TAK codec (Any news, seems silent for some time) Options

[johnsonlam]

Hi Guys,

Thomas seems going silent for a period of time, any news or other developers working on TAK related GUI or something like "TAK drop"?

Also want to ask, any media player can DIRECT decode the HDCD signal inside TAK yet?

Thanks.

[hlloyge]

Well, yeah, TAK has it's strengths, but I live in NOW, not in 10 years THEN. Thomas might, or he might not, release it's codec as Open Source, or port it to linux and OS X.
And I'm old enough to be tired of will be's, could be's, should be's. I use what I have available now

[Destroid]

Pardon my saying, but I never understood the attitude that open-source is instantly future-proof, nor the argument saying a program is doomed if it does not release a new version X times a year. Sounds like FUD.

In yet another thread on this board was all sorts of doom and gloom over the idea the "leader" in lossless formats is doomed for all sorts of reasons. Again, mostly speculation and barely any confirmed news.

TAK is a "10 years ago" format? Hardly. The first public version was released in 2006 and the latest version released in 2011. In a quick glance I counted over 12 non-beta public releases.

As other persons suggest to critics: why not make a new and better lossless codec and make it open-source and see how it feels to be demanded for licensing obligations and release schedules without a team of full-time software developers?

But enough of this old, tired train of thought...

I asked earlier (although obscurely) in this thread: would existing TAK users care if compatibility was changed again for future expansion? (Backwards-compatibility would still be supported, of course.) Maybe a fresh direction for development would be welcome rather than boxing the codec into a corner with ultimatums like, "Make it open-source, or else be criticized."

edit: I correct myself- 10 public non-beta TAK releases starting in 2007.

This post has been edited by Destroid: Sep 19 2012, 11:33

[saratoga]

Pardon my saying, but I never understood the attitude that open-source is instantly future-proof, nor the argument saying a program is doomed if it does not release a new version X times a year. Sounds like FUD.

Well from my point of view it makes perfect sense, since if I have the source code I can just add support for the format to rockbox and use it on my hardware + phone

[mudlord]

Pardon my saying, but I never understood the attitude that open-source is instantly future-proof, nor the argument saying a program is doomed if it does not release a new version X times a year. Sounds like FUD.

Well from my point of view it makes perfect sense, since if I have the source code I can just add support for the format to rockbox and use it on my hardware + phone

WRONG.

TAK is Delphi, so unless you can get it working under FreePascal, good luck.

[saratoga]

WRONG.

TAK is Delphi, so unless you can get it working under FreePascal, good luck.

Two things:

1) I didn't say anything about TAK, since there is no decoder source available (AFAIK).

2) Lossless decoders are fairly simple. I don't really care about TAK, but given Delphi source code, it wouldn't be that hard to port a decoder to any given platform if someone wanted to. I've certainly ported worse.