I've got a lot of ogg vorbis files which I find sound much better than my usual mp3s encoding @ 128 kbps. But what I'm concerned about is that these ogg vorbis files can only be played on my computer. So is Ogg Vorbis ever going to be supported on these portable players and when? I just cant help feeling that I'm wasting my time. There is so much rhetoric and promises, but nothing seems to be happening.

I too would be interested in this, but the various news bits coming out aren't that encouraging. I've heard some rumors of good news from iRiver (though no timetable of any sort), but a lot of rumors that Tremor isn't suitable for the hardware in many portable players (dynamic memory allocation causes problems on some embedded devices, and for some Tremor just uses too much memory).

Anyone have any knowledge of how likely it is anyone will support Ogg anytime soon?

While this is not based on news or fact, only my opinion based on my business background, I would say unlikely.

Companyies will support OGG if it generates more revenue for them (with minimal cost increase). Outside of this forum, there is little reason to add OGG as an alternative to MP3. The average listener - who buys audio products - cannot differentiate between the two.

There has to be a significant reason for a listener (not an audiophile) to switch from MP3 to OGG. Then companies will take notice.

I agree. The companies would only consider if the public asks for it for some reason. Now Apple supporting AAC, there's a reason for AAC to get popular and demanded by the average Joe (even though he wouldn't be able to distinguish the result). But I guess eventually one would be able to program the firmware (like xbox, etc.) when the players get complicated enough and then it will be possible. I think if one just designs a player device that runs NetBSD and programmable in which you can connect a regular 2.5" hard drive and would be good looking and small, that would be the most flexible thing. It should also be quite easy to implement (using an Intel XScale board for instance)... Then we'd have whatever format we want supported without bugging the developers who only care for public opinion which does not usually mean a damn.

Iriver is progressing slowly yes. But something is happening. IIRC Iriver is not even looking at AAC, MPC, etc any time in the forseeable future. Pretty much only OGG. Oh BTW don't be so down. Read the maling lists and the ogg traffics. There is more going on than I think you relaise. Personally the new Neuros portable is looking to be the hottest thing on the market here for a while. And not just because of their apparent serious interest in "Vorbis".



Well unless Monty was lying or I am reading the ogg traffic and mailing lists wrong most of the memory issues had been taken care of. It was more down to CPU power and power consumption. Some of which relate back to memory issues yes.



Apple is an innovator and trend setter yes. But since the mid ninteys apple has been rendered for the most part irrelivent. Of all the systems in use Apple can claim to have slightly more Mac systems in active use than there are Amiga or Alpha stations and nowhere near Intel. When Amiga and Alpha which are both defunct produt lines for the most part have a market share significant to yours that should be a wake up call. Apple's media formats are the most despised in all of PC userdom. Well not exactly. They are slightly better liked than Real. Don't get me wrong. I like apple more than the next guy. And even though the ipod has enjoyed a moddest sucess I dont see it setting a trend. AAC has been in use for quite some time. And it will continue. But I don't see it making any major forrays in to userdom for quite some time if at all ever. It will have its niche. But big money only wants to talk to big money. And I doubt the whole Mpeg consortium and pattent/licensing pool combined asset and monitarily wise will even be on par with Bill Gates and Microsoft. Having a monopoly is a beautiful thing. Instant name recognition. AAC is superior to WMA. But if it goes head to head with it; well it does not stand a chance. AAC while having superior algorythms than mp3 and wma has the same licensing issus as MP3 and worse.

Superiority asside who do you think is going to get both corporate and user support.
AAC - Almost the exact same licensing issues as MPE and worse.

Vorbis - Truly free. The only cost is that of porting it to your device and even alot of that has been eaten by someone else.

WMA - Can be licensed for much much less than MP3 and AAC and much much more than Vorbis. On the bright side if you are important enough Microsoft will pay you to support WMA and charge you no licensing what so ever. It is supported by the only non-government sponsored global monopoly in existance. A Monopoly who has endless funds and resources that they could even convince people that MSADPCM sounds better than 160KBPS mp3.

Don't delude yourself with AAC. As much as I despise the format, the company behind it, and their intentions with it even I can recognise that WMA is the format for the future.

HAHA, they already officially announced AAC support in their Hard-drive players that will be launched later this year.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....=ST&f=21&t=7508

I can't say the same for Vorbis...

MP4 (successor of AAC) is MPEG consortium standard. Soon DVD players and all future gadgetry will come with MP4 support (because of the number of backing companies) . It's not pushed by Apple, rather Apple is pushed into it. Even though I dislike almost all Apple products and their mentality, I think AAC was a good pick on their side. Microsoft, as always, came up with its own standard which is not superior in any sense (except possibly for DRM restriction and future palladium crap)...

