Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 25th Mar 2013 21:09 UTC
Legal Late last week, Nokia dropped what many consider to be a bomb on the WebM project: a list of patents that VP8 supposedly infringes in the form of an IETF IPR declaration. The list has made the rounds around the web, often reported as proof that VP8 infringes upon Nokia's patents. All this stuff rang a bell. Haven't we been here before? Yup, we have, with another open source codec called Opus. Qualcomm and Huawei made the same claims as Nokia did, but they turned out to be complete bogus. As it turns out, this is standard practice in the dirty business of the patent licensing industry.
Thread beginning with comment 556674
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Big picture...
by lucas_maximus on Tue 26th Mar 2013 13:29 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Big picture..."
lucas_maximus
Member since:
2009-08-18

VP8 is not inferior in performance to h.264 except for just one factor: encoding speed. In every other respect VP8 can match or exceed h.264 performance.


This is rubbish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VP8

In a comparison done in May 2011, the libvpx encoder was found to be slow compared to common H.264 encoders and used up to 213% more data for the same quality video, when used in videoconferencing applications.


over twice as much data! So obviously it is not as good.

Edited 2013-03-26 13:30 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Big picture...
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 26th Mar 2013 13:31 in reply to "RE[3]: Big picture..."
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

over twice as much data! So obviously it is not as good.


May 2011 - a benchmark two years old.

I'm not saying anything about whether either of you is right or wrong, but we'll need more recent benchmarks than that, especially considering how fast VP8/9 develop.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Big picture...
by lucas_maximus on Tue 26th Mar 2013 13:47 in reply to "RE[4]: Big picture..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Fair enough, did a bit more googling and the file sizes differences are negligible now.

However performance wise ...

https://gist.github.com/Hupotronic/4645784

H.264 encoded with the latest x264 offers notably higher quality while encoding almost twice as fast as VP8 encoded with the latest libvpx offering. If you see a test claiming that VP8 is better than H.264 quality-wise, it is very likely that the comparison was done poorly, either by mistake or intentionally. I very much recommend reading this article by x264 developer Jason Garrett-Glaser on the subject.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Big picture...
by galvanash on Tue 26th Mar 2013 14:21 in reply to "RE[3]: Big picture..."
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

In a comparison done in May 2011, the libvpx encoder was found to be slow compared to common H.264 encoders and used up to 213% more data for the same quality video, when used in videoconferencing applications.


over twice as much data! So obviously it is not as good.


I won't argue that you are completely wrong - in best case scenerio tests for VP8 and h.264 I find both codecs are within sptting distance from each other in most measurable metrics, but VP8 loses more battles than it wins.

However, your example is ridiculous. Videoconferencing??? You pick a scenario that h.264 was specifically designed for (low resolution, extremely low bitrate, realtime encoding) and because it is better at that you say VP8 is "obviously it is not as good".

Sorry, but there is nothing obvious about that. You cannot pick one edge comparison and make such a broad generalization.

Again, I am not saying VP8 is better than h.264. I will say that for resolutions and bitrates routinely used for web based video distribution (720p and 480p, 500-1200kpbs) it is definitely close enough in most measurable metrics that most people would not notice the difference.

Besides, frankly I think arguments on the technical merits of VP8 are wasted breathe (for or against). No one uses VP8 because it is technically superior - they use it because it is open and royalty free. The fact that it is actually comparable to h.264 when used for its target use case (web video) is just icing on the cake.

Edited 2013-03-26 14:22 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[5]: Big picture...
by lucas_maximus on Tue 26th Mar 2013 15:50 in reply to "RE[4]: Big picture..."
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Sorry, but there is nothing obvious about that. You cannot pick one edge comparison and make such a broad generalization.


Firstly it is pretty important seeing that Google Talk is probably using it that it uses twice as much bandwidth.

In any case Okay, how about this one?

http://www.osnews.com/thread?556675

Again, I am not saying VP8 is better than h.264. I will say that for resolutions and bitrates routinely used for web based video distribution (720p and 480p, 500-1200kpbs) it is definitely close enough in most measurable metrics that most people would not notice the difference.


Except it doesn't look at the above link.

Besides, frankly I think arguments on the technical merits of VP8 are wasted breathe (for or against). No one uses VP8 because it is technically superior - they use it because it is open and royalty free.


Well that might not be the case, we don't know yet.

The fact that it is actually comparable to h.264 when used for its target use case (web video) is just icing on the cake.


Except it isn't.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Big picture...
by lemur2 on Wed 27th Mar 2013 05:38 in reply to "RE[3]: Big picture..."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"VP8 is not inferior in performance to h.264 except for just one factor: encoding speed. In every other respect VP8 can match or exceed h.264 performance.


This is rubbish.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VP8

In a comparison done in May 2011, the libvpx encoder was found to be slow compared to common H.264 encoders and used up to 213% more data for the same quality video, when used in videoconferencing applications.


over twice as much data! So obviously it is not as good.
"

Way, way, way out of date.

You can catch up a bit here, if you care to:
http://blog.webmproject.org/

Reply Parent Score: 1