[advocacy] Re: is this list active?
christian at matroska.org
Mon Mar 1 16:26:48 PST 2004
Arc Riley wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 04:10:05PM +0100, ChristianHJW wrote:
>>Xiph should really rethink their implementation philosophy IMO. They
>>seem to think its enough to make some nice libs, and the world will
>>somehow care about creating apps from that. At least in this respect you
>>guys could learn from the matroska project ( sorry, couldnt resist ) ...
> I disagree. Making false statements about other formats to promote your
> own is a very short-sighted way to promote your project. In the long
> run people learn that you've lied to them and your project becomes
> nothing more than another fad that comes and goes.
> 1) Ogg was designed for non-Vorbis audio, and video, and subtitles, etc.
> It's just that our goals go beyond the container format. We're doing it
> right, from the start, with real patent-free codecs vs just using what
> everyone else is using.
> 2) Ogg, unlike Matroska, was actually designed for live streaming.
>>From what I've seen of the Matroska format it would be difficult, at
> best, to start decoding at any hypothetical part of the stream.
> 3) There are far more applications and tools which support Ogg than
> Matroska. Lurking on our lists stating otherwise is only going to fool
> the most naive newbies. Your project is in it's early alpha stages, or
> as you call it, "brand new". You have, basically, nothing but hype.
>>From what I've seen, the only advantage that Matroska has is a powerful
> subtitling format. But guess what? http://wiki.xiph.org/OggWrit
> ... and unlike Matroska, we have a full set of codecs and supporting
> tools already built. Ogg is a real alternative to the world of
> proprietary royalty-based multimedia.
> While I support your efforts to try something new, I find your methods
> for promoting it not only extremely distasteful but also self-defeating.
> If you want Matroska to survive you need to put more time into code and
> less into empty hype. Deliver a real viable product first and stop
> making false claims about other projects.
Just for the record :
1. If i want to promote our project, which i do a lot ( thats part of my
job as an organizer and PR guy, i cant code ), i usually choose other
places than the Xiph advocacy list, with only a couple of readers
2. matroska will go 1.0 before March. Your statement that our project is
in 'alpha' stage shows that at least you have actually no clue about
whats going on in the 'scene'. The fact that matroska has and always had
perfect Vorbis support ( we *LOVE* Vorbis and promote it best we can )
is helping your project a lot, even if i am aware you will never be able
to admit that publically.
3. my post was ment to be nothing but an advice from one project to
another, as i truely believe your implementation philosophy has to be
rethought, and we do have and always had a different approach here.
Marking this as 'spam' and 'advertising' is sick and showing how 'open'
your project really is. Xiph, while making their sourcecode open, is
just another bussiness in the multimedia scene, like many others. There
is nothing wrong about this, actually i think your approach is a very
good one and deserves being supported, especially Vorbis is just awesome
But to treat any other opensource video project, especially one *WITHOUT
COMMERCIAL INTERESTS* as 'competition' is poor IMO, i cant find other
words for your reaction. Hopefully your thoughts on that dont stand for
the complete team.
matroska project admin
--- >8 ----
List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'advocacy-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
More information about the Advocacy