Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Proposes Rival Video Format

Comments Filter:
  • 6 billion people (Score:2, Interesting)

    by rnd() (118781)
    With 6 Billion people, a little bit of money saved on royalties will make a huge difference.

    Plus, with other players wanting to enter the market, the Chinese will probably make some money on royalties as well.
    • by cybercuzco (100904)
      Ok, there are 6 billion people on the planet, but 90% of them cant afford to use a vcr or dvd player, so you cant market to them.
      • Re:6 billion people (Score:5, Informative)

        by cyberon22 (456844) * on Thursday July 31, 2003 @04:01PM (#6582646)
        You can buy a VCD player here in Beijing for $25 USD, and a regionless (*cough*) DVD/MP3/VCD combo for under $50. Since the average annual income is about $3000 USD, that's equivalent to someone making $24,000/year buying a $200 machine. Factor in VCD rentals at $0.20/day and DVD/VCDs on sale for between $1 and $1.50... its easy to see why owning this stuff is becoming pretty common.

        Total population figure is irrelevant though. Even if people in rural Fujian aren't making enough money to buy a lot of DVDs, there are 16 million people in Beijing and several million more in the Yantze river delta. And when the population of just a few Chinese cities starts to rival countries like Germany... it makes a huge difference for international standards competition.
  • Piracy? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Rosyna (80334) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:15AM (#6578471) Homepage
    I wonder if this would cut down on media piracy worldwide. Since Videos/DVDs on the black market in China would be in AVS Format, no other country could play them.

    Just a thought.
    • Re:Piracy? (Score:3, Insightful)

      "no other country could play them." ... until the hardware manufacturers get wind of the fact that there's huge demand for AVS capable players....
      • Re:Piracy? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by rjch (544288)

        "no other country could play them." ... until the hardware manufacturers get wind of the fact that there's huge demand for AVS capable players....

        As ridiculous as this sounds, I don't doubt that it's possible. After all, the good DVD player that I bought a few years ago for $750 is sitting right underneath the cheap & nasty $150 DVD player that will play my burnt (S)VCDs. (please bear in mind that I live in Australia, so the prices won't sound right to anyone in the US) The truly annoying thing is

    • Re:Piracy? (Score:5, Informative)

      by iluvpr0n (306594) <pimp_star@NOSpaM.hotmail.com> on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:31AM (#6578541) Homepage
      No, it won't. Mainland China is now separated into its own region (region 6, region 3 is used in Hong Kong, South Korea, and some other Southeast Asian countries). Anyone who is making bootleg video isn't going to play by the rules; they want to maximize the number of people they can sell to. So if you go on ebay to buy those bootleg copies of Star Wars IV - VI you won't find that they say "Region 6. Only playable in China!" It'll be the same way with this AVS format. It also assumes this technology would replace DVDs in China, which seems a bit far-stretched at this point.
    • Re:Piracy? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by garyok (218493) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:49AM (#6578620)
      I wonder if this would cut down on media piracy worldwide. Since Videos/DVDs on the black market in China would be in AVS Format, no other country could play them.

      Who the heck do you think manufactures all the players? Chinese companies. They'll throw in AVS support for nothing with their players (no point in setting up 2 production lines when 1 will do), just like they threw in support for VCD and SVCD. And then the players will get shipped to every country in the world.

      In fact, this is a real shot in the arm for piracy, as they can rip the video from DVDs, repackage it in non-region encoded AVS format. Then they fire it around the wibbly-wobbly web in handy, ready-to-burn form and their little pirate buddies with an AVS-compliant player go "Woohoo! No more swapping SVCD discs!"

      But, for exactly the same reasons, it'll also be a boost for amateur and small media production companies as they won't have to pay Philips and Sony a big wad of their earnings to get their media distributed worldwide.

