PIG

Terry Disz disz at mcs.anl.gov
Fri Sep 27 12:58:19 CDT 2002


I was just asking for a definitive answer about what goes out now with the
PIG. Mike's answer seems in conflict with Ti's.
Sure, OM seems like the best choice if the encryption thing gets fixed. I
just want to solve this immediate problem of getting something out to Mary
Anne.



Terry


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ivan R. Judson [mailto:judson at mcs.anl.gov]
> Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 12:54 PM
> To: 'Terry Disz'; 'Ti Leggett'
> Cc: 'Ag-Dev at Mcs. Anl. Gov'
> Subject: RE: PIG
>
>
>
> I think the basic reason is we're trying to move from UCL to OM. Since
> OM has the latest history of support (although that's scaling back
> towards zero too).  The OM stuff is supposed to be getting H.263 decode
> any time now; and they have made a lot of changes specifically for us,
> including an interface for autolayout stuff.
>
> Depending on what Larry says about encryption it might make sense to
> still include both (but a single UCL version if we can) while we figure
> out the right thing to do in the long run. Media tools seem to be not
> the project of choice for funding now; we might have to support them
> ourselves until funding reappears, if our platform choices require it.
>
> The commercial argument is performance, but if we have to trade-off
> options I'd lean towards Quicktime since it works on linux, macs, and
> windows, whereas direct * stuff is windows only. Real isn't a codec
> system, rather content delivery so they don't play in this game
> directly.
>
> I'd still prefer the open source stuff and OM in particular, but
> whatever we gotta do let's optimize for our own cycle count first :-)
>
> --Ivan
>
> ..........
> Ivan R. Judson .~. http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~judson
> Futures Laboratory .~.  630 252 0920
> Argonne National Laboratory .~. 630 252 6424 Fax
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov
> > [mailto:owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov] On Behalf Of Terry Disz
> > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 12:45 PM
> > To: Ti Leggett
> > Cc: Ag-Dev at Mcs. Anl. Gov
> > Subject: RE: PIG
> >
> >
> > Anyone know about this for sure? Which VIC goes out with
> > Windows PIG? If it is OM, why can't it be UCL?
> >
> > Terry
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ti Leggett [mailto:leggett at mcs.anl.gov]
> > > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 11:56 AM
> > > To: Terry Disz
> > > Cc: Ag-Dev at Mcs. Anl. Gov
> > > Subject: Re: PIG
> > >
> > >
> > > I think we only use UCL vic for the linux pig, the windows
> > pig we have
> > > to use OM for some reason or another...?
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2002-09-26 at 13:39, Terry Disz wrote:
> > > > Last week in Washington Mary Anne said she would like a PIG
> > > system for her
> > > > office and asked if I would supply her with the
> > requirements. As I
> > > > was getting ready to do so, the issue of the OM vic not doing
> > > encryption came up
> > > > on AG-TECH.
> > > >
> > > > I can't send her something that doesn't work securely in a
> > > secure room, so,
> > > > I am wondering what the latest thoughts on this situation are.
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone know where we stand right now?
> > > >
> > > > Are there any plans to a) add encryption to OM or b)
> > supply UCL vic
> > > > with PIG?
> > > >
> > > > Terry
> > > --
> > > Ti Leggett <leggett at mcs.anl.gov>
> > >
> >
>




More information about the ag-dev mailing list