[kman42]

Given the licensing fiasco with MPEG-4, is Quicktime entering into a downward spiral?

Does Apple have a backup strategy for QT if MPEGLA doesn't come to their senses on MPEG-4? If they don't change their stance quickly, content providers will have no other choice but to use the freely available MS tools. QT is the only viable alternative to proprietary technology, but the licensing fees that MPEGLA is asking doesn't exactly make it an open standard. Will content providers see Apple's proclamation as a last-ditch effort to get MPEGLA to change their licensing scheme that they couldn't get changed behing the scenes? If so, are content providers just going to decide that MPEG-4 isn't ever going to get off the ground as a viable solution?

kman

[edddeduck]

Originally posted by kman42:
<STRONG>Given the licensing fiasco with MPEG-4, is Quicktime entering into a downward spiral?

Does Apple have a backup strategy for QT if MPEGLA doesn't come to their senses on MPEG-4? If they don't change their stance quickly, content providers will have no other choice but to use the freely available MS tools. QT is the only viable alternative to proprietary technology, but the licensing fees that MPEGLA is asking doesn't exactly make it an open standard. Will content providers see Apple's proclamation as a last-ditch effort to get MPEGLA to change their licensing scheme that they couldn't get changed behing the scenes? If so, are content providers just going to decide that MPEG-4 isn't ever going to get off the ground as a viable solution?

kman</STRONG>

If MPEG 4 never gets off the ground then the patent holder will not make money either.

So I think they will capitulate.. Or apple will release QT6 with a pls lience you work plea..

Cheers Edd

[mitchell_pgh]

Apple and everyone else has a bunch riding on this! There is no way people will pay anything to watch content when they already must pay for the connection to the internet.

F@#$ MPEG-LA I SAY

I would rather see the streaming part show up later, just give us the MPEG4 encoder/decoder already!!!!!

[mitchell_pgh]

EVERYONE, if you haven't seen the QuickTime Live video, watch it! It makes me sick that we don't have access to this application!!!

[T Allen]

Apple and the key players in the ISMA have had MONTHS to get this mess ironed out.

The right tactical move would have been to pull the plug, or threaten to do so,and go with an open source model. But instead, Apple proceeds to build QT and Broadcaster around a key component (MPEG 4) that they can't use because of licensing isssues.

Would you proceed to design and build a new type of car based on a proprietary, but revolutionary tire system before knowing what the costs are going to be to you and the new owner? "What do you mean they want to charge the new owner 2¢ a mile!"

The ISMA has really mismanaged this. And I can't believe Apple has gotten itself into this jam.

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
<STRONG>EVERYONE, if you haven't seen the QuickTime Live video, watch it! It makes me sick that we don't have access to this application!!!</STRONG>

Sick?

-Sick?

Originally posted by T Allen:
<STRONG>Apple and the key players in the ISMA have had MONTHS to get this mess ironed out.
</STRONG>

AFAIK, wasn't it only Jan 31 when the MPEG-LA released their latest liscensing proposal?

[jcarr]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
<STRONG>I would rather see the streaming part show up later, just give us the MPEG4 encoder/decoder already!!!!!</STRONG>

They can't really do that. The streaming part is already here. It has been for a while.

The problem is not so much the pay-to-play streaming as it is the administration required to comply with the license. Only comercial content providers will be required to pay the fee, so non-profit & education folks are off the hook, and $0.02/hour/stream is nothing for those that charge for thier content. The problem is that it is a clerical nightmare.

This is not a good way to launch a promising new technology.

Voice your displeasure to the MPEG LA: licensing@mpegla.com

[ 02-14-2002: Message edited by: jcarr ]

[mitchell_pgh]

I know $.02 isn't a big deal, but why even bother! It's never going to work! I'm just upset. I want MPEG4 NOW. Ok, calming down. Seriously, Apple is in a mess if this thing takes 3-6 months to figure out. That's valuable time that they could be using updating Quicktime.

[Orange Luna]

Actually with the way the economy is right now a lot of people are having issues related to bandwidth expenses. Try to find a windows shareware site right now that doesn't have some sort of download subscription fee related to it. Though Windows Media Player and Real(though Real has many paid subscribers to it's service) don't charge for streaming, they may in the future. I don't think this can work for MPEG-4 to be competative now however. For now, since MPEG-4 initially with attract less of an audience, it most definitely needs to remain free streaming just to gather interest. Too many competing technologies could render it obsolete very quickly. Success should determine licensing expenses, until then tighten your belt.

