http://www.canoe.ca/MoneyWSJ/wsj2-dow.html

I seriously hope you rethink assisting microsoft in their
attempt to eliminate MP3.

Paul

I rather think that's parnoia talking - MS have no way to prevent a 3rd party codec from encoding at a higher rate than 56kbit.

1.1 has WMA. It had WMA before empeg got bought by Rio, and now fits in even better with the Rio range, as they all have MP3 & WMA support; when they get AAC, the car player will too I suspect.

MP3 isn't going to go away; there's no need to re-encode into WMA, and as storage gets larger and cheaper, there are few size advantages (and no audio quality ones at high bitrates). We're not going to drop WMA just because MS are going to throw their weight (and/or marketing budget) around - they do this all the time anyway.

Hugo

This is so utterly laughable. What I find most amusing about the article is that it's written from the viewpoint of an old-school businessman living in a closed-system world.

Here's an example quote: "The industry doesn't want [MP3] pushed, and Microsoft and RealNetworks don't want it pushed. The consumer is going to eat what he's given."

This is an incorrect assumption from someone who doesn't understand the technology. It's like trying to equate PC audio technology with car manufacturers: "If we only build SUVs, then consumers will only buy SUVs." But we know that's not the way it works.

It's too late for Microsoft to attempt to exert any sort of control over MP3, it's already got a life of its own. Any barriers they attempt to erect will be circumvented. Just look at OpenGL as an example. They tried to kill it in favor of DirectX, but oh, hey look, the Quake engine games still use OpenGL and they've sold a bazillion copies.

___________
Tony Fabris

> I rather think that's parnoia talking - MS have no way to
> prevent a 3rd party codec from encoding at a higher rate
> than 56kbit.

I know they don't. They don't need to do that.

If you use the Opera web browser it identifies itself as IE
by default, since many sites don't work otherwise. This
came about in the same way: through their desktop monopoly
microsoft bribed other companies to include their technology
and exclude others.

Same thing is happening with WMA. You're including it because
it's free. Yeah right.

Paul

"You're including it because it's free. Yeah right."

I'm not sure if I'm reading your sarcasm correctly, but it is my understanding that Empeg paid a licensing fee for WMA. They're including it because it is a viable format. I am personally impressed with the sound of WMA at lower bitrates. It is not as good as my VBR MP3s, but I use it for my portable to get longer playing times...

Most of the screaming and running in circles about this news item is misplaced, in my opinion. They are trying to romance the RIAA with their "secure" format. The idea that they are going to lock any use of high bitrate MP3s in future operating systems...? Unfounded paranoia, me thinks...


Brian H. Johnson
MK2 36GB Blue
"Honey, you're wasting ammo..."

Anybody notice the article is dated one year ago?
Anything changed in the year gone by?

Mk2 #105 12g blue
12g full.............. waiting for 30g prices to drop

No, that article was written on Wednesday. The page says April 11, 2000 but that is an error (Y2K bug?) It mentions Windows XP, and Windows XP didn't exist a year ago, even as a fart in Bill Gates' butt cheeks. Slashdot also linked to this article this week, and we all know Slashdot is never wrong.

-Tony
MkII #554

Slashdot also linked to this article this week, and we all know Slashdot is never wrong.

I seriously hope this was dripping with as much sarcasm as I would have intended it to be if I had written it.... ;)

(O|||||O)

Geez, the only beef I have with MS is their damn Word documents can't open in Wordperfect. Can't even copy and paste. What the hell is up with that?

Anyone know a way around this?

DiGNAN
Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da, etc.

Geez, the only beef I have with MS is their damn Word documents can't open in Wordperfect. Can't even copy and paste. What the hell is up with that?

Anyone know a way around this?

Yeah. 1. Don't use Word. 2. If somebody sends you a Word document, send it back unread and ask them to resend it in a sensible format.

Sorry if that's not very helpful but it tends to work remarkably well.

Borislav

Oh, believe me, I understand. What's even worse is the guy who sent me this document sent it to me in Works format first. You could load it into WP, notepad, etc, but it was all jumbled up.

This past summer at work, my boss asked me to convert a loooong Word file, full of columns, bulleted lists, and highlighting, into Wordperfect. It was not fun trying to replicate it from scratch.

DiGNAN
Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da, etc.

When I have to read a MS Word documnet from home (I have to have MS Office at work because my clients do ), I use this site. It is fully functional online demo of one of these guys' products.

