Re: to be effcient or not to be efficient

On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 12:09, Artem Baguinski wrote:
> the problem with saying that in the beginning of the discussion is that
> it'll sound to radically-conservative. i prefer to gradually create an
> abstract model that looks close enough to XXX and then make the
> suggetion.

The problem with creating a new product from the ground up is that it
takes time, developers, etc.

> you're saying 
>   
>   YYY = ffmpeg
>   YYY = mplayer
>   YYY = GStreamer
> 
> that means: ffmpeg = mplayer = GStreamer

No, I'm saying that all the discussion I've read so far are all about
issues that each of the three above have already solved. They're not the
same, but they each solve the issue. That's different.

> because i have to create software which is not exactly ffmpeg, not
> exactly mplayer, not exactly gstreamer, but still requires part of their
> common functionality - simple access to video and audio.

Why do you need a new product for that? Why not adapt one of the
existing ones and make it better than it is right now (missing
functionality could be considered a bug on itself)?

Differently: what's wrong with ffmpeg that makes it unusable and/or
unadaptable for the product that you guys are after? Same question for
mplayer & GStreamer.

What you guys are after is unification, but you're creating a new
product that will make the distortion only worse. Sounds illogical to
me.

Ronald

-- 
Ronald Bultje <[email protected]>
Linux Video/Multimedia developer