Hey that's pretty good, I'm sending that to licensing@mpegla.com!

[ 02-14-2002: Message edited by: Orange Luna ]

[mitchell_pgh]

Yah, for MPEG4 to take off, they need to do it for free, and make the money on the encoder/decoder... they should raise the cap to 1.2 million for both and walk away with $400,000 and call it a day... If they don't I think Apple will make it's own standard and give it away as a free option.

[T Allen]

Originally posted by &lt;maguirer&gt;:
<STRONG>

AFAIK, wasn't it only Jan 31 when the MPEG-LA released their latest liscensing proposal?</STRONG>

These specs have been in the works for MONTHS. They don't just appear
out-of-the-blue. Regardless of what's been "reported", it's so naive of anyone to
think that the ISMA (Apple, Cisco, IBM, Kasenna, Philips Electronics, Sun, AOL,
etc.) didn't known, in advance, what was going to be proposed. Philips is, after
all, one of the essential MPEG-4 intellectual-property holders (MPEG LA LLC)!

What major corporation would invest millions in a technology that they don't own
without some prior guarantees. Good God, would you?

[a holck]

No, in the stream Phil says the first draft was the encoder/decoder price that caps at $1M + $1M per year.
MPEGLA then added the stream fee, just before putting out the final draft.

The MPEG2 licensing is very alike this proposal, but DVD\s are much easier to track than internet streams.

[mitchell_pgh]

Bunch of lawers: "Yah, I think Apple is cool with the $2,000,000 bucks a year, now how do we get another truckload of money from everyone else..."

Give me a brake MPEGLA... this is making them look bad... Apple is also probably on their S#$% list...

[T Allen]

In the end lawyers are told what to do. If you want to put a face on MPEG LA here it is.

MPEG LA LLC, represents the 18 patent holders (as it relates) to MPEG 4:
Canon
Hitachi
JVC
Matsushita
Mitsubishi
Philips
Samsung
Sanyo
Sharp
Sony
Toshiba
Hyundai
Microsoft
Oki
Telenor
France Telecom
Fujitsu
KDDI

I'm convinced the real story hasn't been told yet - only the spin. If I'm wrong I'll admit it, but I won't blindly accept what a "marketing guy" said happend.

[mitchell_pgh]

And here we are, two weeks later and no QT6...

What a mess... I don't want to buy a new system until they get this finalized. If it's going to be 6 months, I will just wait to see if there are faster machines at that time...

... waiting... waiting... waiting...

[MadMacs]

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by MadMacs:
<STRONG>?????

Excuse me?

Have you tried to use that piece of crap Windows Media crap. It dosen't even come close to quicktime.

It's the biggest piece of crap I've seen ever for media, even on a windows machine. Try pausing it in the middle of a clip.

This is a no brainer. Windows ME will never ever be a contender for Quicktime. It sucks way too much. You can't do squat with the clips and the clips are not compatible with anything else.</STRONG>

What are you talking about... I would NEVER buy a Windows machine ---&gt; EVER&lt;--- I'm just pumped about MPEG4, and want to wait until it's released before buying a new machine (in my mind, I can wait until then and maybe even get another speed bump on the G4's)... I have every Smallville on Digital 8 (I know, miniDV is better but I don't have a Digital 8 system)... and want to get all the shows into a small format that I can store on my computer connected to my TV.

[MadMacs]

