Linked by lemur2 on Wed 9th Mar 2011 00:18 UTC
Multimedia, AV The WebM project Blog has announced an update release of the VP8 Codec SDK codenamed the "Bali" release. The Bali release was focused on making the encoder faster while continuing to improve its video quality.
Permalink for comment 465534
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Shouldn't the heading be...
by WereCatf on Thu 10th Mar 2011 01:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Shouldn't the heading be..."
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

I think the point being made here is that no one but Google (and ultimately the acquisition it came from) ever had any say in what VP8 or WebM was going to be.


Indeed, community didn't. Now they do.

Whereas h.264 was a collaborative project among many companies


Indeed, big, large corporations had a say. Community however didn't. And they still don't.

Given the circumstances, anyone who doesn't insist on conflating openness with freeness would have to admit that h.264 was, and likely remains, more open.


So, your argument is that there needs to be more than 1 entity when creating the initial version of something for it to be open, regardless of how many entities can freely modify and study it after the inception of the initial version?

Initial reports also held that VP8 documentation was very poor


News at eleven: a new project doesn't yet have full and complete documentation, people to barricades.


because it was (and may still be) impossible to create a copyright-clean reimplementation.


There is no such a thing as copyright-clean reimplementation, unless released as public domain. Being copyrighted isn't even a problem as VP8/Webm is released under a license that waives Google's rights to it. Ergo, your point is moot.

Oh well, nice trolling attempt mate, with enough practice you might make a true alpha troll when you grow big! Just hang in tight and keep your head high!

Reply Parent Score: 7