Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Mar 2012 19:37 UTC
Internet & Networking Ever since it became clear that Google was not going to push WebM as hard as they should have, the day would come that Mozilla would be forced to abandon its ideals because the large technology companies don't care about an open, unencumbered web. No decision has been made just yet, but Mozilla is taking its first strides to adding support for the native H.264 codecs installed on users' mobile systems. See it as a thank you to Mozilla for all they've done for the web.
Permalink for comment 510692
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: In through the back door.
by saynte on Thu 15th Mar 2012 11:21 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: In through the back door."
Member since:

Why not? You eliminate one of the variables (the quality, by selecting profiles which yield the same quality, no matter what happens to be the name of the profiles), and then you can compare the other variables, being file size and encoding speed.

The problem with that method is that quality can be achieved in different ways: H264 has different profiles, each one can give you different quality per bit. So to determine which codec can give you the best quality per bit, just take the best profile from each. Otherwise you are comparing profiles ONLY, not codec families.

Each profile can get to the same quality, if you give it enough kbps. You can create any conclusion you want from this, just pick a terrible profile and then conclude that it needs much more kbps to achieve the same quality.

I don't consider a method that gives nearly any conclusion the experimenter wants to be good, or convincing.

Reply Parent Score: 2