From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 17 12:58:47 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 716EB106566B for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:58:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-questions@m.gmane.org) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 248708FC0A for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:58:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OPEg9-0007cE-Cu for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:58:45 +0200 Received: from pool-71-166-132-188.washdc.east.verizon.net ([71.166.132.188]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:58:45 +0200 Received: from nightrecon by pool-71-166-132-188.washdc.east.verizon.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:58:45 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org connect(): No such file or directory From: Michael Powell Followup-To: gmane.os.freebsd.questions Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 09:00:15 -0400 Lines: 23 Message-ID: References: <20100615211740.GA50967@libertas.local.camdensoftware.com> <20100615154956.cfz6ip454w8gcco4@mail.joseph-a-nagy-jr.us> <20100617081156.8441dc67.freebsd@edvax.de> <20100617035140.x8bpf02348g4o8ok@mail.joseph-a-nagy-jr.us> <20100617123319.00d86245@gumby.homeunix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: pool-71-166-132-188.washdc.east.verizon.net Subject: Re: concerning flash under freebsd X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:58:47 -0000 RW wrote: [snip] > > As I understand it, originally Ogg Theora was going to be the standard, > but it's now been left open instead due to uncertainty about Theora > infringing patents. Some sites are using Theora, but most seem to be > going with h.264. I presume that this is due to IE support for h.264. > > I believe Google are going with h.264 and a newer BSD licensed codec > they are sponsoring themselves as an open-source, patent-free > alternative. http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=292 Google wants to promote it's VP8, which is at this point clearly inferior to h.264. Browser wars turned Codec wars. We, the users are always overlooked and no consideration given by those who wear the suits and ties. And the arguing points they utilize within their 'decision by committee' process are usually a distorted view of non-reality. -Mike