Hmmm well it is not an official link to one of their press releases. So it may or may not be true. I will err on the side of thinking it true. And what's up with the rolleyes? You make like it's some big thing. AAC has been out and about since 1997 easy. Why are they only now getting to it? So if they are gonna support AAC they are still looking at Vorbis. What says more? AAC has been out for 5+ years and is just now getting on baord and Vorbis has been official for only about a year and there is serious work to get it on board. One impressses me the other does not. I leave it to you to guess which. Anyhow I will say this. Good things come to those who wait. You all are just getting impatient.

I know AAC is not pattented or owned by Apple. I didn't just fall off the turnip truck. I was simply saying that what Apple does for the most part any more is inconsequential. And should I be impressed that AAC will "soon" be supported on DVD players etc when Windows media has "been" there for well neigh on 2+ years or so? Not only that it has built in DRM which all publishing companies cream their pants over. Where as AAC has none. Vorbis is gonna have to be pushed on companies by user demand. And it is. Something like AAC commercial entities should be clamboring all over themselves to implement. Fact is thay would not touch it with a 10 meter pole for many many many many many years. There were adopters. But not many.

What is really a nail in the coffin for AAC is convergence. You TV is becoming your computer. Your computer is becoming your phone. They are all going down to one little box prefferably with high speed access. OGG and Windows media have well established streaming server systems. What has AAC got? Jack. There is not even an official MP3 streaming server for christs sake. You have two separate implementations that are closely related while neither is endorsed by the MPEG-LA or any of those in the pattent pool. Take a good long look at those set top DVD+ players with cat-5 jacks in the back and wonder no more. The revolution will not be televised. It will be webcast. Who want's to go to the video store when you can just cue it up in high rez and high-fi via remote at home. Hell since Time Warner VOD went live here I have been watching more movies than ever and going to the video store a whole lot less. This does not bode well for Vorbis though I think it will find a way. But what does it say for AAC who is like that strange uncle everyone has but never talks about? In general userdum it goes something like this. Everyone knows MP3. Several know WMA. Many have heard OGG or Vorbis in passing. Few know about or use MPC or AAC. VQF ist death.

No matter how much I like AAC I have verry little hope for it in the future. I'll still go out and tell people about AAC, Vorbis and MPC. Not that I expect anyone to listen. You just got to keep those expectations low and keep on trying. People with high expectations are allways pissed things did not turn out as they expected. People with low expectations are always pleasantly surprised.

It comes to my mind, that announcing OGG Vorbis support is just marketing. Why should a manufacturer say "no" to Ogg Vorbis inquires, when he can say "maybe"?

In other words: Are they just selling an announcement?

Saying maybe and sending a proto board to optimise for is actually quite an investment. Keep in mind they did not just say maybe. Otherwise I would agree. Would you go around donating proto hardware willy nilly?

I listen to oggs all the time on my PocketPC.... Dell Axims can be had for <$200. Throw in a large memory card and you've got a rockin' portable music device....

You can play OGGs on Palm devices using the AeroPlayer:
Aerodrome Software Home

Neo Neko, I suspect that the next generation of ShoutCast will be the support AAC streaming. It may not be as crippled as you think.

While Ogg Vorbis only has Icecast 2 (still not fully functional, though it is for streaming purposes) and PeerCast (which is quite buggy as of now, and there is no itegrated Vorbis decoder for those who don't have an Ogg mediaplayer).

This is true. But, you can also look at all the companies touting "Flash Upgradeability for support of future formats", and not many have even begun work, nor will they ever support future formats. So, in the case of iRiver, maybe we will see Ogg Vorbis support, but whether or not there will be mass convert, who knows?

I wonder if any of these companies implementing AAC will implement MP4 and AAC+ support in the future? Heck, and if they implement AAC+, will they make their own version of it, or will they just pay for Nero Digital licensing? I understand that AAC+ and Nero Digital are not one in the same exactly, but Nero Digital WILL be one of the first mass implementations. I will be VERY annoyed if we get AAC support and then no support of SBR, yes it will be backwards compatible, but it won't sound good.

Also, are we ever going to get gapless support in MP4 (the code for it is supposedly there, it just need implementation). Are we ever going to get ReplayGain support in a portable? These are other big questions people have, sitting right next to, "Will we ever have Vorbis hardware support?"

In order for there to be hardware player support for a format, it either must be:

a] DRM compliant or
b] pushed into service by user demand

Let's not talk about option a]

For b] to work, it pretty much must go via this route: Uber-geeks or companies make a new format (sometimes we're lucky and they are audiophiles, too!), the audiophiles say either yay or nay, and as soon as the audiophiles start to spread the word that "this is good", the regular geeks start to catch on, and from there, it is a simple matter of these regular geeks (usually high school kids who know pretty much nothing of worth) pass the know onto their friends, the regular consumers. You can guess what happens next.

