[whatwg] Removal of Ogg is *preposterous*
foolistbar at googlemail.com
Tue Dec 11 12:55:10 PST 2007
On 11 Dec 2007, at 20:12, Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) wrote:
>> It was intended as meaning "recognized" in the sense of browsers
>> recognising them. No currently shipping browser recognises either Ogg
>> Vorbis or FLAC.
> If I use EMBED on Konqueror pointing to an Ogg Vorbis file, I get a
> player with streaming and everything. Konqueror's shipping, isn't it?
> There is at least *one* browser that already supports, through
> GStreamer, Ogg
> in <video> tags. I'd give you the link but it apparently fell off
> the end of
> Planet GNOME so I can't find it... Now hold on, it's not shipping,
> but that
> doesn't mean it won't be shipping tomorrow.
> What you actually wanted to say (but couldn't/didn't/were unwilling
> to) is:
> "No currently shipping browser by any of the major proprietary
> vendors support Ogg Vorbis or FLAC".
Nor any of the minor ones, nor most open source ones.
Also, I assume through Konqueror relying on GStreamer that Konqueror
doesn't support it itself (or through a required dependancy, which is
needed to actually conform to such a clause that existed). WebKit
trunk also supports Ogg in <video> if you have the needed QT component
(which is supporting it as much as Konqueror supports it). Opera 9.5
beta has built in support for Ogg/etc. and supports nothing else.
There are still large questions about when Fx will support (which I
assume from your later post is what you were referring to) <video>
natively, though it may well be in Fx 3.0 in early '08.
>>> It's just dollars.
>> Apple does not license Apple Lossless to anyone else AFAIK,
> OK. So they sell fewer iPods because iPods don't play Ogg Vorbis
> Rockbox. Same outcome.
Oh, look, they are already losing custom through not supporting WMA.
It doesn't look like they particularly care about that, does it?
>> and the
>> only standards that MPEG-LA collects money for that Apple receives
>> share of whatsoever is "MPEG-4 Systems" and IEEE 1394 (Firewire).
>> Neither of these have anything to do with audio/video codecs. Saying
>> that Apple has a financial interest in wanting MPEG codecs mandated
>> HTML 5 is totally untrue.
> I didn't say Apple wanted MPEG codecs mandated in HTML 5, so don't
> put words
> in my mouth or attempt to smoke-and-mirrors us with straw men. This
> either a fumble on your part or an attempt to derail the discussion
No, it is me trying to understand what you're meaning.
> I said Apple doesn't want Ogg Vorbis because they don't control the
> tech, and
> because they would very much rather have consumers "prefer" (in the
> sense of
> being screwed with no choice) DRM-encumbered AAC (note it's not the
> but the controlling of the consumer that matters here).
AAC doesn't support DRM natively. It's a proprietary extension. iTunes
has always ripped CDs by default into non-DRM-encumbered AAC (i.e., an
open standard, and compatible with numerous players). Apple has never,
anywhere where it has a choice, favoured DRM-encumbered standards.
More information about the whatwg