      A better question would be: given China's intransigence when it comes to upholding international intellectual property agreements, should we rip off this format, use it for publishing everything, make tools to create and edit AVS files willy-nilly, burn AVS discs, blah, blah, blah..., and not pay them one red cent for it?
    • If the US made the format illegal in their country it might slow down piracy a little. These players would sneak in without advertising the fact that they play this format.
  • Go China! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by seldolivaw (179178) <me AT seldo DOT com> on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:16AM (#6578475) Homepage
    In case anybody else hasn't noticed, China is turning out to be -- in fact, already is, simply by its sheer size -- the world's largest booster of open source and royalty-free hardware and software in the world. Open Source and Free Software movements couldn't ask for a more powerful force to have on their side, and they are consistently expanding and improving what they offer -- first Red Flag Linux, then the dragon chip, and now this. Woo!
    • Re:Go China! (Score:5, Informative)

      by Fuyu (107589) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:28AM (#6578528)
      According to the Yahoo article [yahoo.com] it's not royalty-free, "Chinese manufacturers licensing that technology would pay fees in the order of one yuan ($1=CNY8.28) per device, much lower than those for MPEG, the report said. If it becomes a national standard, products of foreign companies sold in China could also have to use AVS."
    • by da5idnetlimit.com (410908) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:36AM (#6578567) Journal
      A common pool of research and market for close to 2 billion peoples, all sharing in some way a low tech - low money environment...

      Open Source is the only way to go if they want to avoid royalties...

      when you have one billion inhabitant, anything can become a huge problem...

      I remember my economy eacher telling us why coffee was badly seen as a morning drink in china. Because if only 1/2 of your population takes one cup coffee in the day, it amounts to 50 tons a day in purely imports...

      And, also, if their standard is proposed as is in all future media players (say, how many DVD players are not made in China ?) this standard could become the worlds standards...

      And the whole world will have to pay royalties to China...

      Ahhhn Anticipation ! 8)
    • by Joel Bruick (685266) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:38AM (#6578576)
      ...you cheer on a country with such a horrid human rights record simply because its software ideals appear to align with your own.
      • by garyok (218493) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @08:19AM (#6578750)
        Hell, we used all the nazi doctors' death-camp research didn't we? And the US shipped all the nazi guys designing V-1s and V-2s (more terrorist devices than weapons) off to build ICBMs, to protect the land of the free. Supporting research after some other jerk has got their hands dirty and killed some folk to get their answers (and taken the blame) is what we do in the 'civilised' west. Get over it.

        Bet you'll be glad for all the stem cell research they will do, with all their aborted female foetuses, when your liver packs in 20 years from now.
        • by Kosi (589267) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @08:58AM (#6578970)
          Hell, we used all the nazi doctors' death-camp research didn't we?

          This goes even further, as the grandfather of the guy currently occupying your president's seat has built the family fortune by dealing with the nazis:

          http://www.baltech.org/lederman/bush-nazi-fortun e- 2-09-02.html
      • Ermmm... (Score:4, Insightful)

        by griblik (237163) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @09:35AM (#6579240)
        ... glass houses, stones, etc [amnesty.org]...

        Let's just say that your local media is more likely to tell you that another country is Bad(tm) then tell you about the stuff your own country is up to.

        I'm not condoning any form of human rights abuse, I'd really like to live in a nice, happy, peaceful world, but let's face it; the west is not exactly utopia either. I saw a post around here the other day from a chinese /.r who pointed out that whilst China's gov is slowly getting better, ours is quite quickly getting worse.

        • Re:Ermmm... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by ryanvm (247662) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @12:49PM (#6581111)
          You're a fucking moron.

          Our government makes some colossal blunders - every government does. But to compare the United States (the largest foreign aid contributor in the world) to a country like China is ridiculous.

          Did you compare AI's report on the U.S. to their report on China [amnesty.org]? Don't bother answering, because I know you didn't.

          The highlights of the U.S. report consists of the detention of 600 foreign nationals arrested in military combat (boo fucking hoo) and the fact that we still exercise the death penalty. The China report details the systematic detention of TENS OF THOUSANDS of Chinese citizens for expressing dissenting opinions. "Torture and ill-treatment remained widespread and appeared to increase".

          If you were a Chinese citizen and had posted the same comment, you could very possibly wind up in prison.

          Get a fucking grip. No, better, move to China.
          • Re:Ermmm... (Score:3, Informative)

            United States...the largest foreign aid contributor in the world

            Untrue

            The US is fourth in absolute terms of overseas aid given (behind Japan Germany and France). In terms of percentage national income, the US at 0.12 per cent, ranks below Uganda.

