Thread: Nokia and Ogg: ambivalence or actively hostile?
View Single Post
lardman is offline lardman
2007-12-10 , 18:26
Posts: 2,102 | Thanked: 1,309 times | Joined on Sep 2006
#21
No, the situation on with the IT side of the company isn't that dire. But look at what they've done with S60. "Symbian Signed" has severely curtailed the development of freeware S60 software, and for a while (months at least, dunno if they've ever fixed it) you couldn't get a free application signed. And no, Nokia, self-signing is not the answer.
Yes, the mobile phone side of their operations is probably quite different. I don't use a Symbian phone so I don't know anything about that, but I can understand at least one reason why they'd want to limit what can be run, and that's abuse of a given provider's network.

Support for MP3 is a must, support for OGG isn't. When it comes to priorities, supporting their DRM'ed online store is going to take precedence over any OGG initiative. We've got an official Rhapsody client for the ITs, but no official OGG support.
Oh yes, I quite agree with you on this, they have to support mp3, they don't have to support ogg and drm codecs/services are a money producing avenue for them and/or their collaborators.

With that said, there's still no reason to not provide ogg support "out of the box" (in the form of the relatively free [in terms of cost to develop and maintain] gstreamer plugin rather than an expensive-to-develop DSP task) unless it's some legal thing.