Google Announces 'WebM' Open-Source Video Format, Plans for Android Television Integration

[MorphingDragon]

Well, there it is, Apple dismisses VP8 :

http://www.thinq.co.uk/news/2010/5/21/steve-jobs-email-dismisses-vp8-video-codec/

So much for loving "open".

Yep, SJ must have some sort of degenerative mental illness if he uses a pre-graduate student to make a business decision...

 

[qtx43]

I've already read the article. I just can't find anything in the article that supports his claim [that VP8 file size is smaller].

Overall, VP8 appears to be significantly weaker than H.264 compression-wise.

Oh wait...that says the opposite. Actually, I suppose it could be referring to encoding speed as well as size. End users mostly care about decoding speed though, I guess.

 

[John.B]

what do you expect. Apple does not support any of the open source codecs out there.

The people who are all consumed with open sores are already running Linux. End of story. That's a whole different ballgame than open standards. Don't confuse the two.

Also from that announcement t I expect the apple fanboys to go screaming about VP8 sucks and it should die.

At the end of the day, VP8 was designed only for the web and is not going to scale up to the average users' HDTVs. Go read the threads about audio over mini-DisplayPort to HDMI to get a feel for how happy this neutered standard is going to make your average user (Mac, PC, or otherwise).

People are just going to love losing high def on YouTube after finally getting it. And I'll bet the HD camcorder manufacturers and HD-dSLR manufacturers are just falling over themselves to implement a less-than-1080p video codec in their new cameras... </sarc>

But that's Google for you, UX is always the last consideration, never the first.

It does not take much in history to go back and find prime examples of this blind following. Just go back and look at the PPC intel switch. On this boards up until the day of the switch it was the majority was against it and said intel suck for *blank* reason. With in minutes of the a announcement it was the other way around. IBM sucks, PPC sucks Intel rules.

Really? Because there are a lot people with a G5 here on MR that are still, to this day, just plain bitter about the switch. Even more so, as each new version of yet-another application (from Apple, Adobe, etc., even Microsoft) loses universal binary support for PPC. Maybe you are just reading a few anecdotes from newer Mac users who don't care and are extrapolating that over a larger group than really exists?

 

[Rodimus Prime]

Really? Because there are a lot people with a G5 here on MR that are still, to this day, just plain bitter about the switch. Even more so, as each new version of yet-another application (from Apple, Adobe, etc., even Microsoft) loses universal binary support for PPC. Maybe you are just reading a few anecdotes from newer Mac users who don't care and are extrapolating that over a larger group than really exists?

A lot is not a majority.

I was at a lurker back then. But I remember reading the boards up until the day before the switch and it was Intel sucks blah blah blah was the feel from the board.

Day after. Intel rules, IBM sucks was the feel. Yes their was a large number of people who were bitter and did not like it but they were a small part of the larger community as a whole.

Also I pointed out the HP example. The blind following is scary. If apple likes it, then it is good, If apple hates it then it is bad.

Go look at our self admited die hard apple fan boys *LTD*. He himself has stated and agreed with this. "If it has a Apple label on it, then it is good to great. If it does not have an apple label on it, then it is assumed to suck"

That is what I find is fairly true of many apple fans. Not the the degree of LTD but clearly there.

 

[totoum]

Apple TV, iPod, iPhone ect none of them can play the widely used Xvid codec that a lot of open source and free encoders use because they can no afford to pay the huge fees to MPEG-LA.

Xvid is not:

-A format. There's no such thing as “Xvid video” – it is MPEG-4 ASP video (or AVI/MPEG-4, i.e. MPEG-4 ASP bitstream stored in AVI container). You don't “encode to Xvid” or “play Xvid”.
-Patent free. It is free software, however, MPEG-4 patents apply to Xvid and all other MPEG-4 codecs

http://www.avidemux.org/admWiki/doku.php?id=general:common_myths


Basicly Xvid is to mpeg-4 ASP what x264 is to H.264.

 

[kiljoy616]

Like we need another video format.

Why not, if its better I want it. It it gives me HD and uses less processing, I want it.

Change is good, and google is going to put it out there as an open and free. May the better format win, even if that is not how it works out normally.