          • Mod parent down. (Score:3, Insightful)

            by incom (570967)
            Who mods this junk up anyway? Sure China is all "evil", but the previous poster was just pointing out that the US is "bad" and getting worse, while China is getting less "evil", and implying that pretty soon the USA is bound to cross that line to "evil", while China may possible cross over to "bad" in time. I hope that translation into you simple language will help you to understand.
      • by 73939133 (676561) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @09:37AM (#6579259)
        ...you cheer on a country with such a horrid human rights record simply because its software ideals appear to align with your own.

        Yes, when some engineers in China do something good and useful, like create a new, free video standard, one should cheer them on for that and encourage them. That doesn't amount to a wholesale endorsement of the Chinese government or their political system.

        The US has plenty of human rights, social, and economic problems itself and plenty of historical baggage. You should worry about that before you are in a position to single-handedly condemn a country of a billion inhabitants.
      • Better than cheering one on just because you happen to live there. At least there's some rationality to highlighting the positives.
    • Since they're planning to require a licensing fee on this new standard, it doesn't look to me like they're really interested in open source as much they are in taking market share away from foreign vendors and then getting people to pay them instead.

      I think they'd rather be a new Microsoft than a new Open Software Foundation.
    • Which is where the Linux is helping communism argument comes from.

      But is it too far fetched to suggest chinese citizens got sick of Microsoft pressurising them into buying their software?
  • fish translation (Score:3, Informative)

    by Simon (S2) (600188) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:20AM (#6578489) Homepage
    translated link [altavista.com]
  • by ZiZ (564727) * on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:20AM (#6578491) Homepage
    This is probably a good idea economically for China, but it smacks a little of France's banning of the word "e-mail" [cnn.com] to me for some reason. Are there any royalty-free video standards out there? I'm not a video guy, so I don't pay much attention to that part of the world, but I know there are plenty of open/royalty-free audio [vorbis.com] codecs...
    • Not yet, I think they want a truly free VIDEO format, not just a codec. All current ones have some kind of baggage on them meaning they where developed by a company that at any time may decide to start charging. Remember what happenend to the royalty free MP3 and gif formats?

      I am not really sure why this is a money matter for china, unless they are planning on becoming huge content providers the cost of licensing current formats is peanuts. I think it is more political. A truly free standard would not see

    • by Jugalator (259273) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:39AM (#6578580) Journal
      Xiph.org [xiph.org] isn't only developing Ogg Vorbis, but also Ogg Theora [theora.org]. It's still in alpha stages though. The technology used in Theora is based on the vp3 codec [on2.com] which is covered by patents, but Xiph.org has negotiated an "irrevocable free license to the vp3 codec for any purpose imaginable on behalf of the public".

      Xiph.org is also developing the experimental wavelet-based "Tarkin" codec. As I understand it, it's more written from "scratch", much like Ogg Vorbis, but is even further ahead in the future than Ogg Theora, which they are focusing on right now.
  • by SharpFang (651121) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:21AM (#6578494) Homepage Journal
    ...that there's so many to choose from.

    (I don't remember who said that but that's daamn right :)
  • by Rogerborg (306625) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:22AM (#6578503) Homepage
    Why not just use ogg video [slashdot.org]?
    • Yepp. Would be much cooler (and more useful for the rest of the world). But of course people tend to stick to the "not-invented-here"-syndrom. Dictators are even worse regarding this.

      Bye egghat.
    • Because this way they can charge people who want to license the thing. If they have a national standard, they get a cut for every machine in China sold that uses it.
    • by r6144 (544027) <r6k@LIONsohu.com minus cat> on Thursday July 31, 2003 @08:32AM (#6578835) Homepage Journal
      Yes, it is NIH syndrome. Besides, the word "Intellectual Property" has become a buzzword here in government-speak. The government strongly encourages companies to develop new IP, new standards (even if they are neither better or freer than others) and patent everything possible. They just don't care about free software at all, actually it is required that IP from government-sponsored projects are "sufficiently protected" (which mostly means "patented").

      It is true that paying royalties to domestic companies is much better than paying foreigners (we all remember the DVD player fiasco), and it doesn't matter much whether ship-making (etc.) technologies are open or closed, but I don't think the current policies are suitable for software and related technologies. Mandating domestic proprietary (and sometimes incompatible) standards over existing free (as in freedom) ones may create more GDP in royalties, and possibly give domestic companies some advantage in competition (unlikely), but ordinary people actually loses.

