<?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: Slides from Dirac talk at LugRadio Live 2008</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.schleef.org/blog/2008/04/12/slides-from-dirac-talk-at-lugradio-live-2008/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.schleef.org/blog/2008/04/12/slides-from-dirac-talk-at-lugradio-live-2008/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 06:35:46 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Basil Mohamed Gohar</title>
		<link>http://www.schleef.org/blog/2008/04/12/slides-from-dirac-talk-at-lugradio-live-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-593</link>
		<dc:creator>Basil Mohamed Gohar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2008 03:25:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.schleef.org/blog/2008/04/12/slides-from-dirac-talk-at-lugradio-live-2008/#comment-593</guid>
		<description>After looking through the slides, I was encouraged by seeing all the integration work (e.g., gstreamer, ffmpeg, GNU/Linux distros, etc.), but I was a bit confused by the concept of &quot;lower&quot; licensing costs over H.264/MPEG-4.  Am I correct in understanding that, in general, there are *no* costs for Dirac, in general?  And if that is the case, that means &quot;lower&quot; means &quot;no&quot;, right?

Aside from that, I cannot wait for the full rollout of the implementation of Dirac in the free software stacks and players (e.g., VLC), because this will greatly accelerate the adoption of Dirac into the mainstream.

Another question - how good is Dirac, in general, over unreliable connections - for example, where part of the bitstream is delivered and another isn&#039;t - such as when doing webcam video conferencing?  Will it work well with this?

Sorry for the deluge of questions...:)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After looking through the slides, I was encouraged by seeing all the integration work (e.g., gstreamer, ffmpeg, GNU/Linux distros, etc.), but I was a bit confused by the concept of &#8220;lower&#8221; licensing costs over H.264/MPEG-4.  Am I correct in understanding that, in general, there are *no* costs for Dirac, in general?  And if that is the case, that means &#8220;lower&#8221; means &#8220;no&#8221;, right?</p>
<p>Aside from that, I cannot wait for the full rollout of the implementation of Dirac in the free software stacks and players (e.g., VLC), because this will greatly accelerate the adoption of Dirac into the mainstream.</p>
<p>Another question &#8211; how good is Dirac, in general, over unreliable connections &#8211; for example, where part of the bitstream is delivered and another isn&#8217;t &#8211; such as when doing webcam video conferencing?  Will it work well with this?</p>
<p>Sorry for the deluge of questions&#8230;:)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ethana2</title>
		<link>http://www.schleef.org/blog/2008/04/12/slides-from-dirac-talk-at-lugradio-live-2008/comment-page-1/#comment-522</link>
		<dc:creator>ethana2</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 03:36:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.schleef.org/blog/2008/04/12/slides-from-dirac-talk-at-lugradio-live-2008/#comment-522</guid>
		<description>Vorbis + Dirac FTW!

...no offense to anyone, but theora....
well..

nevermind.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Vorbis + Dirac FTW!</p>
<p>&#8230;no offense to anyone, but theora&#8230;.<br />
well..</p>
<p>nevermind.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
