<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Dirac encoder/decoder coming along nicely</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/</link>
	<description>Just another GNOME Blogs weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:02:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Luis</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/comment-page-1/#comment-888</link>
		<dc:creator>Luis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/#comment-888</guid>
		<description>Dumb question I have never seen an answer to: why did BBC reinvent the theora wheel? Is theora just that bad? Or some other reason?&lt;p/&gt;How do you see the two playing together in the future?&lt;p/&gt;(Looking at the xiph website, I see that tarkin isn&#039;t even mentioned anywhere anymore- I guess it is dead?)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dumb question I have never seen an answer to: why did BBC reinvent the theora wheel? Is theora just that bad? Or some other reason?
<p />How do you see the two playing together in the future?
<p />(Looking at the xiph website, I see that tarkin isn&#8217;t even mentioned anywhere anymore- I guess it is dead?)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christian</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/comment-page-1/#comment-889</link>
		<dc:creator>Christian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/#comment-889</guid>
		<description>BBC wanted something which could compete with H264 and WMV9 for high definition video, Theora can compete with MPEG2 on quality, but not with these newer codecs. I think in the future we will see these codecs offering both be used for a long while for different usecases.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BBC wanted something which could compete with H264 and WMV9 for high definition video, Theora can compete with MPEG2 on quality, but not with these newer codecs. I think in the future we will see these codecs offering both be used for a long while for different usecases.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MikeC</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/comment-page-1/#comment-890</link>
		<dc:creator>MikeC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/#comment-890</guid>
		<description>Awesome news!  Now all we have to do is convince the BBC to use their own codec for their content instead of Real :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Awesome news!  Now all we have to do is convince the BBC to use their own codec for their content instead of Real <img src='http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/wp-content/mu-plugins/tango-smilies/tango/face-smile.png' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tristan Brindle</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/comment-page-1/#comment-891</link>
		<dc:creator>Tristan Brindle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/#comment-891</guid>
		<description>Shameless self-promotion: the next version of OggConvert* will include support for encoding to Dirac (provided you&#039;re running GStreamer 0.10.11 and have schroenc on your system). It&#039;ll be out in the next couple of days, depending on whether I can fix the horrible pitfdll bug quickly.&lt;p/&gt;* &lt;a href=&quot;http://gnomefiles.org/app.php/OggConvert&quot;&gt;http://gnomefiles.org/app.php/OggConvert&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shameless self-promotion: the next version of OggConvert* will include support for encoding to Dirac (provided you&#8217;re running GStreamer 0.10.11 and have schroenc on your system). It&#8217;ll be out in the next couple of days, depending on whether I can fix the horrible pitfdll bug quickly.
<p />* <a href="http://gnomefiles.org/app.php/OggConvert">http://gnomefiles.org/app.php/OggConvert</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/comment-page-1/#comment-892</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/#comment-892</guid>
		<description>How is the speed of the thing?&lt;p/&gt;It is possible to play HD-sized stuff on a normal computer (say 3ghz P4)? I seriously doubt 1080p or whatever is the biggest, but maybe 1,280x720 at 30FPS?&lt;p/&gt;Also when you guys have time a webpage with visual codec quality comparision vs bitrates would be entirely kick-ass.&lt;p/&gt;If Dirac is actually fast enough to be usable on modern PCs and provides superior quality to Mpeg-4 ASP, and rivals Mpeg-4 AVC then your going to realy start to have something  that people will be very interested in. Professionally interested in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How is the speed of the thing?
<p />It is possible to play HD-sized stuff on a normal computer (say 3ghz P4)? I seriously doubt 1080p or whatever is the biggest, but maybe 1,280&#215;720 at 30FPS?
<p />Also when you guys have time a webpage with visual codec quality comparision vs bitrates would be entirely kick-ass.
<p />If Dirac is actually fast enough to be usable on modern PCs and provides superior quality to Mpeg-4 ASP, and rivals Mpeg-4 AVC then your going to realy start to have something  that people will be very interested in. Professionally interested in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Smith</title>
		<link>http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/comment-page-1/#comment-893</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Smith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/2007/01/29/dirac-encoderdecoder-coming-along-nicely/#comment-893</guid>
		<description>Luis: Theora is - at least in theory - roughly competitive with MPEG4-2 codecs (divx, xvid, etc. are implementations of that). Dirac is an attempt at jumping a generation-and-a-half beyond that (H.264 and WMV9 are generally considered the generation beyond MPEG4-2, Dirac&#039;s being a little more ambitious than those).&lt;p/&gt;The BBC people are also pushing for Dirac to be usable in the broadcast space - so they&#039;re pushing it in directions quite different from what Theora is aimed at. We (the xiph people, that is) are interested in Dirac; we consider it complementary rather than a competitor.&lt;p/&gt;And yes, Tarkin is very, very dead. It was an early-stage research prototype - and got more publicity than it should have. It was never planned as something that would be directly used.&lt;p/&gt;That said, Xiph is very interested in designing and implementing a true next-gen video codec. We had a bit of discussion about this stuff at FOMS (before LCA). Unfortunately, that&#039;s the sort of work that really requires someone working on it full-time for 6-12 months to get anything out of it at all - so we&#039;d need funding from somewhere. &lt;p/&gt;Of course, if you know anyone interested in funding R&amp;D work on free codecs, please put us in touch! :-)&lt;br/&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Luis: Theora is &#8211; at least in theory &#8211; roughly competitive with MPEG4-2 codecs (divx, xvid, etc. are implementations of that). Dirac is an attempt at jumping a generation-and-a-half beyond that (H.264 and WMV9 are generally considered the generation beyond MPEG4-2, Dirac&#8217;s being a little more ambitious than those).
<p />The BBC people are also pushing for Dirac to be usable in the broadcast space &#8211; so they&#8217;re pushing it in directions quite different from what Theora is aimed at. We (the xiph people, that is) are interested in Dirac; we consider it complementary rather than a competitor.
<p />And yes, Tarkin is very, very dead. It was an early-stage research prototype &#8211; and got more publicity than it should have. It was never planned as something that would be directly used.
<p />That said, Xiph is very interested in designing and implementing a true next-gen video codec. We had a bit of discussion about this stuff at FOMS (before LCA). Unfortunately, that&#8217;s the sort of work that really requires someone working on it full-time for 6-12 months to get anything out of it at all &#8211; so we&#8217;d need funding from somewhere.
<p />Of course, if you know anyone interested in funding R&#038;D work on free codecs, please put us in touch! <img src='http://blogs.gnome.org/uraeus/wp-content/mu-plugins/tango-smilies/tango/face-smile.png' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
