Hello Jean: Big mistake!! One of the three things that a supplier should never discuss is politics ... that's business 101. Speex may be a very good product, but we will never use it because of the politics that you espouse ... some of us out here believe strongly in the free market. And we also know that monopolies can't exist because entrepreneurs will always exploit the inevitable market openings left by another supplier ... in this case Microsoft. In fact, Speex's success is proof of the statement I just made ... nevermind the rantings of left wing academics who typically have no real world business experience! At 09:38 PM 8/31/2007 +1000, Jean-Marc Valin wrote:> > Just wondered what your thoughts are on Microsoft's RTAudio codec > > that they use in their Unified Communications stuff: > > > http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=5D79B584-79C9-42A8-90C4-4AB3F03D19C4&displaylang=en > >The document is interesting... So it took them 6 years to come up with a >codec that has almost the same structure as Speex (sub-band CELP -- >can't tell what codebooks they're using), almost 1/5 of the modes >supported and $35,000 more expensive. Looks like a great codec indeed >(OK, I haven't actually found any samples to tell the quality). > > > They let people license it to use in their own products. I couldn't > > find any sample clips of RTAudio encoded speech. Apart from being > > $35000 less expensive, does anyone have any other reasons as to why > > Speex is better? > >That's a tough one. Let me think... >- Because it's an open standard >- Because it's not from Microsoft >- Because you can do whatever you like with it >- Because it's not from a convicted monopolist >- Because it supports 8 rates in narrowband and 11 in wideband >- Because it's not from a company that is known for killing >compatibility every few years to force upgrade >- Because it's very flexible >- Because I wrote it, so it must be good :-) > >Cheers, > > Jean-Marc >_______________________________________________ >Speex-dev mailing list >Speex-dev@xiph.org >http://lists.xiph.org/mailman/listinfo/speex-dev--- B. Mitchell Loebel, Executive Director 408 425-9920 The Tech Startup Connection (formerly The PARALLEL Processing Connection)
Hello Mr Loebel,> that's business 101Speex is a not business, nor is Jean-Marc selling a product. The Xiph.Org Foundation, of which Jean-Marc is a member with his Speex project, is a non-profit organization.> Speex may be a very good product, but we will never use it because of > the politics that you espouseIf you would like to pay for a special US$1000 Speex license, I'm sure Jean-Marc will be glad to provide you with one.> some of us out here believe strongly in the free market.I believe "Free Market" is an American capitalist buzz word. Jean-Marc is Canadian. Regardless, I'm sure he strongly believes in free speech, which means he may humoristically dismiss Microsoft's product and make fun of it publicly. It's not going to affect Microsoft's sells, positively or negatively. There will always be those who will look with suspicion towards a free gift. And there are those who understood that Speex is a better format and will not join a technical mailing list to bash the project's author for no reason other than bashing the project's author.> the rantings of left wing academics who typically have no > real world business experience!You confuse me, Mr Loebel. It appears you believe Speex is some sort of communist plot, or did I understand you wrong?> The Tech Startup Connection > (formerly The PARALLEL Processing Connection)I wish the best of luck towards your company, which means serious business. I'm sure it will be greatly relevant in the free market you speak of, because its Executive Director, who writes e-mail messages like a 16 year old, knows all there is about marketing and establishing a company's reputation. My best regards, Ivo Emanuel Gon?alves
Hello Ivo:
One more from me and I suppose a retort by you
and that's it ... no flame war please. Let's see
if we can keep this discussion objective.
I've had enough life experience to have seen and
heard the mistakes you've made many times. Point by point:
* This is a tech list that I joined a number
of years ago because of a serious intent to use
the Speex product in my business (not TSC). I
didn't join it simply and nihilistically to bash the author.
* You and I have always had the right to
speak freely ... and there are always
consequences to what we say. Jean made an error
in injecting political rhetoric into his answer
to Thomas Leigh. And, yes, that's Business 101. I
now choose to probably not use the product
because I choose not to support anti free market thinking.
