- From: Manuel Amador <rudd-o@rudd-o.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:36:29 -0500
Out of the question, it must be royalty-free. That's one of the requirements, so unless you can convince the holder to go RF, no chance. El Lunes 07 Ene 2008, Federico Bianco Prevot escribi?: > Has anyone considered Bink video as a viable option? > http://www.radgametools.com/bnkmain.htm > > >Bink is a "better-than-DVD" class codec - it compresses at higher > > quality than DVD > > >at up to three times the playback speed! > >Bink uses up to 16 MB less memory at runtime than other codecs. > >It has been licensed for over 3,800 games since 1999! > > It is not open-source, but the good thing is that the codec is > licensed on a flat-fee basis. > > Quoting their internet site: > >Our codecs are licensed on a flat-fee basis. > >RAD doesn't charge royalties - period. You pay one flat-fee to use Bink > >or Smacker in your product. 'Nuff said. > > I really couldn't find any comparison versus any other codec, > > compression and quality wise, but their site says: > >Bink is the best quality codec available. Bink creates incredible > > looking video at extremely low > > >data rates. 256x192 animations for the Nintendo DS can be compressed > > all the way down to > > >50 kps and still look great. 640x480 animations can be crammed into > > 200 kps with little loss. > > >At higher data rates, Bink can play HD video (1280x720) at 900 kps > > (DVDs use a 1000 kps > > >data rate for 640x480 video). > > And even more important: > >Another nice feature of Bink is that it's technology was completely > > independently developed. > > >We are not based on any MPEG or other committee standards (our > > techniques are quite > > >different, in fact) of any kind, so the IP is safe, encumbrance-free, > >and (best of all) entirely royalty free. > > There are probably problems with open-sourcing it, but it might be > worth trying to contact RAD and see if this could be a walkable road. > > -- Federico BP > > On Dec 11, 2007 3:39 AM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote: > > I've temporarily removed the requirements on video codecs from the HTML5 > > spec, since the current text isn't helping us come to a useful > > interoperable conclusion. When a codec is found that is mutually > > acceptable to all major parties I will update the spec to require that > > instead and then reply to all the pending feedback on video codecs. > > > > http://www.whatwg.org/issues/#graphics-video-codec > > > > -- > > Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL > > http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. > > Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' -- Manuel Amador (Rudd-O) <rudd-o at rudd-o.com> Rudd-O.com - http://rudd-o.com/ GPG key ID 0xC8D28B92 at http://wwwkeys.pgp.net/ Now playing, courtesy of Amarok: Haddaway - What is love (7" mix) Good night to spend with family, but avoid arguments with your mate's new lover. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20080107/815415ce/attachment.pgp>
Received on Monday, 7 January 2008 10:36:29 UTC