On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Clay Fandre wrote: > That's exactly the attitude that will make Ogg Vorbis fail. And we all > lose if it fails. It should be our responisibility to do as much as we > can to help Ogg and any other open standard succeed. Come-on Ben, get > with it. You're beginning to sound like a Microsoftie. Me, Me, Me. <snip> > And if you would do a little research you'd figure out that a lot of > apps do support Ogg, and many more will in the future. The more it's > used, the faster it will be accepted as a standard. There's one other little point, though. Why do we support open source? For me there are a couple of reasons, but one of the biggest ones is the ability to make something work the *right* way (or one of the right ways). As much as I have learned to hate them, I probably wouldn't have become anti-Microsoft if they had allowed people to fix problems. But when they build a system, make poor engineering choices, *and* tell you that they know best and you can't change it, well they can stick it where the sun don't shine. The reason why I can't support Vorbis wholeheartedly is because they haven't yet mastered their own game. mp3 is a much better piece of perceputal coding engineering, and MPEG-AAC is lots better than that. I'm *NOT* saying Vorbis is bad; and to the average listener it probably makes little difference. But, and I *am* a little biased, mpeg has some very solid basic research supporting its foundations, and some ingenious DSP. I don't see Vorbis as playing in the same league yet. So for now, I'll root from the sidelines, but right now they just don't meet Phil-spec. :) I don't know if I feel responsible for their success or failure. Open-source / free is *a* nice standard, but for me it's not the *only* factor. (Even though most of it is better built anyway, IMHO!) Got change for a nickel? Phil -- "To misattribute a quote is unforgivable." --Anonymous