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by MadMacs:
<STRONG>And I never said anything about you buying a windows machine. Your implication in your title asking "Is Quicktime dead?" because we don't have MPEG 4 compression lead me to believe you were considering Windows Media Player to superseed Quicktime.
</STRONG>
I would NEVER buy a Windows machine or use Windows Media Player. I didn't start this thread, and don't think QuickTime is ever going to die. The day WMP superseeds Quicktime is the day I pack it all up and live under a bridge.
<STRONG>
First of all, quicktime has nothing to do with which computer you buy. You can even download it for a Windows machine. And you can download it in the future for all Macs dated back to whatever the oldest mac it will run on.
</STRONG>
I know all of this. I'm just saying that I'm willing to wait until MPEG4 is native in QuickTime before buying a new Mac.
<STRONG>
Now if you want to put off buying a new machine so you can a faster machine in the future, there's no problem with that logic. Heck nobody can afford to buy the latest version each time it is released. I believe that within the next 16 months we should have some great jumps in speed, maybe sooner.
</STRONG>
I'm just saying my machine now is fine, but when I start encoding video into MPEG4 I want the fastest machine I can get on my budget. If MPEG4/QuickTime6 doesn't come out for another six months, fine, I will wait until then. And buy then. Like I said, I can wait until then.
<STRONG>
But your argument to put off buying one because of Quicktime? What? You download the latest version of Quicktime. You don't get the pro version even with the latest machines. You have to pay the extra $25 or $30 (whichever).
</STRONG>
I know all about the distrobution method of QuickTime, (and when QT6 comes out, I will be getting the pro version - I just hope the price stays $29)
<STRONG>
Besides, I would never use MPEG 4 for my downloaded clips from my Digital Video Camera. I would keep them in there Motion JPEG format until I had finished with all my work and when I was finished with the final product I would only than compress with MPEG 4. Each time you compress video with MPEG (and JPEG for that matter, but not as severe) you loose quality. Digital Video starts out in Motion JPEG.
</STRONG>
I know all about different video qualities. Yes, MPEG4 isn't DV quality, and I know all about lossless and lossey video codecs. I'm going to keep all of the footage on the original DV tapes, but convert them into MPEG4 for viewing on my computer/TV (a 1 hour SmallVille show should be around 200 MB from what I guess)
<STRONG>
Sure it will be nice to get MPEG 4. But I ain't in no hurry. I would never allow MPEG 4 have any affect on my purchase of a new machine.
</STRONG>
I wouldn't wait but I want to start saving TV shows on a regular basis on my hard drive. I have friends using DivX, and it's VERY cool to have EVERY epesode of friends on demand.
<STRONG>
If you have a really old machine and you want a great deal, you might want to consider the iMac with the Superdirve. That is a great deal to have a computer with LCD, DVD Video and 800 mhz at a reasonable price. I am so tempted, but I am waiting for another couple months. My current PowerBook G4 400 will last for atleast another 8 months until I can't stand the wait anymore.
</STRONG>
Yah, I'm with you on this... the new iMac is a great deal, but I already have a OK 19" CRT and can't bring myself to buy a iMac just for the SuperDrive and look/feel. I can get a 733 tower for $1200-Education that's faster then the iMac.

[ 02-28-2002: Message edited by: mitchell_pgh ]

[ 03-01-2002: Message edited by: mitchell_pgh ]

[MadMacs]

[Macnerd]

Originally posted by MadMacs:
<STRONG>And I never said anything about you buying a windows machine. Your implication in your title asking "Is Quicktime dead?" because we don't have MPEG 4 compression lead me to believe you were considering Windows Media Player to superseed Quicktime.

First of all, quicktime has nothing to do with which computer you buy. You can even download it for a Windows machine. And you can download it in the future for all Macs dated back to whatever the oldest mac it will run on.

Now if you want to put off buying a new machine so you can a faster machine in the future, there's no problem with that logic. Heck nobody can afford to buy the latest version each time it is released. I believe that within the next 16 months we should have some great jumps in speed, maybe sooner.

But your argument to put off buying one because of Quicktime? What? You download the latest version of Quicktime. You don't get the pro version even with the latest machines. You have to pay the extra $25 or $30 (whichever).

Besides, I would never use MPEG 4 for my downloaded clips from my Digital Video Camera. I would keep them in there Motion JPEG format until I had finished with all my work and when I was finished with the final product I would only than compress with MPEG 4.

Each time you compress video with MPEG (and JPEG for that matter, but not as severe) you loose quality. Digital Video starts out in Motion JPEG.

Sure it will be nice to get MPEG 4. But I ain't in no hurry. I would never allow MPEG 4 have any affect on my purchase of a new machine.

If you have a really old machine and you want a great deal, you might want to consider the iMac with the Superdirve. That is a great deal to have a computer with LCD, DVD Video and 800 mhz at a reasonable price. I am so tempted, but I am waiting for another couple months. My current PowerBook G4 400 will last for atleast another 8 months until I can't stand the wait anymore.


</STRONG>

Madmacs - Sorry to wander off topic a little here, but your post was interesting. I'm pretty Mac savvy although have never owned a Digital Video Camera - I've just ordered a Sony DCR-PC120 so will be able to do the iMovie thing with it; What I'd be interested to know (in light of your comments) is what format iMovie imports the movie clips in....

