Fluendo Launches the Ultimate Media Center for Linux Operative Systems

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 03:28:11PM -0400, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> | From: Lennart Sorensen <lsorense-1wCw9BSqJbv44Nm34jS7GywD8/FfD2ys at public.gmane.org>
> | Do they come with source code?
> 
> I have no idea.  I'm not a customer.

I suspect they don't.

> | > | I thought we had been able to do any region DVD playback for about a
> | > | decade on linux now.  How is this news?
> | > 
> | > Not in a way authorized by the patent holders.
> | 
> | Perhaps not.  I don't care.  I don't copy DVDs.  If I couldn't play them,
> | I wouldn't buy them.  I don't buy blueray because I can't play them.
> 
> I don't play DVDs under Linux.  I find that a $30 DVD player means
> that I don't have to.  It still rankles me that there is no free (in
> both meanings) way to play DVDs on Linux.

Well there are lots of free ways to play DVDs on linux.  Whether they are
"legal" or not is a different issue.

> What you have given is a rationalization that has no legal weight.
> But I agree with you.

They claim it is copy protection.  Well since I am not copying them, I
don't see a problem.  Of course it really isn't about copy protection
at all, the laying bastards the media industry tends to be, but I
will pretend it is.

> | > Some folks try to do things the "by the book".  It is thought that
> | > corporations in particular see the downsides of unauthorized use of
> | > patents and decide the cost of the authorization is worthwhile.
> | 
> | And some people try to maintain their systems open source so that they
> | can be supported and fixed if necesary.
> 
> Says he who advocates the nVidia closed-source X driver.  It's all a
> balance of concerns.

Actually no I would much prefer working open source 3D drivers.  None seem
to exist however for anything useable.  For the available hardware worth
using, only the nvidia has drivers worth using.

There is I believe open source drivers for 3D on some intel chips,
but they are so under powered and pathetic that they really don't count
for anything.

I keep hoping ATI/AMD's promise of open specs will actually happen some
day and that someone will actually write drivers that work for them
(ATI has certainly shown that they are not capable of doing the job).

I only advocate the nvidia drivers because they are currently the only
option there is for openGL on linux.

I you wanted to run solidworks, I would tell you to run windows 7 64bit.
I don't like that you have to do it that way, but it is the only way to
do that job.

> (I generally don't use closed-source stuff on my computers.  I do use
> the nVidia driver on by Acer Revo -- in fact the box would be
> pointless without it.  I don't have Flash on my desktop and a
> significant part of the web won't work for me.)

Flash is very annoying.

> | > On the other hand, the whole system has been brought into such
> | > disrepute that some do not care.
> | > 
> | > Generally speaking, Linux folks seem to respect copyright and care
> | > less about patents.  Not surprising: copyrights help Linux but patents
> | > hurt it.
> | 
> | Software patents hurt everyone (except lawyers).
> 
> Nice slogan.  Unfortunately not 100% true.  I agree with the
> sentiment.

Who other than lawyers do they help?  Software patents are like nuclear
weapons.  Lots of people have them to use as deterrents against others
with software patents.  They all spend lots of money to acquire them
(mostly to lawyers).  Of course if no one had them there would be no
need for them.

> I don't actually see software patents as fundamentally different in
> kind from hardware patents.  I don't actually see a fundamental
> dividing line between software and hardware leaving aside the patent issue.

Depends on the hardware patent.  There are many patents that seem
stupendously obvious.  There are some that are amazingly clever (and
which I don't mind having patents at all).

To some extent the duration of a patent should be appropriate to the
world it is part of.  In the computer industry, anything beyond 2 or 3
years is insane given the development pace.

> | > Quick test: do you use MP3 or Ogg Vorbis for music?  (If you answer
> | > flac, you have successfully evaded my test.)  MP3 is patent encumbered.
> | 
> | And not all of those patents apply in all countries.
> 
> I think they apply in the country we are both in.

I am not actually so sure about that.  Either way it looks like we only
have a couple of more years left on the MP3 patents fortunately.

> |  In the case of my
> | mythtv box I do in fact use flac.
> 
> Your wording suggests that you use MP3 somewhere else.

I have ogg files on my desktop.  I don't use an mp3 player ever.  I use
CDs in the car.

> I have a PMP that plays MP3 and Ogg Vorbis.  Such PMPs are a little
> too rare for comfort.
> 
> The North American model of mine (and many others) dropped OV support
> because the Microsoft Pays For Sure license required them to drop it!
> MS later said that they didn't mean it but the damage was done.  So I
> flashed some australasian version's firmware.
> 
> Even with OV support, it works better with MP3s.  Fast forward and
> reverse don't work with my OV recordings.  I've not taken the time to
> explore why.
> 
> So there is (literally!) a conspiracy to make OV inferior.

Well they probably tested mp3 more since that's what they figure people
want.

> Those choices are not used by many suppliers.  In fact, fewer and
> fewer mainstream ones.

That doesn't mean I have to support them.

> Try to get an open version of a digital TV signal.  ATSC includes
> MPEG/2 (why the heck not MPEG/4!!) which is patent encumbered.  Try to
> get a DVD in a format that isn't patent encumbered (on several
> levels!).  Analogue TV was open.  Mind you, our beloved Hauppauge
> cards encoded into an encumbered format.

It uses mpeg2 because the standard was developed before mpeg4 decoding
in hardware was affordable.  Europe uses mpeg4 instead for broadcast.

> CDs have a non-encumbered format (AFAIK).  Subsequent music media are
> generally worse: MP3, AAC (or whatever it is iTunes uses), Sony's
> (thankfully essentially dead), Microsoft's several formats (WMV is a
> container, I think).

Amazing that people are willing to pay for less.

> Add to that various (intrinsically horrible) DRM techniques.  One is
> HDCP and the whole "trusted video chain" thing.

Yeah, why should I pay money to someone that assumes I am a criminal?

> My pessimistic view is that "media access" is a serious blocker for
> Linux.  It is partly sleeping at the moment: few patent holders are
> acting on Linux users' infringements.  Microsoft is spreading FUD, but
> not as much as they could; they did whack Tom Tom.
> 
> Some netbooks used to come with Linux.  Did they come with movie and music 
> players that could play patent-encumbered recordings?  If not, most 
> consumers would be dissatisified.  If they did, the licensing would have 
> been annoying.  Perhaps Canonical (Ubuntu) or Acer (Linpus) did the
> work.

Not sure.  I just use Debian. :)

> Some servers are still shipped with Linux.  Interesting how none of
> the media patents apply to those platforms.  Is there a correlation to
> patent applicability and the willingness of hardware vendors to ship
> Linux?
> 
> I don't think it would be easy for a large company to come out with a
> MythTV box, for example.  The licensing required would be horrible.
> If not for that, I think that it would be an easy-ish product to
> create.

Mythtv has many flaws that would have to be fixed before it really would
be a sellable product.  Setup of windows media center is far smoother
and simpler.  Mythtv does a lot more though (and I certainly wouldn't
want to switch to media center).

-- 
Len Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists