Originally posted by Jon Ingram You're looking to archive your audio files by losslessly encoding them. So, you'll want to be able to *decompress* them years into the future, possibly using a different OS to the one you are currently using.For these purposes, anything which does not have either an open source decoder or a detailed file specification is useless. This rules out LPAC and Monkeys Audio.Your only two options are Shorten and FLAC. Shorten has the advantage of being used by some real life applications (there's a Shorten based audio file sharing network out there). FLAC has the advantage of being actively maintained, and having better compression ratios than Shorten.
LPAC has a Linux decoder....You can use that too.
Originally posted by Bigus Dickus Of course, if you had to you could always reinstall win98 or equivalent in a few years just to decompress your archive to .wav.I wouldn''t worry too much about future support and development...
Originally posted by JohnV I agree 100%. There's absolutely NO reason to change to open source lossless compressor because of the fear closed source coder may become useless sometime in the future. That's rediculous.
I agree 100%. There's absolutely NO reason to change to open source lossless compressor because of the fear closed source coder may become useless sometime in the future. That's rediculous.
Monkey's is out there in the Internet and isn't simply gonna disapper like that, probably never.
So it's absolutely BS to try to frighten people with closed source issue in this case. Monkey's is out there in the Internet and isn't simply gonna disapper like that, probably never.
I'm a bit on the fence with this issue. I use Monkeys Audio, it does have the best compression. But I also respect and usually prefer to use open source software in general. Matt says he's going to open his source one of these days - soon hopefully.
Originally posted by Jon Ingram I reserve my right not to believe a single word of what he says until 'one of these days' arrives.
Originally posted by Jon Ingram Secondly, you don't know what the decoder and encoder *do*. Hypothetically, the encoder and decoder could both refuse to work after April 2002, or after the 1000th processed file. They could be set up to store information about you and upload it on a certain date. Without disassembling the code, you can't be sure that these won't happen. This is not scaremongering -- an inherent limitation of closed file formats and closed programs is that you have to trust the providers, not only to not screw up *now*, but not screw up at all in the future as well.
So you also believe that evil Matt "the satanic Monkey" has written trojan procedures etc. into his code, and it will stop working when the next eclipse of the sun happens?
Originally posted by mikemikez Oh, and I totally agree with Jon Ingram.....Openup your source or you can not be trusted. That's just very simple. That's why no boady trusts microsoft to do their most demanding jobs..
Originally posted by tangent Sigh.. why don't we just wait for Ogg Squish?
Originally posted by Dibrom Functionality is more important to me than licensing, because at the end of the day I want to actually use something that works rather than advocate for something which may not necessarily work (or at least work well enough).
This "best" software doesn't always happen to be Open Source software, so when I see people pull the "well it's closed so who knows.. maybe this person is evil and wants to take over the world with his audio encoder, etc, etc" I just can't help but find it a bit flawed.
People can argue all day the merits of Open Source (and some point are very valid), but to those which say there is no merit in closed source software which happens to work really well (APE, MPC, and thats just in the audio field).. I'd say that's a bit of an ignorant approach.