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 510702
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
bowkota
Member since:
2011-10-12

Hate to repeat what someone else has said, but... Any idea how much SoCs out there use PowerVR chips for media processing ? Cause they happen to support WebM now.
http://www.imgtec.com/corporate/newsdetail.asp?NewsID=597

As for H.265, I think it will take it some time to get traction. Do not forget that dozens of years since AAC and Vorbis have been out, everyone still uses MP3. Due to the idiotic way we manage codecs, H.265 will suffer every bit as much as WebM suffers today because it is incompatible with its predecessor and as it stands, no hardware or software supports it yet.


First, you're just repeating false information. No mobile phone is using the PowerVR chip that you linked.
Second, in response to you and lemur, I was talking about hardware support, I'm aware that there's been support for it in android obviously.
I was clearly wrong, there will be mobile devices with hardware decoding for VP8 before 2013.
The official WebM blog gives this awesome eastern European tablet(btw have you looked at the rest of the specs?) as one of the devices with hardware decoding for VP8. Clearly, this is what VP8 needs to gain rapid adoption.

You can argue all you want but the fact is that h264 has the support of big companies and it's been adopted by the media industry. It's also a fact that WebM is on par (meaning slightly worse/better) than h264.
Common sense dictates it's impossible for it to replace h264 under these circumstances.

As for h265, yes it's a new format, not compatible with its predecessor and essentially that's my point. IF people are going to move away from h264, why move to something that's the same and not the Next Big Thing(TM).

Reply Parent Score: 1