I'm sure there are other formats suitable for voice that are more universally compatible. I think the OSS geeks are just playing poltics like those they loathe so much ;)
At an 8KHz sampling rate with 8 bit resolution, a WAV file compressed with ADPCM will take roughly 120kB of storage space per minute of playing time. A 1:34 minute clip like Brodie's would take only around 190kB of storage space rather than 320kB. And you wouldn't need special software to play it.
Sorry, it's like the built-in Livejournal Post-by-Phone thingy. I'd have uploaded an 8khz mono Wave file if it were up to me. But I'm affraid the OSS geeks are being too insulated again.
That's not the point. OGG excludes many non-geeks from listening to posts without downloading software which can be troublesome for the less experienced. Whereas an 8khz 8bit ADPCM file would have worked with Windows 3.1 out of the box and provided the same quality as the sound out of a standard telephone receiver.
Geekiness often goes too far and becomes exclusive thereby nullifying the empowerment technology can provide. That my friend is elitism and isn't the way I like to do things.
the same could be said for RealTM media and WMV files (which would not play on anything but WMP 9 last time I checked). Given the choice, I wouldn't have RealPlayer on my system at all. It's highly invasive, highly annoying and a highly POS (based on my experience with it). But, I have a choice...not play any RealMedia files or download and put up with the annoyances that RealPlayer causes.
And then with video files encoded in WMV that I've sent to friends with Mac's, they are able to hear the audio portion of the file, but can't see the video portion even though I, running WMP 9, can view the file without any problems.
Granted OGG might not be the most user friendly format, just like RealMedia or WMV, but there are players out that will play the file with user intervention...just like RealMedia or WMV.
LiveJournal was created using open-source software, therefore I guess they wanted an open-source audio codec to handle the Post-By-Phone feature. If we don't like it, we don't have to use it. /shrug I just don't see the big deal about it.
Ok, when did commercial products like Windows Media and Real come into the picture? Don't distract from my point. ADPCM is a well established codec released into the public domain before OGG ever came to be. There is nothing hidden about ADPCM.
This is another case of Open Souce becoming a cult ideology rather than empowering people through technology. Everything has to be GPL otherwise it's useless?! Even if it is public domain? I really don't think your arguement has any legs to stand on.
Fine...here's the solution: don't use post-by-phone or create your own journalling website, therefore allowing you to make your voice posts in whatever format you want.
LiveJournal made the choice that they did for whatever reason. Now you have a choice too: use it or not. Simple.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2004-02-19 09:51 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 09:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-02-19 10:05 am (UTC)Can't those open source geeks just use regular sound files?
And why do they have to give everything idiotic sound names? "Ogg Vorbis?" What is that, a character from Babylon 5 or something?
Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 10:07 am (UTC)It also means 'thrush infection' in Sanskrit.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 10:23 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 10:23 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 04:10 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 04:17 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 08:15 pm (UTC)"Ogg Vorbis" is for dorks.
The Dork checks in
Date: 2004-03-06 07:19 pm (UTC)According to the organization that developed it, they named Ogg/Vorbis (partially) after a character in Terry Pratchett's excellent novel, Small Gods.
In that novel, Vorbis is a particularly evil Inquisition-type priest and false prophet. Odd choice, if you ask me...
-john
no subject
Date: 2004-02-19 12:00 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 02:10 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 02:46 pm (UTC)I make Star Trek jokes but I used to be a trekker
Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 03:23 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 08:45 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 06:39 pm (UTC)Brodie, could you make it any more difficult for us non-l33t hax0rs?
Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 07:16 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 07:49 am (UTC)that will play OGG files in WinAmp 5 lite. Just follow the directions on that page on how to set it up.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 08:09 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 08:41 am (UTC)Geekiness often goes too far and becomes exclusive thereby nullifying the empowerment technology can provide. That my friend is elitism and isn't the way I like to do things.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 09:01 am (UTC)And then with video files encoded in WMV that I've sent to friends with Mac's, they are able to hear the audio portion of the file, but can't see the video portion even though I, running WMP 9, can view the file without any problems.
Granted OGG might not be the most user friendly format, just like RealMedia or WMV, but there are players out that will play the file with user intervention...just like RealMedia or WMV.
LiveJournal was created using open-source software, therefore I guess they wanted an open-source audio codec to handle the Post-By-Phone feature. If we don't like it, we don't have to use it. /shrug I just don't see the big deal about it.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 09:12 am (UTC)This is another case of Open Souce becoming a cult ideology rather than empowering people through technology. Everything has to be GPL otherwise it's useless?! Even if it is public domain? I really don't think your arguement has any legs to stand on.
Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 09:18 am (UTC)LiveJournal made the choice that they did for whatever reason. Now you have a choice too: use it or not. Simple.
no subject
Date: 2004-02-19 01:56 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-19 02:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-02-19 04:50 pm (UTC)We should form a club!
Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 08:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-02-19 11:10 pm (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-02-20 08:41 am (UTC)