My point is this: Right now, most of the formats in our collective "good" list aren't recognizable by the "common folk" because their geek friends haven't said anything about them yet. There's only one possible reason for this (because we all know that high school geeks like to share): They haven't "heard the word" from the people who are bright enough to make an informed decision. There simply isn't enough exposure of these formats to the world. The best thing that can happen to a format now is piracy sorry to say (or maybe I'm not so sorry ). I'm hesitant to ask people to start dumping their legal audiophile encodings onto the wild web, but I'm somewhat less hesitant in doing it myself. People like to get what they want free, so why not work towards our agenda at the same time? The music corporations dump crap files into the P2P networks all the time, so why don't we start pumping high-quality into it to offset? It's not like we're hurting anyone by doing this--most people who pirate music can't tell the difference between an ogg, mpc, aac or mp3 (or wma for that matter), so why don't we just give them the higher quality formats by default? It'll only lead to the *ahem* less tech-savvy folk doing what we the small congregation of real listeners want to do ourselves.

If Gnutella, eDonkey, BitTorrent, DC and whatever other systems are out there are flooded with high quality formats, people will find them, people will share them and the people will "hear the word". The word that we must spread.

I'll say this again becuase I don't think the point is getting across.

Audiophiles represent less than 1% of the consumer public that buys music. Companies do not design products to sell to a 1% market share, unless its a premium priced product with 1000% profit margins (think Rolex). Consumer electronics certainly DO NOT fit this category, with the exception of plasma TVs. They are purchased almost exclusively based on price, brand playing the 2nd most important role. Outside of our community, who would pay more for a 20Gig portable player that plays OGG? NO ONE. So why bother.

On to the remaining 99% of the public that buys music. Is there a compelling reason for them to switch from their well known MP3 to OGG? No. They cannot tell the difference. Is there a compelling reason for companies to push it? No. Sure licensing is free, but as someone mentioned - so is WMA for the most part. And the MP3 licensing is minimal. Further, record companies will not promote an 'unsecure' format. MP3, achieved critical mass from the 99% public, and is therefore supported.

The record companies will push hard for AAC and WMA because they can be made secure. What format will win? AAC, MP3, or WMA? I do not know. But I'm 99% sure it will not be OGG. Which is too bad, because it is a great format.

Maybe I'll say this again because my point isn't getting across:

Where do you think these consumers are getting their precious mp3s? Most people aren't bright enough to encode their own, and of that same group of non-encoders, I doubt any of them want to be forced back into obeying the good ol' rules. Corporations can do a lot to limit sharing, yes, but the courts are on the formats' side despite being against the piracy. The corporations and their DRMs can only go so far without support from the people. How many of these folks do you think will be happy not being able to share (and thus get more music for free in return) if the music companies get their way? When you simply explain to people that a format is better sounding, relatively small, and free from corporate Big Brothering, I'd say that 99% of the user base will love to hear more. The trouble is that they've never heard more. If someone picks up an ogg file instead of an mp3, no, most people won't hear the difference, but if it is smaller (thus easier to share and to port around on hardware players) and--most importantly--easy to find, then why in the world would they argue against it? What bothers me is that when I go searching for music files on the Internet, I almost never find oggs or mpcs or anything but mp3s. It doesn't seem that even our own precious audiophile community shares (although I'm sure I'm wrong).

I guess lossless will always be a lost cause in support because of this fact, but people like having their free music in abundance. If they can get their free music without DRM, then DRM won't win. Simple as that. The companies will accept our choices if there are enough voices, simple as that. So let's get enough voices, right? That's the point. So all we need to do is "spread the word" and that is best done by getting the enthusiasts (you know, the rung below audiophiles) aboard.

There are many valid points brought up on all sides here.

1. Ogg-Vorbis is not a format that is going to be sought en masse by corporations. (I suspect that about as many will support it as will support AAC)

2. Corporations also look for things like streamability and software to do it. Icecast2 and Windows Media Streaming server are both excelent examples of this. (AAC OTOH has nothing at all. And unless you are an AOL/Nullsoft insider and know something we don't. I don't think Shoutcast 3 is gonna have AAC. Nullsoft does not even support or package decoders for the format. Can you say the same for WMA and Vorbis??)

3. Corporations are going to look for a format with some form of DRM.(I don't abhore DRM. Just what corporations wish to do with it. Of the three WMA is the only one with a set DRM scheme in place. The OGG frame work is quite flexible and extensible. Perhaps someone should look at encrypting ogg packets with GPG libraries or perhaps a more BSD friendly public key crypto type algo. That would close the gap and offer companies yet another thing they don't have to license.)

