Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 18th Mar 2010 00:10 UTC
Multimedia, AV This one was accidentally deleted from the submission queue when it was first submitted some time ago, so I decided to keep it around for a slow news day (such as this one - dear lord, it's quiet). FFmpeg developer Mans penned down a number of crucial problems with the Ogg container format.
Thread beginning with comment 414034
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Why not use Matroska?
by pompous stranger on Thu 18th Mar 2010 12:55 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Why not use Matroska?"
pompous stranger
Member since:
2006-05-28

OK, Matroska is better than Ogg as a file storage format, so the question boils down to this: is it as good as Ogg as a streaming format?

The Matroska devs don't appear to think so:

Q: What makes Matroska better (worse?) than an ogg media container (.ogm)?

A: It's less a matter of better/worse, and more a matter of different. This is a little complex but we will try ad explain.

First Ogg is not the same thing as Ogm. Ogg was designed to stream audio, specifically Vorbis. Ogg was not designed to handle video, or any other type of audio. (Though their use is not prevented in the Ogg specs, it is not specifically supported either) Ogg is an RFC spec now, and is very useful for what it was designed for, streaming Vorbis and Ogm is an implementation of placing other 'things' in Ogg.

So, we have:

Ogg
1. Designed for streaming.
2. Designed to hold Vorbis.
3. Well documented for above two purposes.

Ogm
1. Implementation of Ogg to hold video, other audio codecs, and a type of subtitle.
2. Implements Chapter support.

Matroska
1. Designed to hold any type of codec. (Audio, Video, Subtitle, etc)
2. Designed for editability.
3. Purposely flexible design.
4. Well documented portions, others in process.
5. Initial design is to support presentation container features such as Chapters, Tags, AudioGain, Menus, etc.

Will Matroska be streamable? Yes, but low bitrate streaming like streaming Vorbis, will always be better in Ogg. This is because their design is for different purposes.

from: http://www.matroska.org/technical/guides/faq/index.html

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[5]: Why not use Matroska?
by lemur2 on Thu 18th Mar 2010 13:19 in reply to "RE[4]: Why not use Matroska?"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

Will Matroska be streamable? Yes, but low bitrate streaming like streaming Vorbis, will always be better in Ogg. This is because their design is for different purposes.


Yes, this is more or less what I thought. Ogg designed for streaming, Matroska designed for storage as a video file. The thing I hadn't realised is that both formats can be pressed into service for doing either role.

OK, so it still begs the question ... which is better for use over the web? Considering how easy it now is to make either format, and the fact that they will be within a few percent as far as bandwidth/filesize goes, it surely would come down to how difficult or easy is serving each one?

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[6]: Why not use Matroska?
by WereCatf on Thu 18th Mar 2010 14:07 in reply to "RE[5]: Why not use Matroska?"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

OK, so it still begs the question ... which is better for use over the web? Considering how easy it now is to make either format, and the fact that they will be within a few percent as far as bandwidth/filesize goes, it surely would come down to how difficult or easy is serving each one?

I am in no way an expert at all in these things so I may be talking completely out of my arse here, but from what I've gathered OGG is better for streaming lower-quality content and Matroska would be better for high-end content. On server side though, gathering from the article, OGG poses some synchronization, latency and overhead issues. Multiply that with hundreds or thousands of users and it's probably easier on server side to go for Matroska or some other format.

Now, someone correct me if I am indeed mistaken.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[5]: Why not use Matroska?
by npcomplete on Fri 19th Mar 2010 06:49 in reply to "RE[4]: Why not use Matroska?"
npcomplete Member since:
2009-08-21

Note that for "low bitrate" streaming they specifically compare it with Vorbis -- audio streaming. DVD quality video (youtube "HQ" mode) and above (youtube "HD" mode) is no longer "low bitrate".

Reply Parent Score: 1