Active Topics
-
The N900 is now 15 years old! (8)
to Nokia N900 by whayong - 14 hrs, 5 mins ago -
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (4)
to SailfishOS by Maemish - 5 days, 10 hrs ago - more...
railroadmaster |
2010-06-17
, 20:18
|
|
Posts: 1,082 |
Thanked: 1,235 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
|
#161
|
Originally Posted by gerbick
Thank you for correcting me. However I still think it is stupid for Apple to ban Adobe Flash. They say they support open standards while in truth they don't. They only support the proprietary h.264 video codec for video playback with html5.
|
|
2010-06-17
, 20:22
|
|
Posts: 1,082 |
Thanked: 1,235 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
|
#163
|
Originally Posted by gerbick
That is pretty common knowledge. You can download the specification from Adobe's website.
The ability to create *.swf is open, but the Adobe Flash Player is not open.
|
|
2010-06-17
, 20:24
|
|
Guest |
Posts: n/a |
Thanked: 0 times |
Joined on
|
#164
|
You have to separate the *.swf from the Adobe Flash Player. That's what Apple is protesting. They say that the plugin is responsible for the majority of Safari errors/exceptions.
Yet... they've yet to expose all of the GPU and plugin architecture until... well, just last month.
The problem around Safari and the Flash Player could be surrounding their choices of what they did not make open to folks - not just Flash.
But to say "open standards" and then say "Flash Player" in the same breath, it's a bit off. I'm going for accuracy here.
Yet... they've yet to expose all of the GPU and plugin architecture until... well, just last month.
The problem around Safari and the Flash Player could be surrounding their choices of what they did not make open to folks - not just Flash.
But to say "open standards" and then say "Flash Player" in the same breath, it's a bit off. I'm going for accuracy here.
| The Following User Says Thank You to For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2010-06-17
, 20:24
|
|
Posts: 1,746 |
Thanked: 2,100 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
|
#165
|
Originally Posted by railroadmaster
Correction: the h.264 standard is, in fact, open. However, it is also patent encumbered, which is the problem. Hopefully the MPEG-LA will get snarled in a nasty patent war with Google and something good in the way of docking software patents will come out of it, if re. Bilski doesn't.
Thank you for correcting me. However I still think it is stupid for Apple to ban Adobe Flash. They say they support open standards while in truth they don't. They only support the proprietary h.264 video codec for video playback with html5.
 |
|
2010-06-17
, 20:33
|
|
Posts: 4,672 |
Thanked: 5,455 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Springfield, MA, USA
|
#166
|
Say what you mean, mean what you say. Accurate terminology is precious in conveying an accurate meaning and argument. Flash is NOT a standard. It's common, but not a standard. (Much like RealPlayer was common--but never a standard.) Apple might have nefarious reasons, but what they're saying about HTML5 as a better way to present content on a web page is quite reasonable and well said. h264 is an encumbered standard due to patents--it's not a piece of software, it's a standard--but that's yet another element of the conversation about HTML5 implemented video versus requiring a Flash plugin just to present video content.
In the end, HTML5 *IS* the right way to go, but which codec to use is a whole other conversation.
Last edited by danramos; 2010-06-17 at 20:38.
In the end, HTML5 *IS* the right way to go, but which codec to use is a whole other conversation.
Last edited by danramos; 2010-06-17 at 20:38.
|
|
2010-06-17
, 20:47
|
|
Banned |
Posts: 138 |
Thanked: 45 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#167
|
Originally Posted by danramos
Say what you mean, mean what you say. Accurate terminology is precious in conveying an accurate meaning and argument. Flash is NOT a standard. It's common, but not a standard. (Much like RealPlayer was common--but never a standard.) Apple might have nefarious reasons, but what they're saying about HTML5 as a better way to present content on a web page is quite reasonable and well said. h264 is an encumbered standard due to patents--it's not a piece of software, it's a standard--but that's yet another element of the conversation about HTML5 implemented video versus requiring a Flash plugin just to present video content.
In the end, HTML5 *IS* the right way to go, but which codec to use is a whole other conversation.
WebM will pwn !!! let the patent wars begin !!!!!!!!!
 |
|
2010-06-17
, 20:52
|
|
Posts: 1,455 |
Thanked: 3,309 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Rochester, NY
|
#168
|
Originally Posted by nosa101
So if my band wants to send out free MP3s of our songs on the internet to get started, and encourage others to send it via Bluetooth to others for free, that's totally illegal? According to Apple it is... Just because you have a religious belief doesn't mean I should have to live by it. Same applies here.
So if I buy a song on iTunes then send it to you via Bluetooth, that is totally ok?
Originally Posted by Frappacino
No, it makes the existing distributors (aka labels) of the content happy, not the producers (aka artists). And frankly, most folks have already come to the realization that DRM is a waste of time, since someone always finds a way around it (sometimes before it's even implemented), and illegal copying still happens. This is why major distributors (like Walmart and Amazon) have already chucked DRM in favor of more open non-DRM formats.
They impose DRM not to piss off the users or for principles, its becuase it makes the platform a selling point for the PRODUCERS of the DRMed content, whether that be an APP or any other media content.
