Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Mar 2013 21:09 UTC
Legal Late last week, Nokia dropped what many consider to be a bomb on the WebM project: a list of patents that VP8 supposedly infringes in the form of an IETF IPR declaration. The list has made the rounds around the web, often reported as proof that VP8 infringes upon Nokia's patents. All this stuff rang a bell. Haven't we been here before? Yup, we have, with another open source codec called Opus. Qualcomm and Huawei made the same claims as Nokia did, but they turned out to be complete bogus. As it turns out, this is standard practice in the dirty business of the patent licensing industry.
Permalink for comment 556661
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Big picture...
by saynte on Tue 26th Mar 2013 12:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Big picture..."
saynte
Member since:
2007-12-10

[quote]
VP8 is not inferior in performance to h.264 except for just one factor: encoding speed. In every other respect VP8 can match or exceed h.264 performance.
[/quote]

What? Didn't you claim this months ago and couldn't provide any evidence for it?

http://www.osnews.com/thread?542644

The conclusion from most comparisons is that x264 outperforms VP8 encoders in quality/bit. So VP8 is inferior in two ways: encoding speed and quality. Maybe the quality is acceptable, but it's still inferior to what a good H.264 encoder can provide.

I'd be happy to see some direct comparison that shows otherwise, but until then maybe you can stop repeating this unfounded claim?

Reply Parent Score: 6