Dragi "Bonzi" Raos
Zagreb, Croatia
Q#5196, MkII#80000376, 18GB green

When I have to read a MS Word documnet from home ... I use this site.

Wow, this is really cool. Now I can both read any Word docs I receive and send them back pretending to not have done so.

Borislav

No, that article was written on Wednesday. The page says April 11, 2000 but that is an error (Y2K bug?) It mentions Windows XP, and Windows XP didn't exist a year ago, even as a fart in Bill Gates' butt cheeks.

Well, the name XP didn't exist then, but the OS did (with the name Windows 2000 still in most places, only a few places had the Whistler code name in it).

MS is always working on an OS. The Win2000 code had already gone through a few daily build cycles by the time it hit store shelves.

But anyway on the topic, this will put a minor crimp in MP3 creating by low level consumers, since they are the type to just use whatever is there in the OS. Really dosen't bother me too much, since it won't in any way effect my CD ripping.

Many computers are coming standard with MusicMatch too. That company has really gotten a foothold on the market. It will be in thier interests to keep mp3 around.

12gig Mk. II BLUE
Detroit, MI USA
www.PfeifferBeer.com

What will SonicBlue do several years from now when WMA support is considered a "must have" in order to effectively compete in the marketplace and Microsoft tells them "replace Linux with Windows CE or risk paying a higher license fee for WMA". Or what if the WMA libraries are suddenly no longer available for Linux? Or "the WMA libraries are still avilable for LInux, but they cost more" etc. Laugh and call it paranoid if you want, but the comapany's history demonstrates they will do exactly that if they think they can get away with it.

Note, this senario doesn't even require that WMA destroys MP3 in the marketplace-- all that's required is for WMA to be considered a MAJOR audio format alongside MP3.

Anyone who believes WMA is free is kidding themselves. Why would Microsoft want to waste time developing a free format? The only reason is to extract software royalties and/or use it as a weapon to help maintain the dominance of Windows.

Lastly, the name tells you everything you need to know: "WINDOWS Media Format". i.e. inferior or unavailable on all non-Windows platforms. If that isn't the case yet, it will be later on. Anyone here remember how DCOM was touted by Microsoft as being cross platform and how Software AB would implement it on other platforms, including Linux? That proved to be nothing more than a lie in order to buy mindshare among IT managers for DCOM.

I think the best way to keep mp3, or other (vobis) open standards on top of the list is to just refuse to use such formats, if someone were to send me a WMA file of something, i'd refuse it. no matter what it was. "please encode it in mp3, or don't send it at all"

If someone were to send me their resume in word format, i'd flatly drop it to /dev/null, and ask for a copy in a readable format, like plain text.


12gig red mk2 -- 080000125

No, it's not free, we pay a licence fee for every WMA decoder shipped - just like we do for MP3.

As far as I can tell, nothing has changed; ISTR that win2k comes with a 56kbit MP3 encoder too.

Hugo

I read this when the article first came out on /. Just in case anyone doesn't read all the comments, here's how to fix this "feature":
AJV wrote:
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\MediaPlayer\Settings\MP3Encoding]
"LowRate"=dword:0001f400

Just change it. The above will change it 128k (from 56k). The UI shows this and reflects it.

I hate quoting from slashdot, and if anyone's offended, I'll delete the comment.
Jason

_~= Dearing =~_
"WAY too happy about having #99."

This isn't meant as a flame - just a counter point.

I think this is getting a little out of hand. Office is a great package and is very useful. Customers are not hurt by MS as much as other COMPANIES are. I think that companies such as DoubleClick and AOL (and then they had to go buy Netscape and Winamp) are much more harmful to the average person's privacy than MS is to any computer. I am not saying that MS is a saintly company - in fact, I have serious reservations about their tactics - however some of the products are very good.

MS should be kept in check and we should continue to place them under suspicion. But going so far as to refuse any file sent to you that is in an MS format is snobery. (Unless you are using Outlook in which case you should never accept any files, but I doubt you'd be using Outlook anyway! :)

12gig Mk. II BLUE
Detroit, MI USA
www.PfeifferBeer.com

I think you're missing the point in the office argument...

I would also refuse a word document because I don't own a copy of office...
How is not forking out several hundred pounds for an office suite I don't. need snobery?

I do all my DTP, word processing, finance, spreadsheet and poster/flyer work on software I bought in 1992 for a platform most of you will never have seen. I'm not going to throw it all away just to be able to read a few word documents...