      Being a Chinese citizen, I think the situation here is similar to that in the US in 1970s as described by RMS. Basically most people are not aware of IP, and those who are getting to know it rush to "protect" it, few have yet to get the notion of free software(information, knowledge, etc.).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:24AM (#6578507)
    China never really has gotten over that "we are the center of the earth" mentality have they? Royalties have nothing to do with it - you're talking about the largest exporter of pirated digital media in the universe. Royalties mean nothing. This is really about continuing China's history of trying to advance their civilization without using parts of anybody else's.
    • by stu_coates (156061) * on Thursday July 31, 2003 @08:03AM (#6578674)

      China never really has gotten over that "we are the center of the earth" mentality have they?

      In my experience the USA has the same problem at times.

      • everyone forgets, they have the "last" 5000 years of isolationism already under their belts. 5000 of reletive peace vs. 200 years of perpetual war--I'd say they might be onto something. The current management sux, but hey, it was a failed experiment in "not" being isolationist--look what happened.
    • As opposed to (Score:5, Informative)

      by Epeeist (2682) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @08:16AM (#6578733) Homepage
      As opposed to American publishers who infuriated Charles Dickens by publishing his books without acknowledging his copyright.

      And now of course we have American publishers who want to extend copyright in perpetuity to stop people having fair use of characters in the likes of Rudyard Kipling's books.
    • Traditionally, China is the Middle Kingdom. Middle of what, you ask? Well, there is Heaven; there is Earth; between the two is China.

      So, saying they think they're the center of the Earth is actually an understatement.

  • theora? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by myspys (204685)
    why don't they support http://www.theora.org/ instead of building their own from scratch?
  • by Michael_Burton (608237) <michaelburton@brainrow.com> on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:25AM (#6578514) Homepage

    The Chinese seem determined to avoid patent issues by developing their own chips, and now their own video formats.

    The intellectual property laws that were supposed to guarantee our technology a dominant position may, in practice, be shutting U.S. companies out of future marketplaces, as tech customers seek a way around excessive royalties and restrictions.

    • by valisk (622262) * on Thursday July 31, 2003 @08:12AM (#6578715) Homepage Journal
      our technology a dominant position may, in practice, be shutting U.S. companies out of future marketplaces, as tech customers seek a way around excessive royalties and restrictions.

      This is indeed something which I think will happen if the present US laws are allowed to stand and are perhaps extended into Europe.

      There is a term for this type of regulatory aid to National Enterprises: Mercantilism

      As each Block seeks to protect its own markets with regulation including copyrights and patents which favour companies from within the block versus those from elsewhere, the markets will become increasingly reluctant to innovate and as many innovations will possibly infringe on existing patents, copyrights, national protective legislation etc, overbroad and lacking in utility.
      Most innovation will occur in areas where such regulations are slack in comparison.
      Perversely these innovations will not benefit the large closed markets for the same reasons, and lacking in the ability to make use of these new innovations by either importing or internal manufacturing due to high Intellectual Property costs making innovations uneconomic in comparison to exisiting products and services.
      It could well be that as Large Multi-National corporations take flight to less regulated economies to gain low cost labour and low cost innovation, those jobs lost will not be replaced by new jobs created via the utilisation of new innovations, in effect locking unemployment into the system.

      We can follow this up with an examination of how the USPTO has been increasing the number of patents granted for seemingly spurious claims and look at the fact that the EU is considering enacting a similar set of rules, thanks to the tireless lobbying of US Corporations and US led Industry Pressure Groups, and see that if such Laws are made compatible with existing US patents and US issued patents have the same legal status as EU patents within the EU then a financial bonanza will be the reward for the lobbyists and the US economy in general.
      This will however be very short-term and will likely result in an enormous amount of cross regulation where the US Coporations will face IP claims from EU Corporations designed to close out US entry to the EU marketplace and vice versa. And almost certainly an increase in the amount of Industrial Espionage in order to be first to file IP for Patents.
      It becomes difficult to see why such measures could be considered useful, but in the short term view which afflicts most corporations worldwide, the opportunity to grab a legal monopoly over entire areas of innovation, potentialy bringing many billions of $ of revenue for little to no outlay, will define how our Governments regulate on these matters.

