Skip to main content

Poll

Which codecs will be around for the long haul?

Apple Lossless
[ 8 ] (7.5%)
FLAC
[ 76 ] (71.7%)
La
[ 0 ] (0%)
LPAC
[ 0 ] (0%)
Monkey's Audio
[ 1 ] (0.9%)
OptimFROG
[ 1 ] (0.9%)
Shorten, Shorten
[ 1 ] (0.9%)
TTA
[ 0 ] (0%)
WavPack
[ 9 ] (8.5%)
Windows Media Encoder 9 Series
[ 10 ] (9.4%)

Total Members Voted: 158

Topic: Which has best chance at development longevity? (Read 8101 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Which has best chance at development longevity?

Reply #25
Quote
If any, ReallyRareWares is a good example that most codecs, even very unpopular ones, can be preserved for posterity.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=282094"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Right... In that way, open-source is also safe for posterity only if source are still available somewhere.

But I suppose that people arguing with open-source=future have in mind the possibility to port the code to new OS. Old binaries won't necessary work on future OS.

On the other side, open-source format won't be necessary decodable in the future: it supposes someone to compile source code (most people I suppose can't do that).

Which has best chance at development longevity?

Reply #26
Some of these open-source-fanatics seem to believe that a post-apocalyptic-scenario is near ... and there will be no greater need then as to keep vorbis/flac alive 

Which has best chance at development longevity?

Reply #27
...and to switch from one monopoly to another one

Which has best chance at development longevity?

Reply #28
???
The longevity of lossless formats, when you can easily transcode from one to the other?

Which has best chance at development longevity?

Reply #29
How can you be so sure it'll fall off the internet?

I've been maintaining RareWares for almost 4 years now. ReallyRareWares is in its infancy. Also, it gives me much more pleasure to maintain than RareWares, since I just love research work, and maintenance takes much less effort. Unless I'm left without any web space to use (and I believe I can count on several friends in this community and elsewhere to help me with hosting), ReallyRareWares won't go down.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=282100"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
[/quote]
Anything and everything does.

I think you run a great site and you put a lot of effort into it, though. Maybe you can have a script that puts the whole site into a /site.tar.gz or /site.tar.bz2 file when anything changes.

Which has best chance at development longevity?

Reply #30
Quote
Anything and everything does.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=282150"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Yes, yes, Nostradamus.

I won't bother arguing, your arguments are useless and pathetic.

Which has best chance at development longevity?

Reply #31
Quote
Apple released a proprietary version because they couldn't wait - what, two years already? - for the standardization of MPEG4 ALS to release their lossless codec. They would lag behind the competition (MS, Real) that was releasing their own lossless codecs by then.

And I got this information directly from an Apple engineer.
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=282096"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Interesting. I wonder if they add full support for ALS once it is complete. It seems to be the perfect format because it's open and backwards compatible.

Which has best chance at development longevity?

Reply #32
Quote
???
The longevity of lossless formats, when you can easily transcode from one to the other?
[a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=282111"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Exactly, someone didn't think things through very well.

I've been building a collection of lossless files (I use WavPack, for no other reason than I love the way bryant develops it (mmm, asymmetry)), and as soon as I see a non-WavPack-lossless file, it gets transcoded in a couple clicks into WavPack lossless. If there's some new killer lossless format that comes out, well... click-click-click-wait. Done.

 
SimplePortal 1.0.0 RC1 © 2008-2019