Linked by Brooss on Wed 23rd Mar 2011 23:14 UTC
Benchmarks A new set of x264 and vpxenc encoder benchmarks have been published. The new benchmarks address many of the concerns raised in the comments about the methodology used in the previous article, such as using SSIM for quality measurement. Theora is also included in these tests.
Thread beginning with comment 467618
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Too little too late
by tanishaj on Thu 24th Mar 2011 02:22 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Too little too late"
Member since:

It's hard facts...
WebM is inferior in most ways and it arrived too late.

Regardless of which format you favour, "too late" seems like a stretch. WebM arrived before the H264 royalty collectors caused widespread damage. It also arrived before the HTML5 video tag has gone mainstream. I would say that is not too late.

While there is no doubt that H264 is currently the superior format, I think it is an open question if it is enough better to offset it's disadvantages. I see no reason by WebM cannot become the dominant video standard on the web.

Today, most people get their web video via Flash. The user does not care if it is H264 or WebM as long as Flash plays it. Flash supports WebM. In the future, most video will likely be served natively via HTML5.

WebM is (and will be) much better supported by desktop browsers than H264. Firefox, Chrome, and Opera all support WebM exclusively. Internet Explorer and Safari (desktop) support WebM if it is an installed video codec on the OS. Android supports WebM obviously. So, that leaves only iOS where WebM would currently be unwelcome. The fastest growing platforms all support WebM.

There are a huge number of companies implementing WebM in hardware:

WebM is less expensive and safer for content producers and hardware manufactures to adopt. WebM may soon have an even bigger addressable audience online than H264.

So, the question is really why H264?

Quality? WebM is the same quality as H264 baseline and getting better. IMHO, WebM is "good enough" for the mainstream Internet user. This is not enough of a reason to keep it from being used for video on the web.

Really, the only reason to use H264 is because Microsoft or Apple have made it impractical/impossible to choose and they have chosen for you. That may be a difficult line for them to hold. Microsoft is already giving ground and smartphones have short lifetimes.

If WebM takes the web, it has a real shot at other niches. This is not MP3 vs Ogg.

Too late? We will see.

Reply Parent Score: 7