30% Apple

[jarod-ajLrJawYSntWk0Htik3J/w at public.gmane.org (Jarod Wilson)]

On Feb 17, 2011, at 1:58 PM, Matthew Gillen wrote:

> On 02/17/2011 12:51 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
>> On Feb 17, 2011, at 10:56 AM, Matthew Gillen wrote:
>> 
>>> On 02/17/2011 10:13 AM, Dan O'Donovan wrote:
>>>> It's also worth noting that Apple seldom make choices that result in a loss of experience for ... their customers 
>>> 
>>> Really?  Does iTunes/iPod support open formats like Ogg or Flac?  No.
>> 
>> Do most (non-lug-subscribing) users care that relatively esoteric
>> formats aren't supported? I'm going to go with "No".
> 
> 10 years ago you could have said the same thing about how most people
> don't care if their connection to a given website is secured with SSL.
> Just because "most non-lug-subscribers" don't know enough to care
> doesn't mean it doesn't matter.

Didn't say it doesn't matter. Said lack of ogg or flac support does not
do much of anything to diminish the experience for the vast majority of
Apple customers.


> My point was that in the long term, having patent-encumbered formats as
> consumers' only option is harmful to the consumer.

Unfortunately, we're kinda already screwed. Broadcast television is now
MPEG-2. DVDs are MPEG-2. BluRay discs are h.264/VC1. The major online
music sellers all sell their music in mp3, aac or wma formats (ttbomk),
and the vast majority of music players (be they personal portable ones,
home theater receivers, car stereos, whatever) support at least two of
those three, while very very few support ogg or flac.


> It increases costs
> for content producers, which has all sorts of negative effects.  As a
> Fedora guy, I'm kind of surprised you're making this argument.  Don't
> you get sick of people complaining that they can't listen to their music
> collection with an out-of-the-box Fedora install?

Sure, but NOT supporting all the mainstream entrenched (and yes,
patent-encumbered) codecs is the bigger issue to me than adding support
for fringe codecs. None of the US television broadcasters is going to
start suddenly sending their programming out over the air in theora or
webm format. Wal-Mart and Amazon aren't likely to double (or more)
their storage requirements and start selling music in ogg vorbis format
(and Apple obviously won't).

Outside of internet video, its pretty much a hopeless, lost cause. Call
me bitter or defeated or whatever, but that's how I see it. I'm even
dubious over internet video too, given the prevalence of hardware that
is already out in the field that does h.264 hardware decode, but hasn't
even got a clue what webm is. Anyway, I have other battles to fight
that I actually think are actually winnable. :)


>>> Sure, you can replace the firmware on your ipod with rockbox or the
>>> like, but that's not exactly the Apple experience, is it?
>> 
>> Does Ogg or Flac playback decode in hardware or software? If its in
>> software, well, that's a compelling reason for not supporting it right
>> there -- it'll slaughter battery life.
> 
> But they already support multiple formats (MP3, AAC, WAV, etc).  So I
> don't buy that it was too technically difficult to support it with
> hardware, or that they have mp3-specific decoding hardware.  The ipod
> Touch uses a 'custom' ARM processor.  I would guess that the 'custom'
> part there has more to do with the integrated graphics and I/O than with
> special decoding instructions...

Sure, I bet they could do it, but if it were your company and your profits,
why would you waste time and effort to support something that the majority
of your customers could care less about?


>> Is supporting more things badly really better for most (non-lug-subscribing)
>> users than doing less things very well?
> 
> Depends on how narrow your point of view is.  If you don't care about
> future content creation, and are happy supporting MPEG-LA with every DVD
> you buy, then I guess it is better.

Even if you don't buy a single DVD or BluRay, you're hosed if you simply
want to watch TV, since all television broadcasts are MPEG-2 now. I don't
know how you're going to do anything with any mainstream content without
(indirectly) supporting MPEG-LA. Most future content is going to continue
to require indirect support of MPEG-LA for some time.

Honestly, I really don't think alternative (and often inferior) codecs
are the answer here anyway. Revamping of the crapstorm that is the US
Patent system is, to the point where MPEG-LA has no legal legs to stand
on anymore.

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod-ajLrJawYSntWk0Htik3J/w at public.gmane.org