I admit that I'm stuck with file format "lock in" (These files are not compatible with any other software) but knowing that, I use common formats when sending documents to others (unlike the usual office user who assumes that I use the same software they do...)

I'm sure people who use MS office every day find it meets their needs; however, as my needs are met with my 9 year old software, I'll give it a miss...

Don't assume everyone uses a PC or Mac... =)

Jazz
(List 112, Mk2 12 gig #40. Mk1 4 gig #30. Mk3 1.6 16v)

How is not forking out several hundred pounds for an office suite I don't. need snobery?

Agreed, especially when Word has a perfectly good "Save as RTF" function. I wish more people would use it!

___________
Tony Fabris

How is not forking out several hundred pounds for an office suite I don't need snobbery?

Because, like it or not, you do need the capability of reading what people send to you, unless you are such a snob that you don't care.

I didn't make the rules, but I do have to live by them, and it is an unfortunate fact that MS Word probably has an 80% market share. In the face of such overwhelming market dominance, it is not unreasonable to expect people to be able to read documents in that format.

I do have MS Word on my computer, but the only thing I use it for is to read documents sent to me in *.doc format. Unlike you, I don't use a modern word processor for my daily use -- my word processor isn't one of those newcomers from last decade, I mean 1992, that's less than 10 years old, probably still full of bugs and things. MY word processing software was copyright 1988, and since there are probably only about a dozen people in the whole world still using it, I always send my files in ascii or RTF. Tony knows what I use, and even mentioned it once on this bbs. Anybody remember?

Anyway, you can pick up a copy of MS Word as part of a Microsoft Works suite pretty cheaply (around $60 is the going price) on ebay because people are selling their OEM software that came with their new computer, unregistered and unopened. Ebay has a rule now that you can't sell OEM software unless you act as a manufacturer, and include either a hard drive or a motherboard with the software. This is funny -- you buy MS Works and get an old 80 MB hard drive or a '286 motherboard with it to meet the letter of the rules.

[soapbox] I know this is a contrarian opinion, but Bill Gates and Beelzebub are really not one and the same. Think back to what it was like running a computer 15 years ago. Do you really want to go back to C:> prompts and setting up separate print drivers for each piece of software you install? Microsoft is directly responsible for most of the changes made in the last couple of decades, and most of those changes have been for the better. [/soapbox]

tanstaafl.

"There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch"

You're not using an Amiga are you?

Calvin

Because, like it or not, you do need the capability of reading what people send to you, unless you are such a snob that you don't care.

Okay, I'm sorry for starting this Word debate. I agree with this statement, I really do, and I have Word installed for this very reason.

However, don't I have the right to be able to use my preffered word proccessing program to use those files? I mean, it's pretty bad when I can't even cut and paste simple text from a Word document into Wordperfect. If I need PSP screen captures and OCR software just to use a program I'm more capable and comfortable with, something is amiss.

Anyway, I thank the person who linked that web site. Despite not having any real formating options, I'm going to use that in the future.

ps-I don't think Gates is the devil either. I have no problems with Win98 for the level of user I am, and I prefer IE to Netscape just for small differences in program style. I do, however, have a problem with a piece of software affecting every level of user.

DiGNAN
Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da, etc.

How is not forking out several hundred pounds for an office suite I don't need snobbery?

Because, like it or not, you do need the capability of reading what people send to you, unless you are such a snob that you don't care.

It really depends on your work environment. My manager needs to deal with the PHB types all the time so he does need a Windows desktop and he has one. I don't. So when he forwards me a Powerpoint project requirements document, is it snobbish for me to send it back when it'll take me 10 minutes to find a machine to read it on as opposed to 30 seconds for him to convert it? I don't think so, and he appreciates that. Or when the HR department sends a Word document to all@mycompany.com with subject "Important information", is it snobbish to remind them politely that 30% of the employees don't use Windows on their desktop?

And why do I single out Windows formats to moan about? I don't particularly like PDF or even HTML, but at least I can read them on the platform of my choice. If Microsoft would release a free (as in beer) viewer for most platforms, or allow other people to write one, a lot these problems would disappear. Otherwise, I'll just have to be a snob.

[soapbox] I know this is a contrarian opinion, but Bill Gates and Beelzebub are really not one and the same. Think back to what it was like running a computer 15 years ago. Do you really want to go back to C:> prompts and setting up separate print drivers for each piece of software you install? Microsoft is directly responsible for most of the changes made in the last couple of decades, and most of those changes have been for the better. [/soapbox]

Ouch, that hurt. It's one thing to say that Microsoft makes some great stuff (they do, especially hardware) but to claim that they are the source of all innovation... I had to count to 1024 before replying so that this doesn't turn into a flamewar. Let me just say that it's Microsoft who gave you the C:> prompt in the first place.