* Free Market is not an American Capitalist
"buzz word" as you pejoratively and dismissively
put it. It is, in fact, the essential
characteristic of a very good system called Capitalism.
* You note that Xiph.Org Foundation is a
non-profit organization presumably to elevate its
agenda to some worldly wonderful purpose ... as
if to say "our work is so profoundly important to
humanity, that we forego profit". Non-profit is a
tax term meant to gain subsidy from governments
in the form of tax exemption. And we taxpayers
pay for that subsidy. No, Speex is not a
Communist "plot", as you sardonically put it. It
is simply socialistically funded. An organization
declares that it has no profits by completely
distributing any revenues to its members and
paying for services to its suppliers. Now I don't
claim to know anything about Xiph's accounting,
but we do know that it has expenses that must be covered.
* Now let's deal with who pays for Open
Source because it is certainly not free. I
believe Jean (and you) do eat everyday and you
and he pay for living quarters. In fact, you do
get paid for your work as does he. You either are
recipients of grants or welfare (same thing), or
you do your work on "company time" while the boss
is not watching, or the boss knowingly pays for
your work and passes that expense onto his
customers (after all, he must make profit to pay his living expenses).
* And finally ... how and why did Open Source
come to be? I'm sure you must lament everyday the
notion that Microsoft is the epitome of
Capitalist success. Concomitantly, it must
therefore be destroyed! Right? Open Source is an
anti Microsoft religion practiced by people who
hold these views and their "profit" beyond money
income is knowing that they are soldiers in this
profoundly important movement (sorry, couldn't
resist sarcastically poking a bit of fun).
Enjoy. Have a nice life.
At 10:55 PM 8/31/2007 +0100, Ivo Emanuel Gon??alves
wrote:>Hello Mr Loebel, > that's business 101 Speex is
>a not business, nor is Jean-Marc selling a
>product. The Xiph.Org Foundation, of which
>Jean-Marc is a member with his Speex project, is
>a non-profit organization. > Speex may be a very
>good product, but we will never use it because
>of > the politics that you espouse If you would
>like to pay for a special US$1000 Speex license,
>I'm sure Jean-Marc will be glad to provide you
>with one. > some of us out here believe strongly
>in the free market. I believe "Free Market" is
>an American capitalist buzz word. Jean-Marc is
>Canadian. Regardless, I'm sure he strongly
>believes in free speech, which means he may
>humoristically dismiss Microsoft's product and
>make fun of it publicly. It's not going to
>affect Microsoft's sells, positively or
>negatively. There will always be those who will
>look with suspicion towards a free gift. And
>there are those who understood that Speex is a
>better format and will not join a technical
>mailing list to bash the project's author for no
>reason other than bashing the project's
>author. > the rantings of left wing academics
>who typically have no > real world business
>experience! You confuse me, Mr Loebel. It
>appears you believe Speex is some sort of
>communist plot, or did I understand you wrong? >
>The Tech Startup Connection > (formerly The
>PARALLEL Processing Connection) I wish the best
>of luck towards your company, which means
>serious business. I'm sure it will be greatly
>relevant in the free market you speak of,
>because its Executive Director, who writes
>e-mail messages like a 16 year old, knows all
>there is about marketing and establishing a
>company's reputation. My best regards, Ivo Emanuel Gon??alves
---
B. Mitchell Loebel, Executive
Director 408 425-9920
The Tech Startup Connection
(formerly The PARALLEL Processing Connection)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/attachments/20070831/1ecf1cb4/attachment.html
On Aug 31, 2007, at 3:08 PM, B. Mitchell Loebel wrote:> Hello Jean: > > Big mistake!! > > One of the three things that a supplier should never discuss is > politics ... that's business 101. > > Speex may be a very good product, but we will never use it because > of the politics that you espouse ... some of us out here believe > strongly in the free market. And we also know that monopolies can't > exist because entrepreneurs will always exploit the inevitable > market openings left by another supplier ... in this case > Microsoft. In fact, Speex's success is proof of the statement I > just made ... nevermind the rantings of left wing academics who > typically have no real world business experience!Moderated +5 Funny