4. Finally it is up to us the Uber-geeks to get the word out about these formats we like. Sitting around in forums asking is it ever going to happen is useless and pointless.(Especially in the light that it already has and will continue to happen. It just depends on how specifically you define "portable device". If you define it as brand x model y then the likelyhood of it ever happening are slim and none. It is more a question of will my favorite company x support my favorite format y. Or perhaps will someone hack it for them.)

Personally I think looking at public key cryptography for vorbis would be a good thing. Unless anyone else knows a better form of encryption. I think I will look for some BSD comapatable algos and make a suggestion to the mailing list. Or perhaps hash it out with Monty next time he hits IRC. If anyone happens to know of such algos shout them out.

If ogg ever gets meaningful hardware support (IE more then one or two players) it will be because people hacked existing players. Personally I'm hoping someone with experience in ARM programming gets a little two interested in how his Ipod works. Heck some people already got Linux running on it, how much more effort can it be to hack in an ogg or mpc codec?

As for convergence, it really depends on who converges what. If MS pulls off the whole XPMCE ogg and AAC won't get too far. If Sony does, well they still probably won'y get far either . . . Hopefully no one ever pulls it off and instead we slowly slide towards convergence with a smattering of different codecs that can be used interchangably.

If this was be a valuable argument there would be a solution for it: open source DRM for Vorbis

But who will use this it? Privat Vorbis users will never even think of using it because it's against the spirit of open source... Commercial download sites would have profit of it simply because there are no licensing fees to pay.

If commercial sites or services would use Vorbis and this DRM hardware player producer would surely think of implementing Vorbis support to their devices. But the problem is IMHO that these commercial sites want to use a format which has a widespread hardware support and therefore people with a portable device are willing to pay for it. But as Vorbis is not supported in hardware except palm or one stand alone players I cannot speak of widespread hardware support . That's what we call (in my english lessons) a vicious circle.

Therefore the DRM argument isn't the solution...

Here we go again... I really think you should consider doing some searches before posting crap like "nothing at all".

Apple Darwin Streaming Server

All you need to stream AAC files. From most platforms (it's open source). You just have to wrap the file in MP4 first.

I`m not suprised that some companies don`t want to support Ogg Vorbis in their hardware players.

There was an interview with guy who made motherboards factory in Poland. Journalist asked him how many cost motherboards parts. He answered that he could tell that, but noone (from international companies) will want to talk with him.

Guys from company X could easily tell: add support for XYZ format and don`t add support for conurent format (Ogg Vorbis) or we will not make business with you. There is no company that will promote Ogg Vorbis in such way.

Odd Conspiracy Theory? I don`t think so - the story about motherboard factory owner is true but it also looks like OCT. Nvidia stopped shipping chips for Hercules because Hercules started selling ATI based cards.

Now we have WMA and AAC - some companies pumped mass of cash for these formats, concurent free Vorbis is unwelcome. There is no company to pump cash in Vorbis (or am I wrong?). They will use many "tricks and methods " to prevents from spreding not their format and to promote their format.

Forget about true competition (better product sells better) - this is history. Now cash and promotion causes format X not Y to dominate.

So what WMA sucks deeply? Support is added. I can say that if there will not be support for free Ogg Vorbis but for paid format X will be - i`ll use X but CERNTAINLY i`ll _not_ pay for this X.

Roberto. Perhaps you should do some seraches and research first. The Darwin Server is not in any way sanctioned by the MPEG consortium or an acknowledged part of the MPEG4 standard. Windows Media Server is supported/sanctioned by the entire group behind Windows Media, and Icecast is supported/sanctioned by the entire group behind the OGG project including Flac and Vorbis. The Darwin Streming server can stream AAC in MP4 files solely due to the fact that MP4 is more or less quicktime. Not because they did anything special to support it. You could stream MP4 with DSS long before there were any parsers and decoders to handle AAC. It has nothing to do with AAC specifically. And again. No matter how much I like apple they are for the most part irrelivent.

Why are you getting so pushy Roberto? Simmer down.

@Cobra
I pretty much agree with you on everything. But this was to be expected. Each codec has it's niche. Vorbis has always been more in the realm of real users. Windows Media more in the realm of corporations. AAC is only in the realm of the company's that form the MPEG pattent pool for the most part and a few MPEG diehards. Everyone has a clear defined rather broad niche accept for AAC which for all it's superiority and all the money behind it looks as if it is going to be left out for the most part. Which is some what to bad. Because I would much preffer it over WMA. But as you hinted you can't compete with a company like Microsoft that absolutely will not play fair. That is another difficulty for AAC. The only way for AAC to succede commercialy is to go head to head against Microsoft. So they were pretty well doomed from the get go. Whereas Vorbis on the other hand does not. Microsoft can not undersell Vorbis because Vorbis is not sold. AAC is. Microsoft also can not buy out Vorbis and take over/alter the licensing. They very well could with AAC much to its detriment.