRay. Most people are using 20" CRT TVs and are perfectly happy with them. Good luck trying to upsell them on a new format that does nothing for them unless they buy expensive replacements for their perfectly-okay gear.
Ogg Vorbis would be XviD DVD. You can rip it to a smaller ISO than a regular DVD but it doesn't work with all players.
1. Read the Linux driver.
2. Figure out how to talk to the hardware.
3. Write the BSD driver.
Step 2 is made much easier by step 1. Without step 1 you have to talk to the hardware without any kind of reference.
Not just the iPhone halo. For example, in my university's CS department Apple is among the most popular notebook brands, duking it out with Lenovo and - as of lately - the bulkiest Sony Vaio model (among the students; the lecturers tend to use mostly MBPs, followed by ThinkPads). A nice thing about Aple notebooks is that they're pretty price-competitive as long as you don't buy a bigger HDD/RAM from Apple.
Why is the Mac so popular? Because it not only has a really nice GUI but also is a hassle-free full-fledged Unix. And, of course, it gets stuff like Photoshop. Linux is a decent alternative (guess why everyone likes Thinkpads so much) but it requires much more time and energy to keep running... And with a student-discounted version of Parallels or VMWare you can still run it in a VM - or you use Boot Camp.
So with a Mac you get OS X, a nice bootloader that allows you do dual-or triple-boot into Linux and Windows, Unix goodness, big proprietary apps and decent hardware in a relatively compact form factor for a decent price.
So yeah, in some cases people buy Macs because Macs really are a good choice.
The amusing part is that Linux and OS X wouldn't even be neccessary for Microsoft to get unter competition pressure. Vista ended up being so bad that many users prefer XP over it. And tat, apart from external competition, is something Microsoft really has to fear: The end of the upgrade treadmill. If everything stagnated over an ever-evolving XP Mixrosoft couldn't continually upsell people on new versions of Windows.
It's be interesting to see whether the Vista Plus Pack - ahem - Windows 7 will be able to get the treadmill going faster again.
As the point is do become an immensely popular DRM-free digital music format and nothing else: No. FLAC's properties ensure that most will find it unsuitable because MP3 already faithfully-enough reproduces their overcompressed rock/pop/rap songs on their iPod with the $5 earphones and anything that adds further space requirement is essentially just dead weight.
Who cares? The vast majority of people only cares about MP3 - it does everything they want, plays everywhere and is reasonably small. The only other free formats they could use are Ogg Vorbis (slightly smaller, doesn't run everywhere -> no deal) and FLAC (much larger, perhaps slightly better sound, doesn't run everywhere -> no deal) and those aren't attractive.
The only other format people care about is CD Audio and most people already know you can burn MP3s to a CD.
This is a point where the Free * world is disconnected from the general market: Most users neither care about MP3 being patent-encumbered nor do they care about MP3 being inferior to most other formats. Neither do they want to care. All they want is a way to get their latest Nickelback album onto their iPod Shuffle with the minimum of hassle and knowledge required. "MP3 is digital music" is all they want to have to know about the topic. Maybe "192 kilobytes are good, 320 kilobytes are CD-quality" for the "high-fidelity" crowd (read: those who actually spend $30 on their earphones).
Ogg Vorbis and FLAC are formats mostly Free * advocates and audiophiles care about. The rest of the world is happy with MP3, just like they were happy with VHS and not Betamax. And they are as interested in alternative formats as you are interested in an in-depth comparison of cotton vs. linen vs. cotton-linen mix vs. microfiber for dish towels.
- Penetration. Virtually every portable player, car stereo, PC and other device capale of audio playback supports MP3. FLAC is only found on certain jukeboxes, some PCs and some portable players. Yes, this is a feedback cycle.
- Recognition. Virtually everybody knows MP3 and associates it with unrestricted digital audio. Portable music players are even usually called "MP3 players". Most people have never even heard of FLAC.
- Efficiency. MP3 is Good Enough fr most users while consuming less space and resources than FLAC.
FLAC is nice but to most people it's simply not important whether their player supports it or not. MP3, on the other hand, is a definite requirement.
See "Recognition" above. They want to distinguish their offering from that of others by not using DRM. MP3 has a strong reputation as being not only DRM-free but also the audio format of choice. Telling people that they sell "100% compatible MP3s" sends a much clearer signal than telling them they sell "100% compatible audio".