ObEmpeg: I got my blue carry case today. Looks great... and a lot cleaner than my current one! Anybody know if these things would get too upset if dropped into a washing machine?

Borislav

Nope, although I have a Commodore CDTV sitting under my vcr...
(Sidenote: If anyone has any software for these things, drop me a message)

My main home machine is an Acorn Risc PC, but I also have a Acorn A5000 which I use as a backup machine. I use it mainly for E-mail, but when I need to knock out a document it's the one with the software...

I do have a few PC's as well, one running Linux the other dual boot windows and Linux. That machine is only used for emplode, games and delphi.

If I really needed office compatibility, I could use staroffice, but the problem I have these days is my iMac owning friend sending the weirdest RTF files I've ever seen... (They are updates to put on a website, so I just hacked out the text with my favorate hex editor... =)

Jazz
(List 112, Mk2 12 gig #40. Mk1 4 gig #30. Mk3 1.6 16v)

It's not snobery, it's the simple fact that I don't own the software to open such a document. I love PDF, PS, text, I'll even take HTML.. but dealing with overly complex document formats like word doc is anoying. then again, i work in the .edu world right now, where the standard document format is Latex.. ;)

12gig red mk2 -- 080000125

yep.. the acorn.. which reminds me.. i've got a acorn fanatic.. he said he was going to show me his system today.. (he's a visiting math guru) he's having trouble converting his fonts from the acorn.. all of the mathematics symbols are getting lost somewhere. :(

12gig red mk2 -- 080000125

[soapbox] I know this is a contrarian opinion, but Bill Gates and Beelzebub are really not one and the same. Think back to what it was like running a computer 15 years ago. Do you really want to go back to C:> prompts and setting up separate print drivers for each piece of software you install? Microsoft is directly responsible for most of the changes made in the last couple of decades, and most of those changes have been for the better. [/soapbox]

Lets see here, 2001-15=1986. The Mac was around, with no need for what you speak of. Also, had Microsoft not done what they have, others would have. IBM with OS/2 for example. While Microsoft has helped the PC industry, by no means are they the only reason it's where it is today. Personally I feel they have actually harmed things by crushing competitiors instead of having to develop something new to compete. Take for example OS/2 Warp 4, released a bit after Windows 95. It has built in voice control and dictation. Built in standards like OpenDOC, Open32, OpenGL, and Java. Imagine if that OS hadn't ben slaughtered by MS where we would be today. Decent voice control, and standards that allow people to send work to others without worying about the format it's saved in. Had Microsoft not been able to crush OS/2 like they did, they would ahve been forced to compete and add similar features to Windows to stay alive.

(No, honestly, I'm not that bitter about the death of OS/2 when it was hitting it's prime)

The funny thing about that, is that microsoft did write the first versions of OS/2 for IBM. Go figure...

Frank van Gestel

The funny thing about that, is that microsoft did write the first versions of OS/2 for IBM. Go figure...

Well, they helped, and thats why IBM ran off with file system code that didn't need defragging when they split their relationship, while MS had to write NTFS for NT 3.1

All Windows was originally meant to do was get consumers use to a mouse until they could push OS/2 out the door, since it was delayed by quite a bit. But somewhere along the line IBM and Microsoft got angry at each other and took what they had of the OS/2 code and released something with it. For IBM, OS/2 Warp 3, and MS started NT.

tanstaafl,

Contrary to popular opinion, Microsoft has not been the innovators or even leaders of the last 20 years. The leaders in marketshare perhaps, but that's about it.

You mention having shared printer drivers. The Macintosh had this feature for many years prior to any Microsoft product.

What about a windowing system? Microsoft was dead last there. Macintosh had a usable window system years before MS ever did. So did nearly every desktop operating system: Amiga, RISC OS, Atari ST, NeXT, X-Windows, etc. During the late 80's nearly every desktop system used windows, except for Microsoft's users-- they all were still stuck using DOS.

Pre-emptive Multitasking? With the notable exception of the Mac, Microsoft was again nearly dead last to introduce this feature to their user base. The Amiga offered this in 1985, 10 years before Microsoft would offer this to their general user base!

