Re: DRM+DAB Receivers Have HE AAC Decoders in Them!



Gegroet,


steve41@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx schreef:
Radioscape use software-defined radio. They've already developed
software for DMB with DAB. An HE AAC decoder is there already, and it
could be used very easily.

That's not the issue.

The question why a receiver-manufactorer would use a more complex chip with features not needed and cost them more royalties if there is no need for it.




"DAB Perspectives based on AVDS Developments
* Pave way for new audio codecs (e.g. HE AAC v2)
* Convert DAB into an "All IP System" (incl. Audio)"

Note the word "Perspectives".

Yeah, I can read. And just in case you're using a different meaning of
the word to me, here's a dictionary definition of it:
http://www.onelook.com/?w=perspective&ls=a

Well, "perspective" in a marketing-document (if the vice-president of a industry-organisation makes a speech, it's "marketing") means something else. It means "possibility", or "we are looking into it", or "we want to mention it as we have a reason to do so".



I've been in sufficiant conferences which showed "what the future *will* look like" (not "might", or "might possibibly look like") and "we've got just some bugs to fix but you can expect this technology to appear in our products by next year".


Well, it never did. :-)



I have absolutely no idea what definition of the word 'perspective'
you're using, but it seems to be wrong.
It looks like you don't want to "have an idea" as it would not fit your matra.


What's the procedure inside the worlddab forum to get a technical
proposal into the offical worlddab/ETSI specifications?

They'll have a vote.

Who can vote? What are the opinions of the about this?



Get your head out of your arse and think about this rationally.
Sure, why would somebody be forced to by a chip which does both DRM/DAB if you just want DAB?

A chip which can do MPEG-4 cost extra royalties? Why would I pay for them if the specs of DAB only specify mpeg layer 2?


Cheerio! Kr. Bonne. .