Thanks for the help

Macnerd

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by MadMacs:
<STRONG>This is a no brainer. Windows ME will never ever be a contender for Quicktime. It sucks way too much. You can't do squat with the clips and the clips are not compatible with anything else.</STRONG>

*bing!*

Take a look at that list of patent-owners behind the MPEG-LA -

MICRO$OFT IS ON THE LIST, AS ARE MANY PC VENDORS/MANUFACTURERS.

Hmmm.

[Sven G]

A possible completely free, open source alternative to MPEG-4 - should the licensing problems not be solved - is the Ogg Tarkin project, which, however, is at its very initial stage:

http://www.xiph.org/ogg/index.html


But I doubt Apple would be so brave as to support a free software project as its *primary* project...

[wulf]

Each time you compress video with MPEG (and JPEG for that matter, but not as severe) you loose quality. Digital Video starts out in Motion JPEG.

Madmacs - Sorry to wander off topic a little here, but your post was interesting. I'm pretty Mac savvy although have never owned a Digital Video Camera - I've just ordered a Sony DCR-PC120 so will be able to do the iMovie thing with it; What I'd be interested to know (in light of your comments) is what format iMovie imports the movie clips in....

Just to clear up any confusion, digital video from mini-DV or DVCAM cameras imports in DV format, as long as it is imported digitally (ie. via Firewire). iMovie is based around using Firewire and the DV format.

The principal advantage of DV and digital editing is that most of your footage will only be compressed once (on the camera, when it is first shot) for edit back to DV tape, or twice if the destination is another format such as web video, VCD, DVD, etc. (Further compression is only necessary when rendering effects such as titles, transitions, etc.)

M-JPEG is most commonly used for analogue video capture in non-linear edit systems (technically MJPEG and DV are very similar codecs, both being based on DCT, but in practical terms they are still different). Of course there is nothing to stop you capturing DV footage via an analogue connection, but this is almost always a bad idea since the footage will have to be compressed again on import (having already been compressed into DV format by the camera). I also think MJPEG tends to be a little noisier than DV, even at slightly higher bandwidth (eg. 4MB/s as opposed to DV's 3.6MB/s).

Sorry if I'm just stating the obvious ...and for being OT... I could sense some confusion arising...

wulf

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by Sven G:
<STRONG>A possible completely free, open source alternative to MPEG-4 - should the licensing problems not be solved - is the Ogg Tarkin project, which, however, is at its very initial stage:

http://www.xiph.org/ogg/index.html

But I doubt Apple would be so brave as to support a free software project as its *primary* project... </STRONG>

Apple: Brave or foolish to use Ogg Tarkin?!? There are sooooo... many alternatives to MPEG4 (3ivx, DivX, DivX4, OpenDivx, etc, etc,) but we need an "OPEN" STANDARD that everyone can agree upon. If we want support on the Mac, we need a standard that Windows people can use, or it's not going to be a standard. We need them to get this license fixed NOW... Jumping ship now only avoids the problem.

[T Allen]

well, wer're comin' up on one month and . . . QT 6 is no-ware. . . people are movin' on. What a missed opportunity. Effin hard to believe!

[mitchell_pgh]

people are movin' on??? Ummm, I don't think so... The MPEGLA knows people are willing to wait for this technology. Sad but true. I'm pissed... How could Apple do this to us... Look what we have, but you can't touch it... Like showing us the new G5 and the new iMac, and then saying "You can pick one up in October!!!!... Grerrrrrrr, rant, rant rant...

Anyway, I'm not happy

[DaveGee]

What I don't get is how MPEG-LA thinks they have a coice... From where I sit if Apple doesn't play ball then their pretty little patents die from lack of use. (well they don't really die but no use = no money at all)

Apple is willing to provide the ability for Macs and Windows to view and create MPEG4 content. Is Microsoft? Is REAL?? Without the tools you could sell a BILLION MPEG4 enabled cell phones but without content what the heck good are they? I sure don't hear anyone else stepping up to bat with authoring tools for MPEG4 (that don't REQUIRE QT6) for either Macs or Windows.

I don't claim to know what Apples best next move is but from where I sit isn't the MPEG-LA group playing with fire here? No MPEG4 tools = No MPEG4 content = Useless Spec and TONS of wasted money.

Something / Someone better cave in soon...

Dave

[kman42]

Apple will cave in sooner or later because they have no alternative to MPEG4. From what I have heard QT6 is inseparable from MPEG4. They would have to mostly start from scratch (by which I mean the QT5 base).

kman

[T Allen]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
<STRONG>people are movin' on??? Ummm, I don't think so... The MPEGLA knows people are willing to wait for this technology. </STRONG>

Content developers need solutions, not a mirage off in the distance. With the
uncertainty surrounding QT 6/MPEG 4, I will probably have to recommend an
alternative - most likely Flash MX - for an upcoming project.