Fact is, Amazon makes plenty of money selling standard, non-DRM MP3s. And tons of media players (From Sansa to cheap Taiwan knockoffs) are happy to let you copy those MP3 files to and from their devices like they're memory sticks, and have done so for years. Welcome to the 2000s.
And yes, 100% of my music is legitimately owned. I make my living off selling software. Pirating software or music is counter-productive to my karma. Or were you projecting?
Originally Posted by ysss
Wrong. If you brick your iPhone you have no recourse but to return it to Apple. That's not the same amount of risk as the N900, where you can always reflash it (via a documented hardware shortcut). Right now Apple doesn't do a postmortem to see why it's dead, but if they change that policy, you're screwed. They also don't have the device phone home, or intentionally shutdown if they find a root kit, but they could if they wanted to quite easily. The N900 has no such mechanism, and because they intentionally expect people to get root and alter their device, there's no worries about voiding the warranty if you do.
This is bs. Jalilbreaking an iPhone takes less than 2 minutes and has about the same amount of risk to flashing an N900.
Jailbreaking an iPhone is taking a large risk. Up till now that risk has generally not had a harsh consequence if things went wrong, and that may or may not change in the future. With the N900, there is next to no risk, since the tools and permission to do so are clearly spelled out.
Originally Posted by garyc2010
Clearly you are "cba faffing" at typing as well...
If it was a stable platform then yes, but i cba faffing about just to get basic things to work, on my linux desktop/notebook yes, but not my phone.
PS where is the freedom in Nokias closed binaries ????
Tell me, what "basic thing" is broken with the N900? I can make calls, use SMS, MMS, take pictures and videos, upload them to a dozen sites, chat via IM... What "basic thing" is unstable about that? The N900 is one of the most stable platforms I've worked with, which is saying a lot based on where I've worked in the past.
Even just "playing with scripts" is quite useful. Maybe you haven't heard, but there are lots of scripts that do plenty of useful things in the world. The Apple order page is a script, written in PHP, so clearly they think scripts are useful, since that "script" just handed them a wad of cash. And tell me, does your iPhone let you run scripts? No? Didn't think so. So flexible...
As for Nokia's closed binaries, sure, some of it is closed, but everything has closed components. What little parts are closed in the N900 usually have well documented APIs so you can interface with it without needing the code. Beats the crap out of the non-existent APIs for Apple's closed binaries on a jailbroken phone. Your argument is like saying playdough isn't flexible enough because it's not a liquid or a gas, so you should just play with a brick instead.
 |
|
2010-06-17
, 21:03
|
|
Posts: 4,384 |
Thanked: 5,524 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou
|
#169
|
Originally Posted by woody14619
I haven't heard of any explanation/excuses about the bluetooth situation. But they've been known to ride on technology/standards that they think are taking off and leaving things that are on the way out. Right now that's what they're doing with html5 vs flash.
So if my band wants to send out free MP3s of our songs on the internet to get started, and encourage others to send it via Bluetooth to others for free, that's totally illegal? According to Apple it is... Just because you have a religious belief doesn't mean I should have to live by it. Same applies here.
Reference: Jobs' D8 interview.
Wrong. If you brick your iPhone you have no recourse but to return it to Apple. Right now Apple doesn't do a postmortem to see why it's dead, but if they change that policy, you're screwed.
Have you heard of recovery mode? Can you point out a bricked-iphone story that's not due to hardware defect?
Yes, companies can change their policy to screw you. (read below)
They also don't have the device phone home, or intentionally shutdown if they find a root kit, but they could if they wanted to quite easily. The N900 has no such mechanism, and because they intentionally expect people to get root and alter their device, there's no worries about voiding the warranty if you do.
Jailbreaking an iPhone is taking a large risk. Up till now that risk has generally not had a harsh consequence if things went wrong, and that may or may not change in the future.
__________________
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc
Class .. : Power User
Humor .. : [#####-----] | Alignment: Pragmatist
Patience : [###-------] | Weapon(s): Galaxy Note + BB Bold Touch 9900
Agro ... : [###-------] | Relic(s) : iPhone 4S, Atrix, Milestone, N900, N800, N95, HTC G1, Treos, Zauri, BB 9000, BB 9700, etc
Follow the MeeGo Coding Competition!
| The Following User Says Thank You to ysss For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2010-06-17
, 21:09
|
|
Posts: 1,667 |
Thanked: 561 times |
Joined on Feb 2010
|
#170
|
Originally Posted by woody14619
If you don't want to play by Apple's rules then don't use the Apple device. There is no mechanism to determine what is legal or illegal. The iPhone can't suddenly decide to transfer your band's music and not transfer something bought from the iTunes store.
So if my band wants to send out free MP3s of our songs on the internet to get started, and encourage others to send it via Bluetooth to others for free, that's totally illegal? According to Apple it is... Just because you have a religious belief doesn't mean I should have to live by it. Same applies here.
Also, I think it is hilarious that jailbreaking is oh-so-bad and overclocking is oh-so-good. They both void the warranty.
As you say, "I can do whatever with my device"
| The Following User Says Thank You to nosa101 For This Useful Post: | ||
