PDA

View Full Version : OGG VORBIS Support in Firmware



Mike Hunter
2005-03-15, 07:40
Interesting discussion. BTW, what is this KRUD (wink and nod to our friends
at tummy.com) about FEDORA being a commercial distribution? It is not.

The topic is a request to have OGG in firmware. I remember when MP3 was
dropped from the distro. While I didn't switch my entire library like one
poster did, the change caused me to investigate OGG and I found that I liked
it. All my new stuff is in the OGG format. I even went out and got an
IRIVER jukebox specifically because it supported OGG. I think it is silly
my PC needs to transcode all my OGG stuff just to play on my squeezebox.
There is no way ANYONE can tell me that is more efficient then just running
in firmware.

And this stuff about endless bandwidth and disk space. Hey, OGG works fine
for me and I'm not interested in taking up more disk space for music. And I
agree with that other poster that I would not have FLAC for the squeezebox
and then OGG for my IRIVER. I don't want to screw with having to figure out
hey, I want to play this song on my Iriver so I need to have another copy in
OGG for it and the FLAC copy for my squeezebox. PLEASE, how LAME (pun
intended) is that.

So SLIMDEVICES when are you going to support OGG in firmware? I want it and
I want it NOW (or at least in the near future, please.)

Aaron Zinck
2005-03-15, 08:46
Come on, this hardly seems reasonable. It's one thing to request a feature,
it's quite another to demand it. With most products you're lucky to get it
to do what it advertises it can do--yet here you're making demands of
slimdevices to add new features? They've provided hardware decoding of the
most used lossy format (MP3), as well as of what is probably the most used
lossless format (FLAC). This will satisfy 90% of the market--but they
haven't left the users of other formats out in the cold--they've provided a
mechanism to play back almost any format. Rather than spend time
implementing every format that a user might demand, I can see why slim would
spend their rather meager resources improving other aspects of the design.

If this is such a major issue for you then vote with your wallet--go
somewhere else and find a player that suits your needs better. For me,
though, the networked-audio-device solution Slim provides is the best I've
seen; they've spent their resources to develop an incredibly flexible player
with tons of functionality and an elegant interface. My guess is that since
you are here at the slim boards then you, too, must find that slim products
fit your needs well. Based upon their track record I trust them and I trust
that they'll respond to the community and add the features that will be most
useful to people. It's not like they're just sitting on their duffs and
refusing to update the product or something. How many other products do you
see functionality added to on a regular (sometimes daily) basis?

Simon Oosthoek
2005-03-15, 09:04
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 07:59:43AM -0700, Jason wrote:
> Do you also find it silly that hardly any portable players even support OGG?
>

yes, especially since there's a completely free (BSD style license) decoder
available:
http://www.xiph.org/ogg/vorbis/hardware.html
or directly http://xiph.org/ogg/vorbis/download/tremor_cvs_snapshot.tgz

Cheers

Simon

Michael Alletto
2005-03-15, 09:09
Not really. There are very few people that actually use it. The
people that do use it are just like people that have problems with a
product. They are a very small but extremely vocal group.

If a product states that it supports it it will just confuse people.
I mean really, OGG? Naming is everything and that name sucks. You
try convincing someone who's never heard of it to rip their cd's in
that format. You'll get a blank stare back. Plus the availability to
download ogg based music files is extremely limited.

I personally don't care either way. I don't use it and never will.
I've invested too much time and space into variable bit rate mp3's so
I'm not about to go back and rerip everything.

Just because something is better doesn't mean it is better.


On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 07:59:43 -0700, Jason <jason (AT) pagefamily (DOT) net> wrote:
> Do you also find it silly that hardly any portable players even support OGG?
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
> > [mailto:discuss-bounces (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com] On Behalf Of
> > Mike Hunter
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 7:40 AM
> > To: discuss (AT) lists (DOT) slimdevices.com
> > Subject: [slim] OGG VORBIS Support in Firmware
> >
> > Interesting discussion. BTW, what is this KRUD (wink and nod
> > to our friends at tummy.com) about FEDORA being a commercial
> > distribution? It is not.
> >
> > The topic is a request to have OGG in firmware. I remember
> > when MP3 was dropped from the distro. While I didn't switch
> > my entire library like one poster did, the change caused me
> > to investigate OGG and I found that I liked it. All my new
> > stuff is in the OGG format. I even went out and got an
> > IRIVER jukebox specifically because it supported OGG. I
> > think it is silly my PC needs to transcode all my OGG stuff
> > just to play on my squeezebox.
> > There is no way ANYONE can tell me that is more efficient
> > then just running in firmware.
> >
> > And this stuff about endless bandwidth and disk space. Hey,
> > OGG works fine for me and I'm not interested in taking up
> > more disk space for music. And I agree with that other
> > poster that I would not have FLAC for the squeezebox and then
> > OGG for my IRIVER. I don't want to screw with having to
> > figure out hey, I want to play this song on my Iriver so I
> > need to have another copy in OGG for it and the FLAC copy for
> > my squeezebox. PLEASE, how LAME (pun
> > intended) is that.
> >
> > So SLIMDEVICES when are you going to support OGG in firmware?
> > I want it and I want it NOW (or at least in the near future, please.)
> >
> >
> >

Michael Peters
2005-03-15, 14:21
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 10:09:21 -0600, Michael Alletto <malletto (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:
>
> If a product states that it supports it it will just confuse people.