QT 6 has turned into a product disaster for Apple and a PR nightmare for the
MPEG LA. Is the end in sight? An InternetNews article, "Oh, for Streaming Out
Loud!", reports, "MPEG patent holders are said to be reconsidering some terms of
their licensing policy but for the most part they still stand by the usage fee
structure."
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news...983771,00.html

[mitchell_pgh]

Is this waiting infuriating or what!!! I wonder how badly the talks are going? The licensing fees are ridiculous and impossible to implement. Even if they do get some slick payment method, how long is it going to take for someone to hack it. And if it isn't hackable, people are going to say MPEG4 it's not an open standard. I'm starting to think Apple and a few others are throwing around the term "Open Standard" with little regard for it's true meaning.

I just want to be able to burn an hour and a half of footage on a CD via iMovie... is that asking so much?

[Orange Luna]

Since Quicktime 6 is so dependent on MPEG-4 I wonder if Apple will have problems with releasing OS X 10.2 if licensing doesn't get settled.

[T Allen]

I bet we'll see MPEG-4 encoding via DivX w-a-y before QT 6 .

As I understand it, Divx 5 Alpha for Mac offers an ISO compliant MPEG 4 codec (for QT 5), but as of right now you can't encode - only decode.

No date has been announced for the (Mac) DivX 5 encoder. It will be licensed from MPEG LA, so expect to pay for their encoder.

You might want to check it out. http://www.divx.com

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by T Allen:
<STRONG>I bet we'll see MPEG-4 encoding via DivX w-a-y before QT 6 .

As I understand it, Divx 5 Alpha for Mac offers an ISO compliant MPEG 4 codec (for QT 5), but as of right now you can't encode - only decode.

No date has been announced for the (Mac) DivX 5 encoder. It will be licensed from MPEG LA, so expect to pay for their encoder.

You might want to check it out. http://www.divx.com</STRONG>

I don't want to sound like a jerk, but I have heard this about a million times before. With DivX, DivX4, 3ivx, and now DivX5. The sad truth is, we won't get a MPEG4 encoder worth a damn unless Apple develops it. Half of these DivX projects are college students working from their dorm rooms. I'm not going to hold my breath.

I don't think OS 10.2 is going to be put on hold due to QT6, but I hope that the two come out together so when I pick mine up, it's all there. The MPEGLA and Apple will figure something out... They both have a bunch of $$$ to loose if they wait too long...

[T Allen]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
<STRONG>

I don't want to sound like a jerk, but I have heard this about a million times before. With DivX, DivX4, 3ivx, and now DivX5. The sad truth is, we won't get a MPEG4 encoder worth a damn unless Apple develops it. Half of these DivX projects are college students working from their dorm rooms. I'm not going to hold my breath. </STRONG>

I was just trying to point out an alternative until we get QT 6. DivX 5 Alpha has only been available for a week. But it was noteworthy enough for the authors of Visual QuickStart Guides to QuickTime Pro 4 and Pro 5 to mention on their web site - a first for any Divx Network product.

BTW, Sorenson, Sorenson3, On2 VP3.2, ZyGoVideo, Streambox all rock in QT and none were developed by Apple. While it remains to be seen whether the DivX will every become popular on Macs, I wouldn't dismiss it just because it didn't come from Apple.

I won't bother to go through a very long list of who's-who of "college drop-outs", but I can think of a couple that are pretty important to Apple (lol).

[Footy]

Was a small blirp about DivX in Yahoo this month which talked about DivX for Mac. Almost made me want to try it out.

lloyd

Originally posted by T Allen:
<STRONG>

While it remains to be seen whether the DivX will every become popular on Macs, I wouldn't dismiss it just because it didn't come from Apple.

</STRONG>

[T Allen]

Originally posted by Footy:
<STRONG>Was a small blirp about DivX in Yahoo this month which talked about DivX for Mac. Almost made me want to try it out. </STRONG>

Spent about an hour last Wednesday trying to get it to work w/o much luck. All of the content has AVI/QT issues. You have to change the file type and creator to get it to play in QT. According to several posts DivX Networks is working on resolving this issue. I

I wish someone at Sorenson would leak their MPEG 4 codec. Anyone seen it on Hotline?

