On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Geoff Shang wrote: | IMHO, the fact that icecast 1.x only supports MP3 and not ogg vorbis makes | it obsolete. Thanks for, in effect, telling the people who still reply on icecast1 that they're useless. As that would make us put a lot of faith in icecast 2. You people need to get over your "If it isnt ogg, it's shit" mentality. Ogg itself is barely a few months old, and the Vorbis people seems to think that since then, EVERYONE has re-encoded their massive MP3 archives into Ogg. It makes me wonder what the color of the sky is in their universe. I'll put forth a theory here for everyone to chew on: Broadcasters wont convert their content to Ogg because the streaming server (icecast2) it goes through currently fails to support the features they are used to. And who would pin their operation on alpha-level code where on average the last commit was 5-6 MONTHS ago!? Vorbis has actually abandoned TWO things here: Their Icecast 1.x users, and the icecast 2 project. At least, that's the impression once can gain from just looking in from the outside. Perhaps instead of asking for people to write docs, Vorbis should be asking for vollunteers who actually care. I care, that's why I wrote this. /dale --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
> I'll put forth a theory here for everyone to chew on: > > Broadcasters wont convert their content to Ogg because the streaming > server (icecast2) it goes through currently fails to support the features > they are used to. And who would pin their operation on alpha-level code > where on average the last commit was 5-6 MONTHS ago!? > > Vorbis has actually abandoned TWO things here: Their Icecast 1.x users, > and the icecast 2 project. At least, that's the impression once can gain > from just looking in from the outside.<p>woah do0d . that's a crackp0t theory if i ever heard one ., i'll offer an alternate theory . KiSS - keEp it simple sir ; why should the icecast2 developers be guilt-tripped into repeating icecast's performance ? _ is it not enough that OGG can have a streaming server that supports it ? can't that feature base be developed and stabalized prior to prettyin' up the package w/ features from the original icecast ? another question -- who do you think develops these things ?? go read "Cathedral and the Bazaar" somewhere on the web or in a bo0kstore near you . . don't expect everything , and you won't have to deal w/ sh*t/rushed c0de . allow a project to develop into its own niche , and i do believe strongly that OGG/vorbis does indeed merit the attention . , and if you need MP3 _ weLL , be creative . use icecast2 AND icecast on another port (i think this is possible ) . OR , offer OGG live-streams , and OGG / mp3 (batch converted from .OGG ) for the on-demand programming . . and pLease , PLEASE __ open your mind to a world that is bigger than proprietary technologies , and neEdy/ outmoded user bases . . <p> a:/, http://theDV8network.com _ : : free radio and fertile resistances , fresh from the Canadian underground . . <p>--- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.
Behold, Adon Irani <adon@YorkU.CA> hath decreed:> > the icecast2 developers be guilt-tripped into repeating icecast's > performance ? > _ is it not enough that OGG can have a streaming server that supports it ?Perhaps, if that is the only requirement to have a fully-functional streamer. Unfortunately, I believe this is not sufficient for the user base. So, if the developers are interested in providing something that other people want to use, then it is not enough.> can't that feature base be developed and stabalized prior to prettyin' up > the package w/ features from the original icecast ?Yes, it certainly can. But don't call the feature base released. Call it a work in progress (an alpha, in other words).> > another question -- who do you think develops these things ?? go read > "Cathedral and the Bazaar" somewhere on the web or in a bo0kstore near you > . . don't expect everything , and you won't have to deal w/ sh*t/rushed > c0de . allow a project to develop into its own niche , and i do believe > strongly that OGG/vorbis does indeed merit the attention .The argument is not that icecast2 needs everything right now. It is only that until icecast2 has all the features meant for release, it should not be considered released. In that case, it is still under development, and the previously released version (icecast1 so far) is the current stable version. Those who are willing to give up the features not yet implemented in icecast2 in order to stream vorbis, can use the devel version. Those who don't need to stream vorbis can continue using the stable version. There is not a good rationality for considering icecast1 replaced and obsolete if icecast2 is still lacking in features and/or not tested enough.> > , and if you need MP3 _ weLL , be creative . use icecast2 AND icecast on > another port (i think this is possible ) . OR , offer OGG live-streams , > and OGG / mp3 (batch converted from .OGG ) for the on-demand programming .But if icecast1 is "obsolete" then why advocate using it at all?> . > > and pLease , PLEASE __ open your mind to a world that is bigger than > proprietary technologies , and neEdy/ outmoded user bases . .Ah, herein lies the problem. If the icecast maintainers believe the mp3 community to be "neEdy/ outmoded user bases", then they are not interested in the user base, only themselves. Fair enough, then put up a disclaimer and stop responding to users. Call it a research project. Let someone else handle maintaining and distributing a package that people actually want to use. -- prothonotar at tarnation.dyndns.org "Every man is a mob, a chain gang of idiots." - Jonathan Nolan, /Momento Mori/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: part Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 593 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/icecast/attachments/20021228/64d1ad50/part.pgp
On Sat, 28 Dec 2002, Adon Irani wrote: | woah do0d . that's a crackp0t theory if i ever heard one ., | | i'll offer an alternate theory . KiSS - keEp it simple sir ; why should | the icecast2 developers be guilt-tripped into repeating icecast's | performance ? Icecast2 is icecast2. I'm talking about it's lack of innovation (ogg streaming! woopdefuckingdoo) as well as it's lack of functionality that doesnt even near icecast 1.x (yp, acls, metadata, web-based admin). Right now, it's essentially a daemon that takes in a data stream and spits it back out. And does absolutely nothing else. I'm sorry, but past precedents and the state of streaming technology today dictates that it do more than that to be considered useful. | _ is it not enough that OGG can have a streaming server that supports it ? | can't that feature base be developed and stabalized prior to prettyin' up | the package w/ features from the original icecast ? | | another question -- who do you think develops these things ?? go read | "Cathedral and the Bazaar" somewhere on the web or in a bo0kstore near you | . . don't expect everything , and you won't have to deal w/ sh*t/rushed | c0de . allow a project to develop into its own niche , and i do believe | strongly that OGG/vorbis does indeed merit the attention . Tell me, in the past year, where exactly HAS icecast gone? Absolutely no-where. Don't throw this Cathedral and the Bazaar crap around as a cop-out. If this were a serious project, then the maintainer (if there even is someone with that hat on) should look for more enthusiastic people to take icecast2 forward. Because right now, no matter what open-source ideaology you toss around, icecast2 is stagnant, underdevelopped, and underpromoted. | and pLease , PLEASE __ open your mind to a world that is bigger than | proprietary technologies , and neEdy/ outmoded user bases . . Put down the crack pipe, dude. My mind is open. I DO use icecast. I DO NOT want to use shoutcast/live365. As for audio formats, there are abosolutely no reasons for me to move to OGG, becase icecast2 does not allow me to provide the same service and experience to my users as streaming mp3s with icecast 1.x does. I WOULD love nothing more than to move to OGG once the adequate server features are in place, and time allows me to re-encode approx. 5000 tracks of music. But I'm not going to reduce my useablitiy and server functions at my disposal for the sake of OGG itself. As for "needy/outmoded user bases", you definitely have no finger on the pulse of reality in the streaming audio world. Right now, OGG is only an alternative for those who have zero interest in serving streaming music. /dale --- >8 ---- List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/ icecast project homepage: http://www.icecast.org/ To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'icecast-request@xiph.org' containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body. No subject is needed. Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.