Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Apple Businesses

"Open Source" Apple says "No" to Xanim 182

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the that-aint-very-nice dept.
Frostking writes "According to the homepage of the Xanim author, Apple has prohibited Sorenson, the makers of the codec used in the Starwars clips among other things, to license the codec to anybody else, including Mark Podlipec the Xanim author. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

"Open Source" Apple says "No" to Xanim

Comments Filter:
  • Read the licence statement at http://xanim.va.pubnix.com/xa_copylic.html. Note that is *isn't* open source, because it can only be used for non-commercial uses.
  • Video? In Java?

    HAHAHAHAHAHA!

    *cough*

    sorry, it's just that Java isn't exactly known for, uh, speed...
  • Sure, Apple will go Open Source when it suits their interests.

    They're no better than Microsoft, and, with the way they're pimping Open Source for their own gain (Apache, etc...), they could be considered worse.

    Screw them. :P

    - A.P.

    --


    "One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad

  • I don't see what everyone is whining about - Xanim is not open-source either.
  • The article title is very misleading. If you go to the xanim page, you'll see that Apple did NOT SAY "NO".

    Apple's policy with the codec they paid a lot to help develop is not to license it out. However, no one has asked them to make an exception for xanim. Apple has not said no, because they have not been requested.

    Maybe if we request that Apple does, they will. But they've done nothing wrong yet.

    I'd sure hate to get slammed for saying "no" to a question that was never asked of me.
  • I have no problem with MOV - as a matter of fact, I kinda prefer it.

    If it don't work with xanim... I don't watch it.
    .
  • Posted by His name cannot be spoken:

    It is important to note the effect that slashdot postings can have on companies. After Toshiba said that they would not release information for the IR interface, everybody rallied around and boycotted Toshiba. Then 3 days later they gave the information. Now, I personally wouldn't be caught dead in the same room as a mac, but I'm sure there are some who don't mind 'em. Show apple your stripes. Tell them it's not OK to pretend to be supportive of Open Source when their only goals are for their immediate gain. Free the Format! -
  • Posted by DratSomeoneTookMyName:


    There's a RealVideo version of trailer #2 at

    http://solo.gatech.edu/ [gatech.edu]

    -adam a

    ps. I agree, 'tis a shame, Sorenson rocks.

  • one of the things thats good about linux
    is that you can choose (or migrate)your hardware without worrying about software. this is lessening
    with all the binary only software out there.

    There are companies like Mental Ray who write
    good software for all platforms of linux as well
    as the other OSs they support. (of course being
    funded by hollywood may have something to do
    with why they can afford to do this)

    but anyway, it is another reason that open source
    software is preferable.
  • >Just because someone is trying to make a dollar doesn't mean they are out to get you.

    Yes, but if you want to hop on the open source bandwagon (like Apple just did), the price is at least some respect for the tenets. For example, at least don't inconvenience people for no gain of your own. If I can use this codec on Windows, it's not an Apple exclusive -- so what does it cost Apple to allow it to run on Linux? Nothing. So why should they disallow it?
  • >they are supporting open source as long as they can make any money of it.

    Uh-uh. And Netscape, IBM, Oracle, Informix et al. are just doing it out of their great philantropic ideals....?

    Get real--these are companies whose primary purpose of existence is to make money and make their shareholders happy.

    But as long as they benefit OS movement in the process, we're all happy.

    And please, spend more than 5 minutes working on a Mac before you bash it.
  • Come on Apple, help us out, huh? Allow binary only libraries if you have to, but allow us the CODEC.
  • The codec was really developed by some EE called Huang but named after his boss Sorenson. Now that really sucks for Huang.

    Steve Jobless has a knack for picking out great ideas like the Imac, firewire, and the GUI, but he falls on his face when it comes to licensing those ideas. Today while every other company realizes licensing their technology to third parties is the only way to survive, Apple is the single company wanting to remain the sole proprietor of its technology.
  • Sorenson is the best codec out there by a mile at the moment.

    It is really annoying when closed source is not only closed by also _better_

    Are there any OS codec projects? It's a pretty tough field...

  • The way they go on about apache on their web pages is sickening. You'd think they were the first person to discover it. Hell, they aren't even the first big business. IBM was way before them.

    Open Source at the moment fits in rather well with Apple's image - the whole 'slightly rebellious, but squeaky clean and terribly stylish "think differnt"' thing. It's all crap.

    And they boast about how Apache 1.3.4 is a 'core component' of OS X. Sure... like it's somehow more core than every other BSD/Linux distro that bundles it.

    I'm sorry, at least Microsoft are willing to say "We're big, ugly, and we aim to win by any means possible". Apple are just as ugly, want to be just as big, but are twice as slimey.

    And, in the balance, Microsoft have produced more decent software than Apple. Scary, huh?
  • they are better.

    Sorenson is one of the best codecs around. That's why Apple won't show the source or license it.

    Apple are happy to open up the stuff they have that's no use. A bunch of badly written drivers, some mucked about BSD code.

    Apple are just hoping some programmer out there comes along and fixes a few bugs for them. When it comes to giving back to the community by opening up the stuff they've done properly - quicktime, the GUI, etc. - oh, suddenly they aren't so keen.

    At least Microsoft aren't asking a bunch of Linux programmers to help them do their dirty laundry.

    I always thought Apple were kinda cuddly but incompetent - flashes of genius amongst lots of well-intentioned screw ups.

    Now I think they are just a bunch of tossers who want to cash in on anything and save their sorry asses. OS X isn't even BSD with a nice GUI. It's first and foremost BSD with Apple branding. And, now, apparently, Apache branding.

    Hell, looking at the Apple site (http://www.apple.com/macosx/server/apache.html) you'd think they invented Apache, or funded it 100% themselves or something.

    Wankers.
  • Alas - you are behaving like a rational person and reading all the small print.

    After working in the advertising industry, I can tell you that what counts is what the person sees in the first 1.25 seconds.

    Your text "Certified implementation.." appears in knocked back (adspeak for 'made less obvious') text in smaller print to the side of the main article.

    What the person sees is the Apache logo incorporated AS PART OF an Apple product (the logo is on the screen of a G4). This would break most companies' use of logo guidelines. Alas that Apache has none.

    Also, the headline (what the managers remember) says "Mac OSx server proudly presents Apache".
    I've ignored the second line of the headline? Sure I have. So will the readers (subconsciously).

    It's all very sad, but it's all very true.
  • How about a general UNIX port, I use solaris and have a great video card, yet I have to use my old Mac to view quicktime!
  • The problem as I see it is that Apple refuse to directly support Quicktime under non-Apple/MS platforms - and also refuse to let anone else support it. If they released a Quicktime player for linux/unix things would be fine. As it is I have no access to either a Mac or a windows PC (I run linux at home and work in an SGI/Solaris shop) so I can't watch the trailer. I have no choice. Simple as that. Nick
  • ...are probably (my guess, anyway) to keep Microsoft's hands off it. They're trying to keep something to distinguish QuickTime from its competitors (namely, Microsoft Media Player).

    As a public company with shareholders, it has to do something to generate interest in its products, otherwise the perceived value of Apple's stock drops through the floor. They *do* have a bottom line to worry about. That being said, QuickTime being ported to other platforms is very possible, given that they've already moved it to two beyond the MacOS (Win32, OS [Ne]X[T] Server).

    With all the locked mindsets about Apple's business practices, it's a wonder anyone drives a Ford (*cough* Exploding Pinto *cough*).

    -cfw

    --
  • First of all, source code is one thing but 0 support is another - which is the case in the Sorenson codec. Apple didn't say, "you can't have the source code". Xanim has 3 modules that are distributed as binaries only because of that sort of agreement. What Apple said was "you have to pay us to allow people to view the movies *WE* made". If they make these movies you would think that they would want people to see them.

    Troll Tech is another completely different case. Troll Tech came up with a really good window toolkit that didn't catch on because although it was free for users it was not open source.
    Joseph Elwell.
  • Talks of a Linux port of QuickTime by Apple have been around for ages. I would consider this a good sign that Apple could be willing to do this; why prohibit something from being ported to a platform unless you have plans to do that yourself?

    I think that, once again, we should wait and see what happens. That's one thing I've noticed on Slashdot: the average reader is far too quick to jump to conclusions.
  • Apple behaves like just another (failed) Microsoft, yet around here we treat them as if they were brothers or something. M$ - Closed proprietary software Apple - Closed proprietary hardware AND software.


    --
    As long as each individual is facing the TV tube alone, formal freedom poses no threat to privilege.
  • I can tolerate Apple for the time being. Every iMac that gets sold is another $500.00 or so that doesn't go to Uncle Bill.


    --
    As long as each individual is facing the TV tube alone, formal freedom poses no threat to privilege.
  • does anyone know whether quicktime or windows media player
    work under WINE yet??
  • judging from the posts here, /. readers seem to hate apple enough they boycott it no matter what.

    I made the mistake of recommending an Imac to someone last week. I didn't even hate the guy, but now he is going to be stuck with a cute box that is closed. I cannot help him if he has a problem (except for things like not plugged in, etc...) Apple seems to be the pinnacle of marketing and trapping people into their side of the fence.
  • Apple is/has ported QuickTime to Java... it's still "devel" quality... but once it hits, expect to run it on your box
  • Apple is the Italy to Microsoft's Germany. They are inconsequential, but just as ambitios.
    --
    Aaron Gaudio
    "The fool finds ignorance all around him.
  • Man, fast server - fastest RealVideo connection
    I've ever gotten 200 kilo bytes per second (yes
    bytes, not bits). Damn I love my cable modem :)
  • | I bet 99% of all linux [users] just rebooted
    | into [Windows] and downloaded the trailer from
    | there.

    Actually, I just downloaded the mpeg. Viewed it with mpegtv on my Alpha. Under Linux.
  • I and a few others have campaigned quite vigorously on the QuickTime Developers and QuickTime 4 lists for Linux/Solaris support to be added to QT. The response back has allways been that they aren't interested (although I have heard different from other Apple sources).

    If you want QT for Linux lobby Apple.

    Or persuade content developers to use Real and persuade Real to do G2 on Linux (Likely).

    Or set up a project to write an Open Source Codec of comparable quality to Sorenson (not easy).
  • QuickTime if FREE - you only pay for the Pro version
  • Mark Podlipec has put forth an incredible effort to support as many video formats as he has time for. He has sent emails to the various companies involved, has expressed willingness to compromise when licensing has been an issue, and all in all has gone out of his way for the community and the good of the code.

    Just wanted to say thanks, Mark.

    Next time you want to complain about something xanim doesn't support, find out why; chances are Mark or someone else has given it their best shot.
  • Bare feet == healthier feet. Get your facts straight. See The Dirty Sole Society [barefooters.org] web page for more facts. "Yellow toe nails", if meant to imply fungus, happens more frequently to the shod. Dark, damp environments promote fungus growth. Bare feet do not live in such environments.
  • by WORLOK (7690)
    I do all my REAL work under Linux and only use M$ for cd burning, playstation game copying, and watching a few videos. Linux 95% of the time, however.

  • Aww, lets not be bittermans, you should really *read* the licence (this applies to all). The open source is for Mac OS X Server, IE NeXT/Openstep OS - *NOT MAC OS*. This means that any source which includes Quicktime and the Mac OS is simply *NOT* for the offering - PERIOD. It could not be spelled out more clearly so don't whine about *major* portions of the Mac OS (ie System 8+ and QT) missing because *none* of it has been offered.

    Apple will always be the underdog next to MS so they will always struggle to impress the rest of us. As for Jobs pulling the clones out, hell Apple would be the smallest supplier of machines if Power Computing was still around. And if you know Apple then you'd know the HW profits feed and cloth them.

    Stop your moaning, Jobs is a hippie who likely smoked weed and walked around barefoot with yellow toe nails. I doubt that Gates even knows what a joint is (or seen a yellow yoe nail)- so who do you trust now?