What about the web? Again, Microsoft was last again. I recall seeing an interview with Gates around 94 where he claimed the Internet was "insignificant" and "only useful for academa" and how it will "never amount to someting useful for the average home user". And we all know how Microsoft was one the last companies to have a web strategy or even acknowledge the importance of it-- they waited until '95 to address this issue!

That's not leadership, and it's nothing to be proud of. The only thing they have to be proud of is making lots of money-- not bettering computing for all mankind.

Can we take this elsewhere? This is an empeg BBS, not a Microsoft-advocacy group.


Roger - not necessarily speaking for empeg

My appologies for the extended rant. But I feel I speak for many others who are dissapointed by SonicBlue's decision to support WMA.

While I will admit it doesn't seem very likely that WMA will crush the MP3 format, over the last 15 years I have watched the same thing happen again and again when Microsoft sets its mind to something. Personally, I would not discount Microsoft's efforts to make WMA the dominate format.

I understand SonicBlue's desire to support a potentially popular format in order to complete in the marketplace. However, WMA format is just that: a potentially popular format. Why it has to be supported before even proving itself popular is somewhat perplexing. Obviously, SonicBlue management are tuned into and believe in Microsoft's plans enough to help them out.

And this is disappointing because many us thought empeg was a cool company. Not a company leading the way to support a format that may eventually force a DIVX security model for music upon everyone.

That's the last I will say on this subject for now.

agree wholeheartedly

Henno
mk2 6 nr 6

I think that it has been stated that the decision to support WMA was empeg's and not SonicBlue. It was made before the purchase of empeg, ltd.

32GB (JUST UPGRADED!) Mk. II BLUE
Detroit, MI USA
www.PfeifferBeer.com

Whoah, it wasn't their decision - we had WMA support lined up as empeg before any SONICblue involvement.

WMA *is* popular, and is getting more so due to the bundling of a fairly good music manager (wmp7/8) with winME and onwards. Lots of people use the stuff they get with their system - eg, iTunes on the mac, and not supporting WMA because it has DRM possibilities (note - we don't support DRM protected files as yet) is very short-sighted.

Most music companies are not going to release commerical music digitally without some kind of DRM. To limit the use of the empeg player to files people have encoded themselves *ONLY* (or obtained illegally via napster & equivalents) is a very short-sighted decision.

In the future, when you can download music and it *is* less hassle than buying the CD and ripping it, are we really going to place ourselves at a huge commercial disadvantage by not supporting these files?

MP3 isn't free - you have to pay for both encoders and decoders (with the exception of free PC player apps). Just because we pay Thompson as opposed to Microsoft doesn't make it any less a format controlled by a large company. Thompson have various plans including licence fees on mp3 radio stations too...

Hugo

>we had WMA support lined up as empeg before any SONICblue involvement

Yes. And I complained about it back then too.

http://cryptome.org/sdmi-attack.htm appears to be the future
of DRM, i.e. nothing except strong-arm legal tactics without
any technical measures whatsoever.

I'm pragmatic and realise you are doing this because you believe
it's commercially necessary. I just believe you are digging
your own grave.

Paul

Maybe I am missing something here. But last time I checked, the empeg with WMA support will still play MP3 files. If you personally are not going to use the WMA feature, the decision to add it won't affect you in any way. The 1.1 upgrade is going to be free, and I am sure that if empeg ever releases an upgrade that they need to charge for, the feature they are needing to charge will be optional.

And even if empeg had to sign a strict contract about WMA, theres no way they could force empeg to take out MP3 support.

And skipping the legality of anything like this, if the contract did allow full control of the empeg once WMA is added, just hold on to a pre-WMA upgrade file.

If WMA becomes dominate, so what? Just like today in the browser war, I am free to use Netscape or Opera in the face of the dominate IE. Sure I don't like how MS got IE to where it is today, but it's also not something I'm forced to use.

In any case, I don't see how adding WMA will in any way harm us as the users, or empeg as a product or company.

In reply to:

---

My appologies for the extended rant. But I feel I speak for many others who are dissapointed by SonicBlue's decision to support WMA.

While I will admit it doesn't seem very likely that WMA will crush the MP3 format, over the last 15 years I have watched the same thing happen again and again when Microsoft sets its mind to something. Personally, I would not discount Microsoft's efforts to make WMA the dominate format.

I understand SonicBlue's desire to support a potentially popular format in order to complete in the marketplace. However, WMA format is just that: a potentially popular format. Why it has to be supported before even proving itself popular is somewhat perplexing. Obviously, SonicBlue management are tuned into and believe in Microsoft's plans enough to help them out.

