Linked by fran on Sun 20th Mar 2011 20:00 UTC
Multimedia, AV "Addressing a major weakness its plan to build its WebM video technology into the Web, Google yesterday released a version of its VP8 video encoder and decoder designed to be baked into hardware. [...] The hardware implementation of VP8 is called H1 and now Anthill, said Aki Kuusela, engineering manager of the WebM Project, in a blog post. It comes in the form of RTL, or Register Transfer Language, a very low-level description close to how processors actually perform their instructions, and it's available royalty free."
Thread beginning with comment 467036
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
"and it's available royalty free"
by mrhasbean on Sun 20th Mar 2011 21:44 UTC
mrhasbean
Member since:
2006-04-03

Everything Google does is at best "Claytons" (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Clayton's) royalty free. Sure it doesn't cost coin out of the pocket of the content provider, but what's your privacy and personal data worth, and how many billions of dollars do Google make by stealing it? Funds which are paid to Google by advertisers and are added on to the price of that advertiser's goods and services, which we're all paying for, just as we are with H.264. But unlike H.264, this is royalty by stealth. Anyone with a business background understands this concept, sadly many others don't.

And as with the drink, Google's "royalty free" has an aftertaste, and it's also not a good one...

Reply Score: -6

ruinevil Member since:
2009-01-08

So? Google is releasing software codecs and designs for hardware, which are both libre and gratis.

Free Code is free code is free code.

That they implement for their money making ventures doesn't prevent others from doing the same.

Google probably does have 10gig on me in their databases, and knows my spending habits, what sites I visit, and can track me to 10m using my Android phone; however, that conversation doesn't really have anything to do with VP8 hardware.

Also that Clayton definition page is useless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claytons

Why use Urbandictionary when you have Wikipedia.

Edited 2011-03-21 01:07 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

chekr Member since:
2005-11-05

Everything Google does is at best "Claytons" (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Clayton's) royalty free. Sure it doesn't cost coin out of the pocket of the content provider, but what's your privacy and personal data worth, and how many billions of dollars do Google make by stealing it? Funds which are paid to Google by advertisers and are added on to the price of that advertiser's goods and services, which we're all paying for, just as we are with H.264. But unlike H.264, this is royalty by stealth. Anyone with a business background understands this concept, sadly many others don't. And as with the drink, Google's "royalty free" has an aftertaste, and it's also not a good one...


Can you please explain what the VP8 codec has to do with Google's ad platform?

TFH much?

Reply Parent Score: 5

testman Member since:
2007-10-15

He is saying that it is funded in part by advertising revenue.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Everything Google does is at best "Claytons" (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Clayton's) royalty free. Sure it doesn't cost coin out of the pocket of the content provider, but what's your privacy and personal data worth, and how many billions of dollars do Google make by stealing it? Funds which are paid to Google by advertisers and are added on to the price of that advertiser's goods and services, which we're all paying for, just as we are with H.264. But unlike H.264, this is royalty by stealth. Anyone with a business background understands this concept, sadly many others don't.

And as with the drink, Google's "royalty free" has an aftertaste, and it's also not a good one...

So use WebM but don't use any other Googles other services. There's enough competing services for each and every one of Google's offerings out there.

Reply Parent Score: 7

fran Member since:
2010-08-06

Previously you had advertising budgets exclusively targeting print, tv, radio.
How much did these big advertising revenues benefit general society? Except for making media moguls rich, subsiding televisions shows.
Advertsing in print,tv and radio has in reality become so expensive that some companies dont even consider a tv adds anymore because you have to compete with big companies for slots...
And how did these advertising moneys went towards advancement of technology?

Google on the other hand use there advertising revenue in a way that benefit even the poor and drive innovation.

Gmail. Google maps. Research tools. Operating systems. Royalty free or FOSS codecs. Google apps. youtube ect. ect..

Reply Parent Score: 4

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

Anyone with a business background understands this concept, sadly many others don't.


Anyone with a business background, wouldn't have an 4chan sourced avatar or link to urban dictionary.

Micro economics is a bit more complex than can be discussed on this message board. But rest assured everyone using webm is doing their best to make the best decisions for themselves.

Reply Parent Score: 6

Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Are you saying that Google is funding it's R&D through the only means by which they make money? Hot damn, stop the presses. You've got the scoop of the century there, old boy.

and how many billions of dollars do Google make by stealing it?


It must hurt that they're making more than Apple, eh?

Also, I guess since Clayton's a guy you'd like to hold on to forever we should consider WebM to be totally awesome. Thanks for clarifying.

Edited 2011-03-21 17:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

ruinevil Member since:
2009-01-08

I don't think they are making more than Apple, however I agree with your assessment of Clayton and WebM.

Reply Parent Score: 1