ChiefsPlanet - Electronics New Apple Tablet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)

- Media Center (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- -

New Apple Tablet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=222464)

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief (Post 6768464)

Yes it is. It is wholy owned and controled by MPEG-LA, who have made it free FOR NOW... but that can change.

But that's not proprietary, at least not by the actual definition of proprietary.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla (Post 6768609)

Why?

Because he's rabidly anti-Apple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6768714)

But that's not proprietary, at least not by the actual definition of proprietary.

It is prorietary by both the software sense of the definition and the "actual" definition...

Actual definition
1. belonging to a proprietor. (it belongs to MPEG-LA, they license it out)

Software definition from wikipedia

Quote:

A literal meaning of "proprietary" in relation to software is that it has a copyright owner who can exercise control over what users can do with the software, in contrast to public domain. However, the term is commonly used in a narrower sense to describe software with restrictions on use or private modification, or with restrictions judged to be excessive on copying or publishing of modified or unmodified versions.[1] These restrictions are placed on it by one of its proprietors. In this sense it is also known as "non-free software" and is the opposite of free software, generally speaking.[2][3][4]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6768717)

Because he's rabidly anti-Apple.

Actually have no problem with their laptops or desktops.. I am rabidly against Apple mobile products(iphone, itouch, ipad) and Itunes... and the whole closed environment.

I actually want Apple to do well, they are good for America... BUT I want them to do well without trying to bully the market.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief (Post 6768781)

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/techn.../h264/faq.html

It's not proprietary, because anyone can make an H.264 codec and sell it. They'll have to pay license fees, but again, that's not proprietary. H.264 is exactly like MP3, which is hardly proprietary, either.

From another web page that says it much better than I could:

"Is the format that Adobe uses for Flash video. It is covered by 129 patents owned by a large range of companies. Apple owns one. Microsoft about 7. Philips and LG are big contributors, as is the Fraunhofer institute, Panasonic, Sony, JVC, Toshiba etc. Apple isn't gaining significantly from the adoption of H.264.

The specification is openly documented and anyone can write a H.264 CODEC. If they can figure out a faster or better way of implementing the spec then they'll have a market. They will need to pay licence fees if they are in a county that allows software patents, but they are otherwise unrestricted.

Flash is a closed format. It isn't documented by Adobe and you can't write your own flash player. If you could then Apple would probably have written their own by now and it wouldn't be an issue. As it is Apple have chosen to to let developers write in C, C++ or Objective C and compile using an IDE that they give away for free. It's hardly a huge barrier to entry."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6768823)

Ok the disconect here is that you aren't getting the difference between available source and proprietary. YES the source is available... but that does not mean it isn't proprietary. AND yes Flash is both proprietary AND closed. I don't like that Flash is the standard but I am a realist. I would LOVE an open source GPL alternative but until then, we are stuck.

If given a choice... WebM is head and shoulders better than h.264 MOSTLY because it is truly open source... h.264 is NOT.

Proprietary does NOT mean people can't view the code ... it does NOT mean people can't make a new codec based on the code... it does mean that someone owns it AND can dictate it's use and fees.

That's not proprietary, though. Proprietary means that you don't have access to it if you don't own it, and that's just not the case.

Is MP3 proprietary?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6768882)

That's not proprietary, though. Proprietary means that you don't have access to it if you don't own it, and that's just not the case.

Is MP3 proprietary?

Again, you are misunderstanding what proprietary means. Proprietary simply means it is owned and controlled by somone. Think of it as the opposite of public domain. And yes, MP3 is a proprietary format... Ogg Vorbis is not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_f...ietary_formats

Here is a broader article showing other file formats...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_format

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief (Post 6768890)

And yes, MP3 is a proprietary format... Ogg Vorbis is not.

Why no uproar over MP3, then?

Quote:

Here is a broader article showing other file formats...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proprietary_format

According to engadget (and many others), it's an open format, which means it's not proprietary based upon the definition provided by your link.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/04/k...nsing-and-you/

Your link bases the definition of proprietary based on this link:

http://www.openformats.org/en1

So, while H.264 isn't FREE, it IS open, which means it's not proprietary.

But whatever. It's all just semantics. H.264 isn't hurting anyone, so I don't see what the big to-do is. It's only because Apple is involved. If they hadn't been involved in it, no one would even be considering this a big deal. Apple just causes violent reactions in people for some reason.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief (Post 6768099)

Apple better get on the ball...