And this is disappointing because many us thought empeg was a cool company. Not a company leading the way to support a format that may eventually force a DIVX security model for music upon everyone.

---

First, I agree that Microsoft's claims at innovation are mostly laughable, that they use their size in very dirty way to strangle technologically superior competition, that our computing environment would have been much better today had not IBM decided to elevate a certain geek to the level of their OS suplier by tasking him to clone CP/M and so on.

But:

Believe it or not, both empeg and SonicBlue were founded not in order to lead holly war against the Evil Empire, but to make money. I don't perceive them any less cool because of that, since they do it (especially empeg, of course) in uniquely customer-friendly and responsible way.

WMA with its copy protection, serial copy management or whatever will probably succeed to squize MP3 out of online music distribution market (such at it exists). I don't care for that very much, since I don't rely on copying music someone else has bought online. Choice of format in which I will encode music from my own CDs will stay mine, and, at least for the time being, I think I will stay with MP3 (but see bellow). Moreover, if I do buy music online, I don't care if I can copy it from the original file in only two or three generations - I only need it on my empeg and PC disk backup.

Music megacompanies (our real enemy here, not M$) will, of course, continue trying to make us pay for our music when we buy it, backup it, listen to it, think of it... I think I read on this board that some were already testing the waters with new, propriatery CD formats that would make ripping and empeg-feeding more difficult, with predictable catastrophic result. Installed base of CD players is too large to allow for that. Of course, there is danger that they will ultimatively succeed in pushing something new, with perceived technical advantages (audio-DVD or whatever). Then, the only venue of action will be defending fair use of our music at court. WMA has nothing to do with it.

Next, WMA is superior format for some purposes. My home machine is temporaryly a Win98 that was gathering dust untill my Linux laptop died, so I had chance to actually listen to some low-bitrate WMA files (samples from CDNOW). Well, at 20kb/s WMA sounds like AM radio or slightly better, RealAudio like Edison phonograph played through bad analog telephone line, and MP3 does not work at all at such low rate. So, it would seem that for high-volume/low-quality applications (say, audio books), WMA might currently be format of choice.

Finally, don't forget that good German ladies and gentleman at Frauhofen Institute still hold our metaphorical balls, since they are copyright holders for MP3 technology and might choose to charge for it whatever they want (or more likely, what they feel the market will take). In this sense, WMA might even be our ally, by keeping FI folks from becomming too greedy.

OK, enough ranting.

Cheers!

Dragi "Bonzi" Raos
Zagreb, Croatia
Q#5196, MkII#80000376, 18GB green

]Thompson have various plans including licence fees on mp3 radio stations too...

but T donot have the power to squeeze everybody else out of the market, even if they have the intent (which I doubt).

Moreover, WMA may be adequate at low bit rates; it is said that it doesn't match the quality of other codecs at high bit rates. It doesnt make sense to *not* use the full potential of your player. Storage gets cheaper every day.

Henno
mk2 6 nr 6

Finally, don't forget that good German ladies and gentleman at Frauhofen Institute still hold our metaphorical balls, since they are copyright holders for MP3 technology and might choose to charge for it whatever they want (or more likely, what they feel the market will take).

As far as I remember, the German governement placed conditions on the grant given to the Institute for the development of the format; I believe that they were required to hold copyright but not exploit the format commercially.

They are allowed to charge for tools, such as encoders, decoders, etc. I think the intention was to prevent the same situation as the "GIF" charade a few years ago, which was resented big time in Germany when the copyright holder suddenly tried to apply commercial exploitation tactics on a de-facto standard.

One of the few remaining Mk1 owners... #00015

...Thompson, however, who co-developed it, *are* allowed to charge whatever they want for it. Much like AAC, who use Dolby to deal with their licencing; the reasoning is that Dolby have done this for ages and have good lawyers...

Hugo

I don't think we are; time will tell. If MS try to do anything like tying codecs to OS choice, the EU (at the very least) will sort them out - I have a lot more faith in the EU's anti-monopoly powers than the US's...

Hugo

I didn't know these details, but what they seem to boil down to, I am affraid, is that we still might end up in gif-like situation with MP3, right? So, competition among open, semi-open and proprietary formats might not be such a bad thing, even if the behemoth we all like to hate is behind one of them :-)

Dragi "Bonzi" Raos
Zagreb, Croatia
Q#5196, MkII#80000376, 18GB green