    I doubt that this will affect MS much in the *near* future but I would really be interested in hearing some level headed responces as to what people assume Bill Gates is thinking.

    S.L.
  • Er er, jackass. What are the figures? Where did you get them? And what is your proof that *more* Linux users *need* access to QT than Mac and PC users?

    Maybe a little thought should be put into our comments before posting. Flame away about any OS you choose but please provide some factual basis.

    S.L.
  • They don't actually need to release the source code to the Sorenson. Xanim already supports a number of binary-only codec modules.

    Since they already give away the Quicktime viewer for Windows and the Mac, I don't see what they have to lose, other than the threat that Linux will overtake MacOS in popularity. By some accounts, it already has.
  • I think you've confused yourself. Reverse engineering isn't much different from duplicating through analysis. Reverse engineering means you analyze the results of a process/algorithm and write your own process to recreate it. Sounds like duplicating through analysis to me.

    Another thing: it's perfectly legal. So long as you can prove you developed your process independently of the other, there is no patent issue involved. This is why, among other things, MS can't stop SMB's being ported to Linux.

    --
    "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away. "

  • I have seen no objective proof, only hype from Apple, about how wonderful this codec is. To my eye, it's no better than CinePak. Is it also supposed to be better than MPEG?

    Apple is so transparent. Their hard-on for Sorenson is just an attempt to beat Microsoft at its own game of CLOSED PROPRIETARY "standards". We are just incidental roadkill.

    Send mail to Fox and Lucasfilm telling them that you couldn't watch their clip, thanks to their choice of "technology".

    Just don't make Marc Podlipec really mad, or he might reverse engineer the sucker. He's done it before. What say, Marc?


  • I have the utmost respect for Marc, his code, and his contributions to computing freedom, but, lest people be afraid to undertake similar efforts, the truth needs to be known.

    He withdrew the CinePak source because Radius threatened legal action, and because Radius paid him to do so.


  • Now that an Anonymous Coward is telling me Sorenson is better, I believe it. Thanks for lending your credibility.

  • I was recently recompressing a piece of video of mine, looking at the quality carefully, and Cinepak is definitely quite crappy. Lots of pixelation and screwed up color palette.
    Sorenson, though not perfect, is far more faithful to the original and pleasant to look at. The only downside I see is the CPU requirement which makes it practically unplayable on anything slower than 100 Mhz...

    MPEG, in my experience, has some major playback control problems, often stuttering or lacking proper audio/video syncing.
  • IIRC quicktime embeds MPEG just as i embeds any other format. btw, I don't know shit about mpeg 4; I've just worked with QT and MPEG1
  • sorenson is better.

    Do you believe now?

    (jeez... how many fucking jackass idiot zealot dumbfuck linux "pseudo-defenders" who have minimal experience with non-linux/non-windows stuff are there on slashdot anyway? linux would be far more popular without the damage you no-brain pimplefaced morons cause the community when you mindlessly bash stuff you *really* know nothing about... open your fucking minds, morons... sometimes methinks that the majority of the linux zealots are ex-windows lamers that just changed os's to be more "in"...)

    tnt -- somewhat annoyed...

    btw: "death to all fanatics"/sl

  • MPEG was choosen to be the basis of the next Quicktime version.. not the other way around.
  • by GiMP (10923)
    Then why windows at all... you can do all of that in Linux, unless there aren't any drivers for your specific Cd-Burner/TV card (WinTv and Diamond's TV both work great, as well do others based on the bt848 chipset)
  • They do. They make decisions regardless of what consumers want (iMac floppy), that are bad for their own business (Mac clones), and will enivitabely cause their future bankrupcy (inability to work well with others). If they want Quicktime to be popular, then they have to let other people use it. Are they morons or something? Eventually people are just going to stop using Quicktime (I really don't know why anyone uses it in the first place).

    I thought Apple was warming up to Linux by supporting LinuxPPC/mkLinux. You'd think they'd want Quicktime to be a CROSS-PLATFORM video codec. But no, Apple is just being Apple - stupid.

