| ||||||||||
| On May 14, 2014, at 10:09 AM, Steve Oakley wrote: > I understand that. lets say I *pay* for a h.264 codec from vendor. the new format should be in some respects like QT, its a container for data. if I install a codec, then the data can be turned into picture. I'm not asking for explicit h264/5, but rather the option it can be in the container. having some built in standard codecs is great but what happens when some spiffy new codec shows up a year from now that we all might want to use ? This is exactly what I'm hoping to avoid with POM: making movies that not every POM program can play. Closed-source commercial add-ons would be the fastest way to break POM. I am not even interested in free open source add-ons if they have to be installed separately. I want any program using POM to be able to open any POM movie, like you can with OpenEXR. I'm all for adding new patent-free codecs if they add functionality. OpenEXR has done this. Eventually every program updates to the latest libraries and everyone can read files with the new codec. I'm OK with with some people not being able to read a new codec in the short term as long as everyone can read it in the long term. Nearly every container out there already follows the model you describe, so people are free to choose that workflow. What's needed is an alternative. Brendan |
