Specifying codecs for the web

Posted Dec 13, 2007 9:51 UTC (Thu) by nhippi (subscriber, #34640)
Parent article: Specifying codecs for the web

Ogg vorbis is much better position than theora. vorbis has accepable quality and some nice
features for web, such as peeling (dropping bitrate without recompressing), has seen patent
review and is in widespread use by community and industry players like samsung and software
houses wanting to avoid mp3 tax. The main disadvantage is that vorbis isn't really
dsp-friendly, which makes it hard to implement bugfree in low-powered portable players. This
is not a problem for the html5 video tag really.

Ogg theora on the other hand is technically inferior, and rarely used. Even the <a
href="http://www.effi.org/tapahtumat/bb-seminaari-07-videot.html">EFF finland site</a>
provides videos only in H.264 and mpeg2 format! I don't think the community is very honest
when demanding *theora* support from W3C when they are not ready it eat their own dogfood.

An interesting review would be the visual quality of H.261 (which is supposedly old enough
that all patents have expired) vs Ogg theora. With selected improvements, such as allowing
more video sizes, H.261 could become an acceptable baseline.

to post comments

Specifying codecs for the web

Posted Dec 13, 2007 11:27 UTC (Thu) by mjr (guest, #6979) [Link] (2 responses)

Taking a single example of a non-Theora using nonprofit (that does not represent in any way the whole of the "community") from our little country that has had no software patent litigation so far is of no worth as an argument to any intellectually honest person. I'll mind you also that the local authorities have granted software patents here as well, EFFI merely asserts that those are nevertheless illegal here. It's quite likely businesses are already threatened into paying protection behind the scenes, though; not something you want to be happening with a Web standard either.

Incidentally, you're also wrong about H.261, as it's not yet old enough. H.120 would be. That's 1982 technology.

Specifying codecs for the web

Posted Dec 13, 2007 14:23 UTC (Thu) by nhippi (subscriber, #34640) [Link] (1 responses)

Taking a single example of a non-Theora using nonprofit (that does not represent in any way the whole of the "community") from our little country that has had no software patent litigation so far is of no worth as an argument to any intellectually honest person. I'll mind you also that the local authorities have granted software patents here as well, EFFI merely asserts that those are nevertheless illegal here.

Effi is the the biggest anti-sw-pat actor in Finland, and thus would seem to be the most likely contender to use non-patent-encumbered formats as an example for others. That is why I picked them as an example.

I'm just trying to point out that theora is on weaker ground since not even freedom activists embrace it with scale vorbis has been adopted.

Specifying codecs for the web

Posted Dec 13, 2007 15:13 UTC (Thu) by mjr (guest, #6979) [Link]

Effi is the the biggest anti-sw-pat actor in Finland, and thus would seem to be the most likely contender to use non-patent-encumbered formats as an example for others. That is why I picked them as an example.

On one hand it would (and I perhaps would have preferred that approach). On the other hand, as said, it's a kind of active assertion that "we are completely within our liberties to use this". EFFI also has a guide (in Finnish) on picking a video format for Web use in Finland that reflects this and includes consideration and recommendation, especially in some circumstances, of Theora also.

Now that the issue is fresh in my mind, maybe I'll do a quick conversion and see about getting them included aside the other versions.

Specifying codecs for the web

Posted Dec 13, 2007 11:37 UTC (Thu) by mjr (guest, #6979) [Link]

Oh, also I'll note that Fluendo/Cortado streaming has seen mainstream use here in Finland as
well at least in sports event streaming - perhaps they were less confident than EFFI in
asserting that software patents are illegal here. (Don't know which event(s) or how many, as
I'm not interested in sports - merely noted their use of free technology). As for more global
use, at least Wikipedia policy is to use spesifically Theora for video. They're only one of
the ten or so most popular web sites around, and while there's not overmuch video content at
this point, the amount is only going to increase.

Theora may not be as widely used as some of the encumbered options, but that doesn't mean it's
doesn't get around already.