[maemo-users] N810 is here

From: John Rudd john at rudd.cc
Date: Thu Oct 18 15:36:48 EEST 2007
Ralph Angenendt wrote:
> John Rudd wrote:
>> Kahlil Johnson wrote:
>>> Wow, still no OGG.... when will maemo people ever learn. Who cares
>>> about AAC, give us OGG.
>> Huh.  I have many AAC files.  I have no OGG files.  Why should even 
>> remotely care about OGG?
> How weird. I have no AAC files but a big bunch of ogg files, why should
> I even remotely care about AAC?
> IOW: What is the point you are trying to make?

Pretty simple: why should I be upset (or sympathetic to the upset that 
Kahlil was expressing by trashing another format) about the lack of OGG 
support, or the presence of AAC support.

>> Or is this one of those "you absolutely need it for interesting content 
>> in Europe, but it's absolutely useless for content in the Americas" type 
>> situations?
> Huh? What does it have to do with America/Europe? It's about *open* and
> *free* music codecs - neither AAC nor MP3 are free. 

It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with America/Europe. The 
question was asking "_does_ it have something to do with America/Europe" 
... as in, I'm trying to figure out why OGG support would be so 
important as to induce the comments Kahlil made.

And, no, it's not about "open and free".  Since the developers in 
question are Nokia (since the comment was directed at the release of the 
N810 itself, and not a request for more 3rd party development), it's 
about how much effort the developers need to put into supporting 
something vs. the amount of return they get from supporting it.  Given 
all of the other things that are on Nokia's plate for the internet 
tablet development, why should OGG be a priority?  What thing only comes 
in OGG format, that they need to support now, instead of later?  Or that 
they need to support directly, instead of leaving to the efforts of 3rd 
party support?

I'm as interested in open and free as the next person, but there's 
nothing about the comment I was replying to that captures that.

> And I don't really see the problem with supporting *also* ogg.

I don't either.  But that's clearly not what the initial request was 
about, or it wouldn't have also attacked another format.  By asserting a 
value judgment about "AAC vs OGG", that then leaves the question of what 
value is actually being implied in that assertion.

If the person just wanted another format to be supported, then they 
could have just said that.  But they didn't.  If they just wanted an 
open/free format to be supported, then they could have just said that. 
But they didn't.

More information about the maemo-users mailing list