    • I wonder if the problem is simply one of scale. In a global market, with people patenting their "inventions" in every area, there are a lot of inventors struggling to be not first to market, but first to file.

      I fully expect to see fantasy patents ooze out of the USA into other areas. Once the EU caves in and allows software patents, watch them get swamped by US patent holders trying to file their patents (and variants on them) there.

    • I'll bet $5 China can't develop a new codec that doesn't infringe on a single US patent. Of course, I'm not restricting this to good patents, but a patent is a patent while it stands, even if it's 'a method for creating the illusion of a moving picture by stimulating the retina with a rapid succession of changing pixels on a video display.'.

      Same goes for Ogg.
  • by jkrise (535370) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:26AM (#6578517) Journal
    Slashdot : Today's SCO news - Darl McBride wakes up, brushes teeth, SCOX down 10 cents.
    China : So? We've got RedFlag Linux, we don't bother about US Copyright laws.

    Slashdot: Intel settles with Via, latter not to make pin-compatible CPUs after 3 years... blah,blah,blah..
    China: Here's the Dragon CPU. Forget Intel, forget Via.

    Slashdot: CDMA and GSM are the top technologies for mobile phones.
    China: We've developed SCDMA totally in-house. We don't pay royalties for that.

    And now...
    Slashdot: GIF is out of patent. Some image formats still remain in copyright and patents mess.
    China: Here's our video format.

    Slashdot: XBox can be hacked to run Linux.
    China: Dragon CPU runs Midori Linux. We don't need any damn XBoxes..

    And so on.. Slashdotters makes noise, China makes progress.

    -
    • That's good...isn't it? I mean, would you rather 6 BILLION people collectively accomplished nothing, or would it be better if the country became better developed. China developing could eventually mean they actually contribute to the worldwide pool of technology. China doesn't have laws against stem cell research, so labs there could eventually provide treatments for the rest of us.

      Sure, their government is oppressive (so is ours, its just a matter of degree). And maybe it will keep them down. But if
    • China better than Slashdot??

      Yup. China is a lot better than Slashdot. Slashdot doesn't have any farms, so couldn't support its population without relying entirely on imports from the so called `real world'.

    • Just wait until they start competing against themselves.

      Never underestemate the power of intelligent people. Educated people can create new things faster than anything we know about in this universe. When you put a human into the right environment, one that doesn't hurt them with rhetoric, propoganda, etc. One that nourishes their natural desire for progress. If you put a person in an environment that will take care of them, give them all the tools and supplies they need, loving people around them to g
  • communism and IP (Score:4, Insightful)

    by martyn s (444964) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:26AM (#6578518)
    Communism may not be a good fit with physical goods and commodities and stuff like that, but I think China is setting a good example with intangible, non-rivalrous goods (IP). Once they design a chip, or a video compression scheme, no one can exhaust its usefulness. This is a good thing.

    Now don't think I'm going so far out there. We have similar ideas here, and we at least pretend to practice them. That's the idea behind University research and stuff like that (at least before universities had the right to own the products of their research).

    Here in America, I think we need more research done for the public benefit, paid with public money. There are so many intricacies to the vision I have, and I can anticipate many objections, but I'm not going to write a whole long post here. I'm just making a positive suggestion here.
    • Althoungh the ruling party has the name "Communist" the system behind it all is no longer in effect. In almost all matters in urban areas, capatilism reigns. As a matter of fact, even the government has regarded the nation as a "Socialist" nation for some time now, which is more correct in the sense that there is now much free enterprise with not much government regulation to prevent people from being merchants.

      As state industries continue to close down and more private companies take their place, it beco

  • But does everyone in China have a credit card?
  • I wonder why they wanted to invent the wheel .. there are already a number of Open Standards, and Open Source implementations that are royalty-free, such as: either they did not do enough research, or they like reinvinting thw wheel
  • by Phoenix666 (184391) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:52AM (#6578628)
    You see, everything the CCP does is aimed at reaffirming their legitimacy as the one and ruling party. There is a Chinese space program to go to the moon. There is a program to build a navy to rival the US's. There was their version of linux, and now there's this project.

