Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 14th Mar 2012 19:37 UTC
Internet & Networking Ever since it became clear that Google was not going to push WebM as hard as they should have, the day would come that Mozilla would be forced to abandon its ideals because the large technology companies don't care about an open, unencumbered web. No decision has been made just yet, but Mozilla is taking its first strides to adding support for the native H.264 codecs installed on users' mobile systems. See it as a thank you to Mozilla for all they've done for the web.
Thread beginning with comment 510666
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
bowkota
Member since:
2011-10-12


I'd like to see some evidence of that. Me and several other people tried it during the latter half of last year and atleast back then you needed much higher bitrate on VP8 to get the same quality and especially at lower bitrates VP8 lost quite clearly.

It doesn't matter.
Last time any meaningful tests were done between the two, VP8 was almost as good as h264 in quality per bit rate, however encoding and decoding was horrible. Even if this has changed to the point where VP8 is better in every way, albeit by a small margin, it doesn't matter because there's no support for it.
More importantly that there's no support for it in mobile. None of the SoCs have hardware support for VP8 and they haven't announced any plan to do so, which would mean no support until at least 2013. At that point, if they're going to support another format, h265 is going to be the best option as its way ahead of both codes.

A good analogy is social networking,i.e. Google+ and Facebook. There's no way for Google+ to succeed unless there's a pretty big incentive to do so and right now there isn't. As you can see so far it can't beat the support and traction that Facebook already has.

Edited 2012-03-15 07:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

More importantly that there's no support for it in mobile. None of the SoCs have hardware support for VP8 and they haven't announced any plan to do so, which would mean no support until at least 2013. At that point, if they're going to support another format, h265 is going to be the best option as its way ahead of both codes.

Hate to repeat what someone else has said, but... Any idea how much SoCs out there use PowerVR chips for media processing ? Cause they happen to support WebM now.
http://www.imgtec.com/corporate/newsdetail.asp?NewsID=597

As for H.265, I think it will take it some time to get traction. Do not forget that dozens of years since AAC and Vorbis have been out, everyone still uses MP3. Due to the idiotic way we manage codecs, H.265 will suffer every bit as much as WebM suffers today because it is incompatible with its predecessor and as it stands, no hardware or software supports it yet.

Reply Parent Score: 1

bowkota Member since:
2011-10-12

Hate to repeat what someone else has said, but... Any idea how much SoCs out there use PowerVR chips for media processing ? Cause they happen to support WebM now.
http://www.imgtec.com/corporate/newsdetail.asp?NewsID=597

As for H.265, I think it will take it some time to get traction. Do not forget that dozens of years since AAC and Vorbis have been out, everyone still uses MP3. Due to the idiotic way we manage codecs, H.265 will suffer every bit as much as WebM suffers today because it is incompatible with its predecessor and as it stands, no hardware or software supports it yet.


First, you're just repeating false information. No mobile phone is using the PowerVR chip that you linked.
Second, in response to you and lemur, I was talking about hardware support, I'm aware that there's been support for it in android obviously.
I was clearly wrong, there will be mobile devices with hardware decoding for VP8 before 2013.
The official WebM blog gives this awesome eastern European tablet(btw have you looked at the rest of the specs?) as one of the devices with hardware decoding for VP8. Clearly, this is what VP8 needs to gain rapid adoption.

You can argue all you want but the fact is that h264 has the support of big companies and it's been adopted by the media industry. It's also a fact that WebM is on par (meaning slightly worse/better) than h264.
Common sense dictates it's impossible for it to replace h264 under these circumstances.

As for h265, yes it's a new format, not compatible with its predecessor and essentially that's my point. IF people are going to move away from h264, why move to something that's the same and not the Next Big Thing(TM).

Reply Parent Score: 1

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

More importantly that there's no support for it in mobile. None of the SoCs have hardware support for VP8 and they haven't announced any plan to do so, which would mean no support until at least 2013.


Not correct. Android has supported WebM since version 2.3 Gingerbread.

As for hardware:

http://blog.webmproject.org/2011/11/time-of-dragonflies.html

"In total, over 50 semiconductor companies have licensed the VP8 technology today. The first devices with 1080p VP8 decoding are today in the consumer market from nearly a dozen different brands (see example here), and the first chips capable of VP8 encoding will ship in 2012."

Says it all. More than a dozen mobile brands are shipping with WebM decoders. Fifty semiconductor companies have licensed the technology, and are making chips. WebM encoder hardware began shipping in some devices earlier this year.

You couldn't have been further from the truth.

Reply Parent Score: 3