    Oh well, I give em 5 more years before they shoot themselves in the head once in for all.
  • I didn't look for specific addresses, but the Sorenson site appears to be at http://www.s-vision.com/ [s-vision.com].

  • I wonder how hard the codec would be to reverse enginneer.
    Hell, the codec modules are around 5K.

    You could practically brute force it. ;)
  • Just because someone is trying to make a dollar doesn't mean they are out to get you. Just because something is *inconvenient* to you doesn't mean it violates the open source ethic.

    You want a free codec as good as sorenson? Go write one. Port it to quicktime. Give it away free to lucasfilm and everyone. But don't bitch because someone who -did- put in the effort didn't decide to give it to you for free.

    Open source is about admirable people giving away stuff they worked hard on and cooperating. What I hear here is the same lame bitching the script kiddies do when they can't get Q3A on their favorite wAreZ servers.

    Worst of all, CmdrTaco seems to have bought in on this one and posted a pretty editorially biased article.

    Anyways. I support Apple for making great products, despite the odds. I support Troll Tech for making a great desktop environment possible (one that doesn't crash). I even support Larry Wall, despite the fact that his profit model means I have to buy lots of out-of-date books rather than getting good online documentation and tutorials. All these folks, and more, have given us great stuff, often for cheap or free. Sure, I want more....and if I rub this here lamp and the genie comes out........

    Please folks, stop being lame.
  • I just don't like clicking on the "Later" button everytime I want to watch a Quicktime movie.
  • SuSE
    Caldera
    Stampede

    3 major linux distributions that ship KDE.

    Didn't catch on? Perhaps that's just wishful thinking.
  • Well considering I don't know of any players for sorensen, it seems pretty obvious that mpegs play better.
  • What exactly would be the point? You already can view QuickTime on windows and the mac. Isn't java's entire point to be cross-platform. It just seems like a waste of cpu cycles for something that could be better done using standard c/c++.
  • The Quicktime File Format was chosen to be the BASIS for MPEG-4. The final version of MPEG-4 will incluse elements from MS's Advanced Streaming Format and others.
  • The amazing thing all these Open Source zealots also ignore is that fact that , just because a company starts open sourcing, this new 'agreement' does NOT supersede all previous contracts. Open Source is not the 10 commandments and it does not override agreements previously in place unless specifically stated as such. Chances are, Sorenson doesnt want Open Source having their codec anymore then Apple does. They 'blame' Apple but is it really Apple's fault?

    Grow up people.
  • i threw win98 onto aspare hardrive and booted that
    just to see if there was a noticable difference.

    the mpeg version worked fine for me :)

    but i would definitely like to see quicktime on linux...


    brian
  • Heh, at least they figured it out before Microshaft...
  • Alright, the whole open source argument is kind of getting silly. Apple deciding to open the source to OS 10 should be regarded as a good thing, not like they're GNU wannabes that didn't have the balls to go all the way. Deriding Apple for only releasing part isn't very constructive. M$ hasn't released anything, why don't people sh*t on them more? Saying that since Apple isn't releasing all of their code, they're as bad as a company notorious for not releasing all of their API's to external developers is pretty damn dumb.
  • Here is the text from the Xanim home page:

    There is a new Star Wars trailer that has been recently released and it uses the currently unsupported Sorenson Video codec. I have contacted Sorenson about licensing their codec. They responded that Apple won't allow them to license it to others. You may want to drop Sorenson and Apple a line asking about unix and/or xanim support for Sorenson. Probably should also send email to web sites that use sorenson so they know it has a limited audience.

    For the record, I would gladly add support for Sorenson if allowed to. Same goes for all other currently unsupported video/audio codecs.



    So.. send those letters! Apple has not been contacted yet.. well, likely by -now- it has.. but you get the drift. :-)

    ----
  • >Get a life.

    you heard it right here, folks. get a life: become a trolling AC.

    -- neil

  • I think it's a typo. Apple probably does however have a trademark on "Open Sores".

