[Ubuntu-BD] Discussion and planning on RBL linux distro

[dark lord]

Linux mint and other multimedia distro hav codec pre installed

On 12/3/08, dark lord <darklord2007 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ankur hav those codec pre installed
>
> On 12/3/08, Mohammad Bhuyan <nuxser at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Though I have no idea what this RBL linux is but I am going to jump in
>> and provide my two cents:
>>
>>>
>>> Lats make 2 flaver
>>>
>>> office edition = all kind of app that can be useful to office
>>> corporate user Oo.o 3 must + xfce + less multimedia support + good
>>> support for networking,internet communication that ubu already hav +
>>> simplest lightest possible.
>>>
>>> Multimedia edition for regular user = kde latest may be gnome too for
>>> giv users choice + exclude Oo.o include small office app + all
>>> multimedia  support  codec+ 3gp converter , mp3 ripper , non-linear
>>> video editor,rythombox/banshee + wine +  compiz if possible provid
>>> restricted graphic card driver too for manual installation.
>>
>> Without clear definition of what "less multimedia support" (office
>> edition) is, I am going to assume that this version will not support
>> playing of mainstream video/audio formats out of the box. And I think
>> this is not a wise choice. Why would an office edition distro will
>> need any less usage of media formats than a home user.
>>
>> True that business user might not need format
>> transcoders/rippers/editior but these days they need to play more
>> media contents than an average end user. Business users deal with more
>> varied information than a traditional users and this is the age of
>> multimedia contents. I guess I don't need to go on and provide an
>> essay about that.
>>
>> And now going for the Multimedia edition, how do the project plans to
>> provide "multimedia support codecs" without considering legal
>> implications like Intellectual Property (IP) issues?
>>
>> Those related to this effort, have you ever considered why Linux
>> distros fails to provide the basic codes out of the box (installed by
>> default)? Why the user needs to go install them by thenselves? For
>> example: Ubuntu has them in repository for you to obtain but they
>> don't install/distribute them by default? Ever wondered why so?
>>
>> These is a very complicated web of legal issues relating to these
>> codecs and you need to be aware of them.
>>
>> Any work relating to this codecs need to be aware of whats the
>> Copywright & IP laws associated to the codes, How that IP is enforced
>> in various geographical locations
>> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Intellectual_Property_Organization).
>>
>> --
>> Ubuntu Bangladesh mailing list
>> ubuntu-bd at lists.ubuntu.com
>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bd
>>
>
>
> --
> DARKLORD (:=
>


-- 
DARKLORD (:=