Looks like Google is killing h.264 support.

That's a huge jump on your jump to conclusions mat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishjayhawk (Post 6768906)

That's a huge jump on your jump to conclusions mat.

NO, if the quote is correct... they have switched to make ALL NEW VIDEOS OVER 720P in the new format. It's a minor jump to assume that phase 2 will be all new video.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6768895)

Why no uproar over MP3, then?

According to engadget (and many others), it's an open format, which means it's not proprietary based upon the definition provided by your link.

http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/04/k...nsing-and-you/

Your link bases the definition of proprietary based on this link:

http://www.openformats.org/en1

So, while H.264 isn't FREE, it IS open, which means it's not proprietary.

But whatever. It's all just semantics. H.264 isn't hurting anyone, so I don't see what the big to-do is. It's only because Apple is involved. If they hadn't been involved in it, no one would even be considering this a big deal. Apple just causes violent reactions in people for some reason.

No uproar on mp3 cuz it isn't part of this argument... but for the record I prefer the idea of vorbis and would support it.

First, h.264 is a codec not a file format... which is probably why you don't see it or any other video codecs listed in the examples in the article I posted.

Second, even in the VERY limited context of a "format" the wikipedia article I quoted is wrong in a few places. I only quoted it to show you more general examples.

Here is where th article is wrong...

Quote:

A proprietary format is a file format where the mode of presentation of its data is opaque and its specification is not publicly available.[1] Proprietary formats are typically controlled by a private person or organization for the benefit of its appliances and can be protected with patents or copyrights which are intended to give the license holder exclusive control of the technology to the (current or future) exclusion of others.[2] Typically such restrictions attempt to prevent Reverse engineering, though reverse engineering of file formats for the purposes of interoperability is generally believed to be legal by those who practice it. Legal positions differ according to each country's laws related to, among other things, software patents.
The opposite of a proprietary format is an open format.

The last statement is clearly an off shoot of the first and has no citation so let's toss it. The first statement is cited from a webiste called openformats.org... It appears the "site" was created simply to prop up the wikipedia article which at the time (and still is) under dispute, otherwise it serves no true puprose and was created by a college student in Europe whose degrees are in Philosophy and Cognitive Science. I have gone in and corrected the article if you'd like to take a look now.

Again, OPEN does not = nonproprietary even though you want to believe that... REGARDLESS it really doesn't matter because here is the scale of bad to good...

closed proprietary > open proprietary > open source with license issues > true open source

Like I said, semantics. You think it's proprietary, I think it isn't. Regardless, it isn't hurting anyone, and it's pretty clear that H.264 is a standard, proprietary or not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silock (Post 6770081)

Like I said, semantics. You think it's proprietary, I think it isn't. Regardless, it isn't hurting anyone, and it's pretty clear that H.264 is a standard, proprietary or not.

Yes it is a proprietary source-available standard. :D

But as I pointed out, people are excited about WebM for good reasons. It will drastically cut storage size while still performing marginally better than h.264 (all the big players have signed on for hardware support). Combine that with the fact that since it is TRULY open source, we should see pretty serious community development.

WebM is a good thing... but just like h.264/html5 supposedly replacing Flash video... it too will take awhile. Flash simply isn't going anywhere soon.

Now that Android 2.2 is ready for prime time... there isn't much reason (unless battery life is the key factor) to go with an ipad over an Android tablet. The prototypes are all making the rounds now, so expect them to hit market in June and July.

Speaking of Android...

Android Froyo OS Features

USB and Wi-Fi Internet Tethering
2 to 3 times improvement in JavaScript loading
2 to 5 times better performance on same hardware
Support for V8 JavaScript Engine
Faster and improved browser
Compass support for Google Maps in the browser
Improved Google Voice Search
Full Flash support in the web browser
Search within app data
Over the air application to download files from PC
Stream non-DRM home music library onto your Android device
Purchase music over the air from a non mobile destination
Install apps on your SD-card instead of your phone
Update all your apps at once
Improved Android market
Use voice gestures to trigger apps

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief (Post 6770181)

Now that Android 2.2 is ready for prime time... there isn't much reason (unless battery life is the key factor) to go with an iTouch Senior Citizen Edition over an Android tablet.

HAHAHA, believe it or not.. it was NOT me who put that replacement phrase in place! Funny though.