I havent gotten to test it yet, but with the pda clocked down to 208mhz, I hear the video and audio playback is perfect... And that battery life is GREATLY IMPROVED.
I was at best able to get almost two hours video playback with audio headphones and all... At 520mhz, because 208 was too choppy. I want to do some tests with your plugin, but I missed the download.
__________________
-Imidazole (Chesapeake, Va)
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
A movie that i converted for the pda in 640x480 res using pocketdivxencoder and had it slimmed down to fit on my 512 card. I had the axim set to 208 mhz and using the 2700 decoder setting. I did a benchmark and the score for the 2700 decoder setting was at 188% versus the same cpu speed with rawframebuffer is was reading at 96%. So i would say that is a huge huge improvement. Kudos to Picard!!!
Good grief, why is it that whenever PocketTV is mentioned on just about ANY PPC forum on the web, PocketTVTeam swoops down from a tree and turns the discussion into some back and forth exchange?
And what was the point of you even posting in this thread? To start trouble? You could have easily sent him a private message or email, yet you decided to bring it out in public. A subtle, yet deceptive scheme.
Can't you just leave well enough alone? It seems as though every thread you are involved with over at Brighthand turns into some kind of flame fest. Please don't let that happen here too.
It seems as though PocketTVTeam alwasys tries to throw just enough doubt into a person's mind about competing products to make them feel unsure about it. He did it with Pocket MVP, and he's now doing it with BetaPlayer Thankfully, most of us here are smarter than that and will continue to use BetaPlayer as it provides a stable, fast platform for ALL of our videos.
It seemed like an amicable enough exchange Developer to Developer-wise I mean. I'm sure picard_beta would let us know if he had a problem with any comments in one of his threads.
Don't Panic!
Bobby
__________________
Don't Panic!
Bobby
42 Soft-reset is our Friend To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I agree it would have been the nicer way if PocketTV had PMed Picard privately. This thread has already side-tracked too far because of the whole GPL discussion. It would be more interesting if we could post our first findings of how much battery life can be saved using the new 2700G plugin ;)
__________________
Find me at To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. or To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
It seemed like an amicable enough exchange Developer to Developer-wise I mean. I'm sure picard_beta would let us know if he had a problem with any comments in one of his threads.
Don't Panic!
Bobby
But it ALWAYS ends up this way with PocketTVTeam gets into a discussion. All he had to do was PM or email Picard to voice his concerns.
Why cloud up a discussion thread made to help people with performance on the new release of BetaPlayer with accusations of taking/copying source code and other nonsense?
Sorry, but I've just seen this happen to many times over at Brighthand and it's getting rather tiresome
Meh. I'm laughing at the irony of PTV's talk vs. development. They're obviously intimidated by Picard and his work and don't seem to realize how everyone knows this ...except maybe they're so-often-pointed-out-in-these-types-of-threads "many people" who support PTV.
PTV: You brought this on yourself. You went looking for trouble and now you've found it. Can you handle it? Will you actually do anything? Find out when these GPL issues are resolved.
I agree with the fact that PTV should have taken this off line to Picard and then let Picard act as he saw fit. Making it public kind of leaves a bad taste in your mouth with regards to PTV. The intention may have been good, but no one likes a tattle tale much. My thoughts ...
GPL is like any other legal license, it's illegal to break it. Picard did the right thing by pulling it off until this is resolved. If you want to blame anyone, blame Intel for keeping their documentations NDAed.
Now if someone else released the 2700 plugin closed source it would be fine since they did not derive any of the code from Picard's GPL betaplayer. I believe there's a bunch of legal ways around this issue. If he does not use any GPL code in the plugin/driver he should be ok. Here's a good thread on it: http://zgp.org/linux-elitists/200206...kroah.com.html .
For instance, Nvidia and ATi release video card drivers for Linux yet are not required to release code for it.
Now if someone else released the 2700 plugin closed source it would be fine since they did not derive any of the code from Picard's GPL betaplayer. I believe there's a bunch of legal ways around this issue. If he does not use any GPL code in the plugin/driver he should be ok.
I think there are special exceptions added to GPL license used for the linux kernel to allow usage of closed source drivers. You can't add closed-source plugins to a normal application under standard GPL. Even if you don't use GPL-ed code in the plugin itself, it will connect to the GPL-ed main program which is not allowed.
Would it then be possible to add special exceptions to the GPL license of BetaPlayer?
__________________
Find me at To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. or To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Follow Us
RSS Feed
Follow on Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
Addicted Member
