Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 30th Sep 2010 23:04 UTC
Google A few months ago, Google open sourced the VP8 video codec as part of the WebM video project, to create a truly Free/free unencumbered video format for the web as an answer to the non-Free/free patent-encumbered H264 format. Today, Google launched a new image format for the web, WebP, which aims to significantly reduce the file size of photos and images on the web.
Thread beginning with comment 443524
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Comment by hornett
by Fettarme H-Milch on Sat 2nd Oct 2010 09:53 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Comment by hornett"
Fettarme H-Milch
Member since:
2010-02-16

not offering a shred of evidence never stopped you from sprouting things like -"On2 sold a slightly tweaked h264 codec as their own invention"

WTF? Of course he released evidence. He didn't release a full list of every detail where AVC and VP8 are alike but he released some examples in
http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/archives/486

In chapter 2 he writes that VP8 uses all 9 AVC intra prediction modes and an additional on top.

In chapter 3 he describes a shared problem with the deblocking filter in 4x4 blocks. He describes that VP8 and AVC use the same filter but VP8 applies it to 4x4 blocks while AVC uses 8x8 blocks, causing performance impacts for VP8 but besides that it's the same.

He also released the source code to ffvp8. Releasing the source code = releasing evidence.
You may not understand the evidence in detail (neither do I) but just because someone does not understand the evidence the situation is not that there is no evidence.

Sorry to say that but reading your comment makes me remember fundamental Christians who claim that there is no evidence for evolution while in fact there is very hard evidence for evolution. In fact evolution is way better understood than gravity (which apart from 'things fall towards objects with high mass' isn't understood at all and the quest to understand gravity is one reason the LHC was built). They just don't want to accept the evidences for evolution.

Btw, Garrett-Glaser does not bash VP8 all the time. In the post I linked he points to some of the features where VP8 diverges from AVC. The 10th intra prediction mode is "cool idea and elegantly simple".
"Tree-based arithmetic coding (...) greatly reduces the complexity -- not speed-wise, but implementation-wise -- of the entropy coder. Personally, I quite like it."
He also writes in chapter 6 how great it is that VP8 does not support interlacing, bashing on AVC for the added complexity of interlacing.

Overall I find that blog post balanced. Sure, the haters only see what they don't like. But the reality is that out of 6 chapters, 3 present positive aspects of VP8 and 3 present negative. That's a 50:50 ratio. You can't get more neutral than that.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[10]: Comment by hornett
by Valhalla on Sat 2nd Oct 2010 14:01 in reply to "RE[9]: Comment by hornett"
Valhalla Member since:
2006-01-24

[WTF? Of course he released evidence. He didn't release a full list of every detail where AVC and VP8 are alike but he released some examples in
http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/archives/486

But neither you nor Garret has shown any evidence that these are A) patented techniques or B) if patented, patented by mpegla. Garret was saying that the techniques were the same or atleast very similar, and that there was potential patent problems. YOU jump to the conclusion that these techniques ARE patented and that they are patented by MPEGLA without offering any sort of proof. 'If' they are patented they may very well be patented by On2 whose vp3 pre-dates h264.


Sorry to say that but reading your comment makes me remember fundamental Christians who claim that there is no evidence for evolution while in fact there is very hard evidence for evolution. In fact evolution is way better understood than gravity (which apart from 'things fall towards objects with high mass' isn't understood at all and the quest to understand gravity is one reason the LHC was built). They just don't want to accept the evidences for evolution.

LOL, I'd say it's the other way around. If anything you are worshipping at the shrine of Garret-Glaser.

Reply Parent Score: 3