IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Closed TopicStart new topic
TAK 2.3.0 beta, 2013-06-04: beta 2
TBeck
post Jun 17 2013, 21:28
Post #26


TAK Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1098
Joined: 1-April 06
Member No.: 29051



QUOTE (CoRoNe @ Jun 16 2013, 18:23) *
QUOTE (TBeck @ Jun 15 2013, 22:19) *
If someone has encountered any bugs, please report them now.
The cuesheet-issue (with AND without pipe) still persists.
QUOTE (TBeck @ Jul 5 2011, 21:57) *
The support for binary items like pictures is now on my todo list for V2.2.1. If nothing intervenes.
How's this coming along?

Thank you for reminding me. I had lost sight of it. blush.gif

QUOTE (CoRoNe @ Jun 16 2013, 18:23) *
QUOTE (TBeck @ Jun 15 2013, 22:19) *
...Without breaking backwards compatibility and without making decoding slower, it's quite difficult to improve the compression ratio...
Are you saying, breaking compatibility would allow for much stronger compression?

Not much stronger. I can only estimate the possible outcome on the basis of the things i have already evaluated to some extent:

- About 0.10 percent better compression without breaking backwards compatibility and without making decoding singinificantly slower.
- About 0.20 percent better compression without breaking backwards compatibility but with slower decoding of the -p4x-preset.
- Possibly 0.30 percent better compression with breaking backwards compatibility and with slower decoding of the -p4x-preset.
- Possibly 0.40 percent better compression with breaking backwards compatibility and with singinificantly slower decoding (still a lot faster than for instance OptimFrog) of any preset.

I was tempted to write a lot more, but currently i have no time to discuss this in depth...

QUOTE (Corpulencio @ Jun 17 2013, 20:35) *
By the way, ImgBurn now supports TAK (as of version 2.5.8.0).

Great news! Thank you very much!

I hope to release TAK 2.3.0 final tommorrow. It has passed most of my tests, but the last one will take quite long and i don't want to let it run overnight.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
eahm
post Jun 17 2013, 23:37
Post #27





Group: Members
Posts: 1056
Joined: 11-February 12
Member No.: 97076



TBeck, are you going to release the source code of TAK? I'd like to have the security of something that will last long enough if something happens to you or if you quit your passion for the codec. Until then, I can't consider completely switching to TAK from FLAC.

Thanks.


--------------------
/lwAsIimz
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
saratoga
post Jun 17 2013, 23:50
Post #28





Group: Members
Posts: 4904
Joined: 2-September 02
Member No.: 3264



QUOTE (eahm @ Jun 17 2013, 18:37) *
I'd like to have the security of something that will last long enough if something happens to you or if you quit your passion for the codec.


Not a direct answer to your question, but there is an open source decoder in ffmpeg, so regardless of what happens it will always be possible to decode tak files.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
greynol
post Jun 18 2013, 00:08
Post #29





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 10000
Joined: 1-April 04
From: San Francisco
Member No.: 13167



QUOTE (eahm @ Jun 17 2013, 15:37) *
TBeck, are you going to release the source code of TAK? I'd like to have the security of something that will last long enough if something happens to you or if you quit your passion for the codec. Until then, I can't consider completely switching to TAK from FLAC.

Thanks.

This has been discussed many times already. Thomas will do as he pleases with his code. In the meantime this topic is about beta development; it will not be about when or whether source code will be released. Future posts on the matter will be binned, which may include administrative action.


--------------------
Concern trolls: not a myth.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TBeck
post Jun 18 2013, 09:31
Post #30


TAK Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1098
Joined: 1-April 06
Member No.: 29051



QUOTE (eahm @ Jun 18 2013, 00:37) *
TBeck, are you going to release the source code of TAK? I'd like to have the security of something that will last long enough if something happens to you or if you quit your passion for the codec. Until then, I can't consider completely switching to TAK from FLAC.

I think in the worst case you would have to transcode your files from TAK to another format. If i would quit the work on TAK and new operating systems would drop support for the latest release (for instance if windows would no longer support 32-bit-applications), you probably would have years left to perform the transition. But ok, this would mean a lot of work.

QUOTE (greynol @ Jun 18 2013, 01:08) *
This has been discussed many times already. Thomas will do as he pleases with his code. In the meantime this topic is about beta development; it will not be about when or whether source code will be released. Future posts on the matter will be binned, which may include administrative action.

This might sound a bit harsh, but if you have traced the TAK development threads a couple of years ago, you possibly will understand.

I made promisese regarding an open source release, which i first could not and -at some point- did not want to keep. My biggest fault. I surely deserved critic, but there have also been a lot of inappropriate insults. And some members seemed to jump at any chance to attack me over and over again.

I don't want to make the same mistakes again. Therefore no promisese. I only can tell you my current attitude:

I would like to release an open source decoder. If i could snap with the fingers and it was there, i would do it. But unless someone donates me a magic wand, a lot of (not very exciting) work is required. And i don't know, when i will able to do it.

That's all i can say. Nothing more to add.

This post has been edited by TBeck: Jun 18 2013, 09:34
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
skamp
post Jun 18 2013, 09:58
Post #31





Group: Developer
Posts: 1430
Joined: 4-May 04
From: France
Member No.: 13875



QUOTE (TBeck @ Jun 17 2013, 22:28) *
Not much stronger. I can only estimate the possible outcome on the basis of the things i have already evaluated to some extent:

- About 0.10 percent better compression without breaking backwards compatibility and without making decoding singinificantly slower.

[snip]


Ignoring the fact that improving compression ratios might be a lot of fun to you, from a user's perspective, such marginal improvements would probably not be worth the extra cost on decoding speeds (and format incompatibilities).

In other news, I just released caudec 1.7.0, and I just wanted to point out that it supports parsing information from both TAK 2.3.0 beta (with the new machine-parsable output), and TAK 2.2.0. I don't have immediate plans to phase out support for the latter.


--------------------
See my profile for measurements, tools and recommendations.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
TBeck
post Jun 18 2013, 16:40
Post #32


TAK Developer


Group: Developer
Posts: 1098
Joined: 1-April 06
Member No.: 29051



TAK 2.3.0 Final

has been released.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd August 2014 - 03:20