Hell, It probably wouldn't work in QT 5 anyway. GODDAMNIT APPLE, RELEASE QT 6!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by T Allen:
<STRONG>
I won't bother to go through a very long list of who's-who of "college drop-outs", but I can think of a couple that are pretty important to Apple (lol).</STRONG>

Ohh, sorry, I didn't mean that the codec's were bad (well, some are...), but they have a way of drying up after six months. After falling into the 3ivx hype, I told myself I wouldn't encode anything unless it was supported my a major player (Like Apple, Sor. etc.)

I think we all just want quality MPEG4 + AAC, and we don't care who gives it to us! I have looked around hotline for QT6, but haven't seen it anywhere!

[pdot]

I'm waiting for QT6 to come out before I get a registration key for QT Pro. I don't want Apple deciding that QT6 is worth another $30 for people who already have QT5 Pro.

Also, I may be buying too much into the MPEG-4 hype, but so far, I'm not very happy with the other codecs. Did someone mention ZyGo? I don't know why, but playback is insanely choppy on my G4/400 Sawtooth regardless of the bitrates I'd tried. 3ivX, which I think is more CPU intensive, plays much smoother, though not smooth enough. Sorenson plays the smoothest at any bitrate but the quality isn't anywhere as good as 3ivX, though I don't have the professional version of either one.

[pelorus]

Originally posted by kman42:
<STRONG>From what I have heard QT6 is inseparable from MPEG4.</STRONG>

You heard wrong.

What's with people these days? You need to make up rumours and facts to support opinions?

[ckohler]

I want QT6 for two reasons...

1) MPEG4 Video streaming at modem speed bitrates.
Finally.. streaming Quicktime will be as good as Windows Media.

2) Quicktime Broadcaster
Finally.. streaming Quicktime will actually be possible in OSX.

[T Allen]

Don't ya just love this. Seems that On2 (VP3/VP4/VP5) isn't too happy with MPEG LA. I wonder how long they could tie MPEG-4 up in court?

They say that "MPEG LA has, in essence, established a monopoly in the digital broadcast video compression market through the Department's 1997 approval of the MPEG-2 patent pool. It is now attempting to use this monopoly to ram unreasonable fees down the throats of consumers and businesses that use the Internet or Internet related protocols for the delivery of video."


Source: http://www.friendsoftime.org/display...=news#-3344602


On2 has petitioned the Department of Justice to investigate the validity of MPEG LA, as it relates to the promotion of MPEG-4 as a video standard, and the patent pooling of other MPEG technologies. In a letter sent to Mr. Charles James, Assistant Attorney General of the U.S. Department of Justice, On2 Technologies President and CEO, Douglas A. McIntyre wrote:

. . . Since the Department approved MPEG LA's 1997 proposal (MPEG-2), my ongoing concern has been that MPEG LA would use this approval to gain market power, and ultimately, to impose monopolistic prices on consumers and businesses. Unfortunately, recent events indicate that these concerns were justified.

. . . According to the Department of Justice's own guidelines on the pooling of patents, a patent pool must provide some benefit to the marketplace in order for it not to be deemed anticompetitive. The only constituency that the MPEG LA patent pool appears to be benefiting is MPEG LA.

[Orange Luna]

A monopoly, hmm. Certainly a powerful group. Can they force this pricing? I didn't think so until now - it's possible. If content providers use MPEG-4 the can add their own surcharge to implement their own income/streaming cost. Customers paying for internet content like channels of TV may be on the horizon.

[kman42]

Originally posted by pelorus:
<STRONG>

You heard wrong.

What's with people these days? You need to make up rumours and facts to support opinions?</STRONG>

Don't be an ass, dude. I said very clearly it was hearsay. I didn't claim it to be fact. If you know otherwise, I welcome your comments. Enlighten us.

kman

[tullamore]

I just watched the Quicktime Live keynote

I WANT QT6 NOW!!! I want to play my MPEG2s on my mac!!

[Footy]

Couldn't have said it better myself.

lloyd

Originally posted by kman42:
<STRONG>

Don't be an ass, dude.

kman</STRONG>

[Footy]

Just ran accross this article: http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=166

Does it mean will have QT 6 soon?

lloyd

[mitchell_pgh]

Interesting article, but it really doesn't say anything. I'm with all of you... I just want MPEG4 and OSX NOW!!!

Nothing has changed at the MPEG-LA website...

Hmmmm...

[me]

What really surprises me is I can't find it at any warez source...