    I admire their technical prowess, but they're not doing it with the good of humanity in mind. It's all about proving that they're not trapped in luohouzhuyi, literally "fall-behind-ism." They've failed as a communist party, so now the only thing keeping them in power is trying to prove that they're making China strong enough to resist foreign interference. That's what this project feels like to me.

    • by Azghoul (25786)
      This is the most insightful one I've read on this article. They're totally trying to be the best without relying on us (whom they probably hate).

      Good luck to them. :)

      Maybe they beat us out on something significant, then we can have another president drive us towards a tangible goal (I'm thinking Kennedy and moon shots here). Maybe that'll shake us out of the self-centered malaise we seem to be in...
    • They've failed as a communist party

      India. [cia.gov] Government type: federal republic. Population: 1,045,845,226. GDP per capita: $2,540. Literacy: 52%. Life expectancy: 62.2 years.

      China. [cia.gov] Government type: Communist state. Population: 1,284,303,705. GDP per capita: $4,600. Literacy: 81.5%. Life expectancy: 71.86 years.

      Don't get me wrong, China sucks wang, but I'd hardly call it a failure.

    • by Cyno (85911)
      I admire their technical prowess, but they're not doing it with the good of humanity in mind.

      What country does anything for the good of humanity?
    • There is a Chinese space program to go to the moon.

      Yeah, because there are long-term payoffs from the high technology that would need to be developed for such a trip to succeed. Plus, China is quite wise to get millions of Chinese kids excited about space. That will put them far ahead of the US kids, excited about Pokemon.

      There is a program to build a navy to rival the US's.

      If you saw a potentially hostile and unpredictable country attacking countries for economic reasons the way the US has been, you'd

  • by supabeast! (84658) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @07:57AM (#6578647)
    This is why we need to support Open-Source lobbying efforts. Right now, sending a native Chinese lobbyist to push China to adopt the work of the Ogg team as their official standards would be a great coup for the Open Source movement.
  • AVS (Score:3, Funny)

    by soliaus (626912) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @08:00AM (#6578661) Homepage Journal
    There is actually a pr0n company called AVS which stands for Adult Video Systems. I wonder if they will use the format? ~me
  • What's the intellectual property status of the AVS standard? The article mentions "royalty payments" for China. Do those only apply to products used/distributed in China, or do they apply worldwide? Has China taken out foreign patents related to the AVS standard? Or does AVS infringe on patents in the US or Europe and therefore cannot be used in the US or Europe?
  • A propretary video format allows ONLY the playing of that format within it's borders. Since the Chinese also don't like the idea of "foreign ideologies" (blocked CNN, blocked Western websites) streaming into the country, proprietary video is a way to only allow the masses to view what the government deems is "safe."
  • by corby (56462) * on Thursday July 31, 2003 @08:35AM (#6578852)
    I got a chance to review the format, and it looks like they need some more work on the audio / video syncing issues.

    In the clip I saw, a martial artist was moving his mouth extremely rapidly, but the audio was just a slow voice intoning in English:

    "So, my young sabretooth, it appears the student has now become the master."
  • Lotsa codecs (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Winterblink (575267) on Thursday July 31, 2003 @09:07AM (#6579020) Homepage
    I see a lot of people complaining (in essence, or literally) about this being YET ANOTHER video codec. Am I missing something? Is this, competition that is, a GOOD thing? Who gives a rat's ass if there's five, fifty or a hundred codecs out there in common use. Ok, so they can't all be standards and most will be flash-in-the-pan technologies, but at least there's competition.
  • What's wrong with using an open-source codec? Or are there any good ones out yet? It'd be nice if the Chinese gov simply paid some coders to work on OSS video codecs. I mean not to troll or anything but OSS is compatible with the communist ethic...
  • The linked article doesn't mention it, but the SVCD (Super Video CD) format was created in 1998 for the same reasons. Here is a good overview of why and how SVCD was created [uwasa.fi] (some excerpts follow...)

    Super Video CD (aka SVCD, Super VCD or Chaoji VCD) is an enhancement to Video CD that was developed by a Chinese government-backed committee of manufacturers and researchers, partly to sidestep DVD technology royalties and partly to create pressure for lower DVD player and disc prices in China. The final SV

"Hello again, Peabody here..." -- Mister Peabody

Working...