this post was submitted on 03 Jan 2025
95 points (96.1% liked)

Technology

60284 readers
4224 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 69 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Samsung and Google? Two companies well known for maintaining tech long term rather than getting bored within a few months.

[–] neclimdul 4 points 2 days ago

It's funny because it's true.

But also av1 is open and widely available and based on Google's vp9 so... Maybe it will work out.

[–] BassTurd 45 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

Googles propensity to create and destroy tech at alarming rate aside, what is there to be gained in immersive audio? Atmos sounds borderline real in a good setup. What are the current limitations for high end HT audio that this is looking to improve upon?

Edit: so I read it, and it sounds like this is a push for an open source audio standard. If that's the case, then as much fun as dunking on Samsung and Google is, I support the endeavor, at least in theory.

[–] siftmama 4 points 2 days ago

Bear in mind Android was meant to be an open source endeavour. They'll release the OSS version, then slowly close the up the market as it gets adoption, so that it really can't be used without their approval.

Considering there's this about media, there will be some sort of DRM involved. I guarantee it.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I thought DTS:X was the (at least more) open version of Dolby Atmos.

[–] BritishJ 8 points 2 days ago

DTS X is much better than atoms. No channel or group limits etc.

But Dolby has already won the race. Cinemas are all Dolby Atmos, movies are, sound stages etc etc. They won the marketing race so they won out in the end.

[–] BassTurd 3 points 2 days ago

It may be. I really don't know much other than Atmos sounds amazing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

If you make it, they will ~~come~~ probably ignore it and continue to use non-free options.

[–] garretble 46 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Great, new format wars. This time with expensive speaker setups!

[–] dual_sport_dork 21 points 3 days ago

[Insert XKCD "Standards" strip here.]

[–] Kbobabob 0 points 2 days ago

Speaker setups have been expensive for a while if they're done correctly with good equipment. This just changes what goes to the speakers.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

What's wrong with Opus and flac? I've never understood this whole lossy audio format wars when none of them offer anything besides a bizzword salad of "features" that maybe a handful of audiophiles might pretend they can notice.

"3D sound" ooh sounds fancy! I remember my boombox in the 90s had a feature with the same. Have they run out of Buzzwords or somthing... 3d, VR, HDR, I swear they've been reinventing the same shit for 30 years.

[–] IsThisAnAI 5 points 3 days ago

Fuck that noise. I'll be damned if I'm going to drop 3k on hardware that'll be dead in a few years.