If you want the industry to use a "100% compatible FLAC" logo to inform people of their DRM-free tracks you have to get to a point where FLAC is a household term, people are running around with "FLAC players" and any player not supporting FLAC will simply be rejected by the market. You need to put FLAC into the position currently occupied by MP3. That's my entire point.
Make it so that FLAC does not require more powerful hardware than MP3. And make FLAC as important as MP3.
We're talking about a full-fledged MP3 replacement here. Remember, this is not about "this would be nice as a parallel thing" but about "why did they give MP3 and not FLAC their logo". And the answer is that FLAC is neither universally supported nor universally used. Everyone knows MP3, most people find it sufficient and virtually every device can play it.
FLAC is nice and I think it's good when a device supports it, but it's not an MP3 replacement.
Well, some life-support is neccessary - not only does the shuttle need a bit of time to reach the space station, there might also be a problem that keeps the shuttle from immediately re-entering/reaching the station.
Think of the Space Shuttle Columbia: It would have been possible (and was recommended by certain people) to check the hull of the shuttle before entering the athmosphere and, in case of a fault (which we now know existed) attempt a rough patch-up or wait for another shuttle to rescue the astronauts. Any shuttle could find itself in a similar situation and it needs to be able to sustain life onboard for a few days longer than strictly neccessary so the engineers on the ground can attempt to find a solution besides "suffocate" and "burn up".
Ogg support is greater than 0% but it's also lower than 100%. I know that my last player didn't do Ogg even though one of its selling points was that Ogg support would come with a later firmware patch (it turned out the processor wasn't fast enough for Tremor). There still are players around that don't do anything but MP3 - but even on players designed for AAC or WMV, MP3 is no problem.
That's nice. Now show me a generic $20 portable MP3 player that also pays FLAC. "Generic" means "I type 'music player' into the eBay search box and select a random result", not "I have to buy a particular model or brand".
The problem is that people want to share their files between all of their devices without any hassle at all. Buying specific hardware for compatibility reasons is acceptable for the average Linux user but most people expect things to Just Work. When a format is not supported by all devices on the market that's not a fault of the device but of the format.
FLAC is probably nice for the people who buy home jukeboxes but it can't be an MP3 replacement unless it is at least as commonly suported as MP3. That means 100% market penetration everywhere, which seems impossible as FLAC requires more powerful hardware than MP3 and thus can't compete in the ultra-low cost sector.
If someone decides to start an anti-DRM alliance I think something like "Customers First" would be a good name for a logo/certificate/etc. Essentially something that implies that a) the music is not considered to be consumed by the end user and b) the members consider the customer more important than the distributor.
In that case the DRM logo is a raised middle finger. If that doesn't work, Goatse.
It's the old "good vs. good enough" thing again. MP3 is good enough. If you want realy high quality then 320 kbps MP3 is good enough. If you want even more quality you're someone who thinks 5000 bucks is not too much to spend on a new sound system and thus aren't representative for the average listener.
Are there even any unhacked non-PC devices that play FLAC? Nothing against FLAC, but even Ogg Vorbis' ~5% market penetration is much ahead of FLAC's.
And C++ does everything GW-Basic does, being Turing-complete.
OTOH, Mastroska is pretty complex and I don't know whether they can guarantee it's patent-free. Of course, not being involved with codec of Firefox development I have no idea whether those concerns are of, well, concern to Fx/Opera devs.
That's the point. Theora adds one useful thing: Freedom from licensing costs.
At a local shopping center town (in American terms it's a big mall; in German terms it's a small town made up solely of warehouses) the music department uses hard plastic shells with built-in wireless chips (this system predated RFID). The cashiers there know how to open them - it's a function built into the register and works essentially like the one that removes the antitheft tag from clothes. There are no slowdowns and buying there only takes marginally more time than buying somewhere else. We're talking five seconds tops.
As the trend goes to software being sold with nothing much besides the DVD we might very well just give people the jewel case and put an antitheft shell around it. And then we use bigger shells with the same locking mechanism for hardware. Bam, immediately training transfers between the music, software and hardware departments.
If your cashiers are too stupid to know how to operate the detagging device on the register - what the hell are you doing emplying such morons? The fact that they're cheap doesn't mean they're cost-effective.