Specifying codecs for the web

Posted Dec 12, 2007 18:44 UTC (Wed) by sfeam (subscriber, #2841)
In reply to: Specifying codecs for the web by nim-nim
Parent article: Specifying codecs for the web

"As mp3 proved, having a widely available codec is effectively game over for competitors even if they are technically superior (and in this particular case only theora is a bit weak technically).

Perhaps. But in the video world another obvious analogy is to the state of proprietary vs. free video cards. Until recently, you could make a case for rephrasing that as: "having a sufficiently superior proprietary video card has been effectively game over for free competitors." Which analogy is more apt? It depends on how inferior theora is when compared to h264.

to post comments

Specifying codecs for the web

Posted Dec 12, 2007 19:32 UTC (Wed) by nim-nim (subscriber, #34454) [Link] (3 responses)

I compare codecs to codecs, you compare codecs to hardware.

If you want to go into hardware-land look how bad clearly technically superior formats like
blue-ray and hd-dvd fare against simple encumbrance-free DVD.

DVD isn't free either

Posted Dec 12, 2007 20:45 UTC (Wed) by rillian (subscriber, #11344) [Link] (2 responses)

DVD is not encumberance-free. The licensing group charges a royalty fee for encoder and decoder implementations of the MPEG-2 codec and container suites. The DVD-specific parts of the format (subtitles, menus, navigation, virtual machine, disk layout, scrambling) are only available under NDA; I don't know if there are other contractual obligations that would count an encumberances. Much of that has been reverse-engineered, however.

DVD isn't free either

Posted Dec 12, 2007 20:54 UTC (Wed) by nim-nim (subscriber, #34454) [Link] (1 responses)

On the hardware-side for all practical matters it is. I agree it's not a perfect analogy.

DVD isn't free either

Posted Dec 12, 2007 21:46 UTC (Wed) by dlang (guest, #313) [Link]

VHS vs Beta would be pretty close

h264 is NOT proprietary

Posted Dec 12, 2007 19:39 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] (6 responses)

Sorry but that's inferior free codec vs superior one. x264 is here. Not even a contest - except for some countries where software patents are legal.

h264 is NOT proprietary

Posted Dec 12, 2007 21:47 UTC (Wed) by cortana (subscriber, #24596) [Link] (4 responses)

You have pushed x264 all over the comments on this page--but you have not explained how to get
around the simple fact that no one in the United States can use x264 without leaving
themselves liable to patent infringement lawsuits. Like it or not, the fact that software is
patentable in the US does matter--you can't just bury your head in the sand!

Ask fluendo, will you

Posted Dec 12, 2007 22:31 UTC (Wed) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] (3 responses)

Ask Fluendo to speed up work on H.264 and buy codec. Hopefully it'll be available sooner then HTML5 :-)

Yes, it's not a perfect solution, but how can you be sure it'll not be needed in the future by Theora as well ? As long as software patents exist the only way to get 100% unencumbered solution is to use something 20 years old - and that's not Theora.

Ask fluendo, will you

Posted Dec 13, 2007 8:13 UTC (Thu) by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501) [Link] (2 responses)

How can you be sure you have payed all the existing patent owners for the specific
x264-related patents?

Microsoft has learned it the hard way recently with MP3.

So that risk still applies for all others. At least for Theora there are no known patents.

You can not

Posted Dec 13, 2007 22:41 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] (1 responses)

How can you be sure you have payed all the existing patent owners for the specific x264-related patents?

You pay to all known patent owners and hope for the best

Microsoft has learned it the hard way recently with MP3.

Exactly.

So that risk still applies for all others. At least for Theora there are no known patents.

And what exactly does it change ? Submarine patents still will be a problem. At least with H.264 you should only fear patent trolls, with Theora "normal" companies like IBM or Microsoft can sue you too...

You can not

Posted Dec 15, 2007 2:39 UTC (Sat) by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501) [Link]

Microsoft surely can't. At least not if they participate in the standartization of HTML5.

H.264 is a proprietary codec

Posted Dec 10, 2014 22:53 UTC (Wed) by Simon_Hall (guest, #100181) [Link]

H.264 is proprietary.

Anyone labelling H.264 as non-proprietary is confused as to what constitutes a “proprietary technology”.

"Proprietary" describes a technology or product that is owned exclusively by a single company. These are controlled by licenses and.or patents.

Any technology distributed under license, free or not, is proprietary

H.264 is controlled under license by MPEG LA.

See the list of patents...
http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/avc/Pages/PatentList....

Specifying codecs for the web

Posted Dec 12, 2007 19:40 UTC (Wed) by gmaxwell (guest, #30048) [Link] (2 responses)

Video cards?

File formats exhibit considerable network effect:  I install XYZ tools to read the XYZ files
you produce, causing me to produce XYZ files which ...

The same isn't true for Video cards.

It's also the case that unencumbered software is ZERO per unit cost software. The same would
not be true for 'free' video cards. 

The dynamic is just different.

You are right that the level of inferiority is material. But even today Theora is simply 'not
quite as good', rather than 'so much worse that it would be unsuitable for the application',
like MJPEG or H.120 would be for web video.

Theora is good enough today that, if widely adopted, it would put price pressure on vendors of
H.264.  The payoff math is particularly simple for web use: Both Theora and H.264 can fit
acceptable quality streaming video into typical broadband connections. If compatibility is
equal, H.264 must be enough better to pay its way in reduced bandwidth consumption. Between
decreasing bandwidth costs and improvements to Theora, this will become increasingly difficult
over time.  ...

Frankly, the above seems like a much simpler an obvious explanation from companies with
patents in the MPEG patent pool's than the handwaving argument that they would suffer a
material increase in patent liability because of an optional recommendation by the W3C.

Video Card Network Effect

Posted Dec 12, 2007 23:55 UTC (Wed) by zlynx (guest, #2285) [Link] (1 responses)

The video card network effect is seen most in games.  The current Nvidia dominance of the
performance video card has resulting in games optimized to Nvidia cards.  This translates to
review benchmarks showing Nvidia running games faster than ATI/AMD.  More gamers buy the
Nvidia card, leading to game writers optimizing for it ...

It also applies to game consoles.  When one console offers a superior game experience, the
game authors target it, the game buyers buy more of them, etc.

Video Card Network Effect

Posted Dec 13, 2007 4:48 UTC (Thu) by intgr (subscriber, #39733) [Link]

More gamers buy the Nvidia card, leading to game writers optimizing for it ...

Well, it's not that simple. NVidia is also publishing very elaborate toolkits to analyze and debug performance with their drivers/hardware. Naturally game developers will optimize for nVidia because it's so much easier to do.