Why?

> I mean really, OGG? Naming is everything and that name sucks.

I don't think it sucks.
It's no worse than mp3 or aac or flac.

> You
> try convincing someone who's never heard of it to rip their cd's in
> that format. You'll get a blank stare back. Plus the availability to
> download ogg based music files is extremely limited.

No one is suggesting that mp3 support be dropped.
That would be a bad move.

>
> I personally don't care either way. I don't use it and never will.
> I've invested too much time and space into variable bit rate mp3's so
> I'm not about to go back and rerip everything.
>
> Just because something is better doesn't mean it is better.

Well - I generally "rip once, rip right"
I rip to lossless - which means I can transcode to whatever format
happens to be the best at the moment. For me, that is mp3 because
Linux does not have a good aac encoder, and ogg is not supported on my
iPod.

But ogg in the squeezebox firmware does not require you to change.
That, btw, is an excellent way in which the VHS/Betamax analogy fails.

If I used a Betamax, I could not play my tapes in a VHS player.
Music files are different - you don't have to change your player to
change formats, and a player supporting a new format doesn't mean that
the users have to stop using what they prefer.

There are portable players that do support ogg, and I may buy such a
player in the future. Especially if it offers gapless playback - the
iPod Mini has a kick arse interface, but I hate the fact that it is
not even capable of gapless playback - I enjoy live bootlegs, and a
gap between each song really is irritating. When I do replace my iPod
Mini, I will look at players that support gapless - and that probably
means an ogg player because gapless mp3 is a hack. Plus, I can use ogg
at 128 VBR to get what I get with lame at 192VBR - which means more
tunes on the player. AAC would also do that, but FAAC needs some
serious work.

Of course, if Apple released QuickTime for Linux then I could use
their AAC encoder, as it is really good. Perhaps Nero will release
their AAC encoder for Linux as well - they have released their CD/DVD
Burning sweet (I hear it needs some work, but it is just released -
that's to be expected)

--
http://mpeters.us/

Michael Peters
2005-03-15, 14:39
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:31:06 +0100, Christian Pernegger
<pernegger (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote:

>
> Wait a minute, didn't you just bash mp3 halfway around the list because it
> was patent encumbered? Yet you consider AAC? I just don't get you...

I didn't bash mp3.
It is a very good lossy codec.
mp3 (and aac) will never be in the mainline Fedora distribution
because they do require licenses to distribute encoders/decoders for.

I use patented software, no doubt about it - but I don't expect it to
be in the distribution, I get that elsewhere and install it myself.

AAC is a very nice encoding format, probably better than ogg (I
haven't done any listening tests, but I was very impressed with
128kbps encodes from iTunes/QuickTime)

I'm not bashing mp3 for patent issues, I am stating point blank that
the patent issues are in fact a problem for SlimServer ever being
included in Fedora/Red Hat mainline distribution - unless their also
is a lossy choice that doesn't have the patent issues (and that's ogg)

I personally wouldn't mind paying for Fedora for it to come with mp3
support - I'm not against a technology just because their are patents.

--
http://mpeters.us/

Michael Peters
2005-03-15, 15:11
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:57:01 +0100, Christian Pernegger
<pernegger (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote:
> >I am stating point blank that the patent issues are in fact a problem for
> >SlimServer ever being
> >included in Fedora/Red Hat mainline distribution
>
> Then your feature request should not be 'please include native .ogg support
> in the sb2', it should be 'please try to get slimserver into an official RH
> package archive'

It won't get into Red Hat/Fedora until it supports lossy.

>
> You might also want to look at other distributions and see if they handle
> slimserver and mp3 support in a way that is more to your liking.

I'm not going to change distributions.
I actually use many - Fedora is what I use for my desktop because I
like the Fedora philosophy - and it is a good solid distribution.

Debian is great for boxes without X11 - Mandrake is good if you like
KDE - SuSE is a good distribution if you like KDE - I'm not going to
change distributions.

Installing SlimServer isn't a problem for me, and as I stated earlier
in this discussion - ogg support in the firmware doesn't matter
personally to me, I don't use ogg at the moment anyway. But it still
would be a good thing for users if it was supported in the squeezebox.

Changing the firmware in the squeezebox is a lot easier than asking a
bunch of users to change their music encoding and install unsupported
third software (lame) in order to get lossy streaming to a squeezebox.

--
http://mpeters.us/