Linked by Eugenia Loli on Wed 12th Dec 2007 05:56 UTC
Benchmarks A lot was said lately about the Vorbis/Theora vs h.264/AAC situation on the draft of the HTML5. As some of you know, video is my main hobby these days (I care not about operating systems anymore), so I have gain some experience on the field lately, and at the same time this has made me more demanding about video quality. Read on for a head to head test: OGG Theora/Vorbis vs MP4 h.264/AAC. Yup, with videos. And pictures.
Thread beginning with comment 290183
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Video Quality
by Eugenia on Wed 12th Dec 2007 10:55 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Video Quality"
Eugenia
Member since:
2005-06-28

There is nothing to think about. Youtube is big because it's big, the rest have to compete by upping the quality. So quality does matter. And companies like apple and nokia do care about quality, because their customers do, so they won't allow to their browsers to use a lesser codec.

I don't even know why we talk about this. Theora is by their own admission not as good as MP4-Part10. If you care about patents and royalties, use that, but if you are an average consumer, you don't care about it. You are going to pay for it in the price of the product, a few pennies.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Video Quality
by hobgoblin on Wed 12th Dec 2007 11:00 in reply to "RE[5]: Video Quality"
hobgoblin Member since:
2005-07-06

i give up, you would not see it if it was 10 meters tall and flashing green...

that you even get to use osnews as a extension of your own blog is just...

Edited 2007-12-12 11:01 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[7]: Video Quality
by Eugenia on Wed 12th Dec 2007 11:06 in reply to "RE[6]: Video Quality"
Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

Why is osnews an extension of my blog? I made a test which shows clearly what is what, and given the amount of comments here, people are interested in it. That's what we do here, we post interesting stuff. If they are LESS interesting, then they only get posted on our blogs. So, stop trying to make this about me, it ain't. OSNews does not get its stories from sponsors, we just write whatever we find interesting and we think others will too. There is nothing more or less into it. Get over the "become CNN" syndrome.

Edited 2007-12-12 11:07

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Video Quality
by kristoph on Wed 12th Dec 2007 16:29 in reply to "RE[5]: Video Quality"
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

I this, actually, that most people want 'adequate' quality.

Honestly, quality means nothing if I can't play the stupid thing.

]{

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Video Quality
by segedunum on Wed 12th Dec 2007 17:06 in reply to "RE[5]: Video Quality"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

There is nothing to think about. Youtube is big because it's big, the rest have to compete by upping the quality. So quality does matter.

This doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

If YouTube doesn't have to care about quality, and everyone else does because that's the only selling point they have, and people still use YouTube, then quality simply doesn't matter otherwise everyone would be using something else.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[7]: Video Quality
by dylansmrjones on Wed 12th Dec 2007 20:31 in reply to "RE[6]: Video Quality"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Aaah, logic ftw!

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[7]: Video Quality
by Eugenia on Wed 12th Dec 2007 20:50 in reply to "RE[6]: Video Quality"
Eugenia Member since:
2005-06-28

We are talking about video codecs here. Quality is just about the only thing that matters.

So here I am, I am writing an article to show that theora is not as good, and all I get is the free software apologists saying that "quality does not matter".

This is ridiculous. I am not going to reply here again. Thank you for reminding me why I don't do much osnews anymore.

Reply Parent Score: 1