    I don't understand why the "dec" part or all these codecs are so protected even in binary form. They give it away for other platforms don't they?

    I'll wait for Star Wars on videotape as long as it isn't Apple Quicktime for VHS.


    - strange planet, Earth.
  • Quite right.

    I won't even give them 5 years. (Newton Users have Long Memories)...Then Gates can complete his buyout.

    . It's been pretty plain since microsloth's $150 million investment/bailout that Steve Jobs is a shill for Bill Gates.

    --vead
  • "..you open source hippies."

    Someday, You (sir or madame, can't tell because You didn't have the cojones to sign Your words) will have a need for a piece of software that won't yet exist when You need it.

    And You may have to ask for help from one of these "open source hippies" as You have calumnified and characterised them here.

    Pray it isn't me...I might not be so ideologically pure that I won't let You starve.

    oh, 1 more thing...Bill Gates is one of those stockholders. Apple ill-serves itself if it thinks the Open Source Community will forget that.

    Apples moves wrt "opening" some of OS X seem to me to be transparent pandering, without really putting much of anything on the table. I say screw OS X. Concentrate on Linux. Let us not divide ourselves or dilute our purpose...great and robust open code.

    --vead
  • This is likely to incense a lot of people. I believe Apple could be prevailed upon either to change their minds or to release a Linux port of Quicktime. If they don't, I imagine an open source project to reverse engineer the Sorenson codec would receive a lot of support. Heck, that'll probably happen sooner or later anyway.

    Would anyone who happens to know Steve Jobs' email address please get CmdrTaco to put it up on the front page? An immediate deluge of angry email to the right mailbox would probably be the quickest way round this.

    I'll be writing to Lucasfilm to complain too.
  • by Beef (19842)
    Apple is a ball or yarn. Mark Podiplek is but a mere goldfish in the pet store of life. Long live Intel Indio!!!!!!
  • Sorenson probably made a lot of money on the deal. . QT put them on the map, kept their programers employed etc.....

    Then apple gives it away to mac and win users... Those greedy bastards..

    Maybe if you ask nicely qt could be ported to linux...?

    -A
  • So where does he say he dislikes OS X?
  • When is xanim going to fully support mpeg? The last version I got only supports mpeg 1 - with certain frame types, with no sound.

    Oh... And if Bill Gates wasn't around, Steve Jobs would take his place as the Computer Industry Anti-Christ.
  • I ended up getting the mpeg version of the Star Wars Trailer. Xanim will not handle this version though, so I had to get mtv & endure it's bugs & obnoxious nagware/crippleware behavior. I will pay for shareware if it's good & useful, but I get so annoyed when a program is designed to tease you with a vital feature & then not let you use it in a useful situation) (mtv won't let you start in DGA full screen mode from the command line (at least that's not documented) & when you start it up from it's GUI interface, it cuts the sound off after 90 seconds & throws a nagware message on the screen. That irritated me so much that I will not pay for that program, I'm looking for alternatives.

    I think that we really do need a good Open Source video format, then we can simply convert from the proprietary formats & watch our movies in peace. (MPEG comes closest - since it is an industry standard, it's easier to get specs for its codecs, but it's algorithms are still patented & can become lawsuit magnets...)
  • xanim isn't open source according to its homepage. It is only free for non-commercial use. It's free beer with a recipe included, but you can't buy it at a packie or at a bar.

    You would think that slashdot is a social experiment, and some social scientists are going to come out with a paper talking about how people who post to it are as cattlelike as any other group of people, despite whinging and whining about how individualistic and independant they are.
  • Of course it's not Free in the FSF sense. It
    isn't Open Source either. What I am pointing out
    is the hypocracy of the slashdot crowd in
    bitching about one non-open source party refusing
    to help another non-open source party.

    See the idiocy now?
  • Why are you mad at Apple? Seems like you should be mad at the Sorenson people
    for their proprietary technology and exclusive licensing of it. Am I right?
  • Apple has never claimed that Apache is theirs and theirs only. And they have never claimed that they are the only ones making it a core component of their OS.