B. Mitchell Loebel wrote:> Hello Jean:Hello B. Mitchell.> Big mistake!!Big mistake to stir up a hornet's nest of political discussion. :) But I don't think Jean-Marc's message was in fact political, as I'll show below.> One of the three things that a supplier should never discuss is politics > ... that's business 101.But it's ok for customers? ;-)> Speex may be a very good product,Speex is not a product, it is a free codec (free as in speech, free as in beer). Codecs and protocols are not products.> but we will never use it because of > the politics that you espouse ...No one is forcing you to use anything. In fact if you are using Google Talk and many other VoIP services, you may already be using Speex. Would you use still HTTP if you knew that Tim Berners-Lee was a closet anarchist or whatever? The technology stands and falls on its own merits. The politics of its creator is immaterial. In fact, if you think it's necessary to research the politics of a technology creator before deciding to use that technology, you introduce a factor that is quite outside usual capitalist reasoning, and (given the web of dependencies involved in any modern technology) impossible to implement. So much for Business 101.> some of us out here believe strongly > in the free market.We don't have a free market, we have a mixed economy.> And we also know that monopolies can't exist because > entrepreneurs will always exploit the inevitable market openings left by > another supplierIn a completely free society based on the rule of law, yes. Our current society is far from that ideal.> ... in this case Microsoft. In fact, Speex's success is > proof of the statement I just made ... nevermind the rantings of left > wing academics who typically have no real world business experience!Nothing like insulting your potential supplier. Business 101? Now I will proceed to show why Jean-Marc's message was not a left-wing rant in the first place...> At 09:38 PM 8/31/2007 +1000, Jean-Marc Valin wrote: >> > Just wondered what your thoughts are on Microsoft's RTAudio codec >> > that they use in their Unified Communications stuff: >> > >> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=5D79B584-79C9-42A8-90C4-4AB3F03D19C4&displaylang=en >> >> >> The document is interesting... So it took them 6 years to come up with a >> codec that has almost the same structure as Speex (sub-band CELP -- >> can't tell what codebooks they're using), almost 1/5 of the modes >> supported and $35,000 more expensive. Looks like a great codec indeed >> (OK, I haven't actually found any samples to tell the quality).Politics? No, just noting how long it has taken a large, well-funded company to produce a good-quality when they just could have used Speex years ago. Seems rather wasteful, no?>> > They let people license it to use in their own products. I couldn't >> > find any sample clips of RTAudio encoded speech. Apart from being >> > $35000 less expensive, does anyone have any other reasons as to why >> > Speex is better? >> >> That's a tough one. Let me think... >> - Because it's an open standardPolitics? No, just noting that all else being equal, open standards are better than closed proprietary technologies. No vendor lock-in. No odd changes that result in incompatibilities. Greater stability. Etc.>> - Because it's not from MicrosoftSee above on vendor lock-in and incompatibilities.>> - Because you can do whatever you like with itFreedom is good. I guess that's politics. But a left-wing rant? I think not. You can wrap yourself in the American flag with consumer freedom.>> - Because it's not from a convicted monopolistYes, this one verges on politics. But it is true that Microsoft was convicted of monopolistic practices both in America and in the EU. Whether you agree with the verdicts or the underlying laws is another matter.>> - Because it supports 8 rates in narrowband and 11 in widebandPolitics? Nope, just technical features.>> - Because it's not from a company that is known for killing >> compatibility every few years to force upgradeSee above on incompatibilities and stability.>> - Because it's very flexibleExtensibility and flexibility are good technical features.>> - Because I wrote it, so it must be good :-)Aha, here is a political statement. :) Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 7338 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://lists.xiph.org/pipermail/speex-dev/attachments/20070904/444a92fa/smime-0001.bin