On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 18:01:55 -0500 Arc Riley wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:45:12PM +, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
[...]
> > That said, VP3/Theora can hardly compare with H.264 in terms of
> > coding efficiency. There really is no viable alternative in some
> > situations. Microsoft's WMV9/VC1 c
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 20:39:32 -0500 Arc Riley wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 12:09:39AM +, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
[...]
> > The patent situation is unfortunate. Nevertheless, the H.264 codec
> > is being adopted by broadcasters throughout the world. For good or
> > bad, the codec is here to st
Mike Hommey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 08:39:32PM -0500, Arc Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > I'm not saying the patent issue should be ignored. It just strikes me
>> > as silly to even start comparing Theora with H.264.
>>
>> Certain graphic artists would say the
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 08:39:32PM -0500, Arc Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm not saying the patent issue should be ignored. It just strikes me
> > as silly to even start comparing Theora with H.264.
>
> Certain graphic artists would say the same of GIMP vs Photoshop, or compare
> their
On Fri, Mar 03, 2006 at 12:09:39AM +, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>
> Sure, On2 has allowed free use of *its* patents relating to VP3. That
> doesn't mean that some obscure company will pop up out of nowhere with
> a bunch of patents they claim *also* apply to VP3, and that On2 has
> been infringing
Arc Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:45:12PM +, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
>> >
>> > The codec has dozens of different corporations holding patents over
>> > it, who will try to extract royalties for it in countries where
>> > those patents are upheld (ie, USA), and giv
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 10:45:12PM +, M?ns Rullg?rd wrote:
> >
> > The codec has dozens of different corporations holding patents over
> > it, who will try to extract royalties for it in countries where
> > those patents are upheld (ie, USA), and giving it "this is free
> > because it's GPL" hu
Arc Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 01:26:56PM -0800, David Liontooth wrote:
>>
>> Are there objections to including the new H.264 encoder in Debian?
>> For details, see bug 354667 (request for packaging).
>>
>> Debian maintainer Christian Marillat currently maintains
On Thu, Mar 02, 2006 at 01:26:56PM -0800, David Liontooth wrote:
>
> Are there objections to including the new H.264 encoder in Debian?
> For details, see bug 354667 (request for packaging).
>
> Debian maintainer Christian Marillat currently maintains an unofficial
> package, and we would like yo
illat wrote:
>David Liontooth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
>>Would you consider packaging x264 for Debian? My experience with your
>>unofficial packages has been excellent on both x86 and amd64. Even
>>though the library is still labeled "in early developme
10 matches
Mail list logo