    Linux people love to brag about all the free software (like Apache) they get with their OS. Why shouldn't Apple do the same?

    - StrangeDaze
  • Oh well, I give em 5 more years before they shoot themselves in the head once in for all.

    People have been saying that for 20 years...

    - StrangeDaze
  • Losing the cloners was too bad, but I'd rather have no clones than a dying Apple. Many people, myself included, consider the new (blue & white) G3s to be an excellent value, probably Apple's best price/performance ratio ever. And, while it would be nice to have more choice of Mac hardware, Apple's prices haven't really risen any since cloning died. If anything, they've come down quite a bit (on their high end machines) and a whole hell of a lot on their consumer offering (iMac).

    Again with the BeOS comments...I keep seeing this BeOS bullshit pop up after every Apple story. When will people give this one up? It's pretty obvious that Apple doesn't want Be on their hardware and Be doesn't want to waste their time maintaining the PowerPC version of BeOS when Intel is such a bigger opportunity for them.

    And, don't forget, FireWire was chosen as an industry standard by the IEEE, which by the way doesn't prevent companies from profitting from these standards. Apple has been charging licensing fees for FireWire all along. The latecomers were asked to pay more, but after they made a stink Apple joined a few other companies in an effort to promote use of FireWire in the industry by creating a licensing program that they all approve of. Check here for more info on that one:

    http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,3 2501,00.html [news.com]

    - StrangeDaze
  • Hey, didn't Jobs say "Good artists create, great artists steal"? Isn't that what Bill does? Actually, he has scads of shiny things, so he can buy these things.
  • Of course, these proprietary codecs aren't mandated. People choose to use them. Why this is so, I could not tell you.
  • The issue isn't that it should be free, especially
    with the new version of xanim that allows dynamically loaded codecs. Sorenson is an excellent codec, and I'd be willing to pay them for it. I'll even grudgingly grant them the right to limit its use if that's what they really want, but that doesn't mean I can't lobby them to change that position. However, I think it's a sign of desperation for Apple to enter into such a restrictive license agreement (assuming that's how they have any say in it at all), and given the fact that my Windoze Premiere has Sorenson support, they've already let the cat out of the bag for their biggest competitor. Any further restrictions are childish.
  • Yes, the close the clone business. Yes, it good for them. No, it wasn't good for the consumer. Apple maintains a profit margin for their machines that PC makers could only dream of. It wouldn't surprise me if manufacturing cost of the iMac is somewhere around half its sale price. The have done that in the past. Their machines are underpowered and overpriced.

    Also, heard of FireWire? Apple allowed it to become the de facto industry standard such that many companies depend on it for their products. Then, surprise! Fork over the money please. I expect they will do the same with their "open source" initiative.

    And how about OS support? Did you know Apple is stonewalling efforts to port the BeOS to the new G3s? They have consistently refused to provide the necessary technical information needed to do so. You'd almost think they didn't want other OSs running on their systems.

    Apple may have to compete with MicroSoft for platform market share, but in the Macintosh-compatible market, they are the monopoly. And they certainly are acting like one.
  • WTF? The article actually says this. Please excuse me while I destroy something.

    --

  • Apple should release the codec to any linux developer who want to write a player because...

    a) It sure doesn't look like apple will be releaseing one for a while, so not a huge loss of revenue for them.

    b) Apple hasn't APSL'd some of it's code just to be nice, it will benefit massivly from the input of the Open Software community, who will develop away code that apple still has limited rights too, or write drivers for PPC OS's meaning the OS becomes more flexable, hence more adoptable at little cost to Apple, - We're giving them all this help, who about something it return.

    With all these IBM, Apple etc 'Open Sorce initiatives" we seem to be running to embrace and perhaps not being as cautious as we should. When it comes down to it IBM and Apple at Corporations with Shareholders and Executives who by-and-large don't know alot about OSS but do know alot about Making money. I hope that they don't have ulteria motives, but I suspect that they are simple covering their bases or at worst profitearing.

    D.

"Floggings will continue until morale improves." -- anonymous flyer being distributed at Exxon USA

Working...