Google boosts open video by funding ARM Theora codec(arstechnica.com)
arstechnica.com
Google boosts open video by funding ARM Theora codec
http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2010/04/google-boosts-open-video-by-funding-arm-theora-codec.ars
15 comments
According to a cursory page search, the word "Apple" doesn't even appear anywhere in the article. I find that annoying (misleading headline).
It doesn't even sound like Google is being of two minds. Changing one's mind from one position to another, even if in a very short period of time, is far from schizophrenic.
Again, please don't editorialize in the headline, it kills the potential for real discussion.
Neither. Google has a an interest in getting video to work on multiple platforms, it seems clearer that html5 will be the future of youtube. However Google's codec of choice does not work well on mobile platforms. Doesn't this make mobile consumption of video easier for all vendors? A win for all, but most of all the service provider.
Maybe I'm not grokking your comment, but it seems to be saying that h.264 doesn't work well on mobile, which the various mobile webkit browsers would seems to contradict.
If instead you're saying that Ogg Theora is the future of Google, again I don't get it, since Google has defended their choice of h.264 for YouTube on technical/performance grounds several times.
If instead you're saying that Ogg Theora is the future of Google, again I don't get it, since Google has defended their choice of h.264 for YouTube on technical/performance grounds several times.
I'm sure they are committed to H264. But this is a case of providing a good alternative that's cheaper for all. This move supports their acquisition of On2, presumably technology developed for the theora codec would be useful in later On2 codecs.
I say it's appears to be the future as there is less to pay in terms of patents. Making is cheaper to produce a device that uses the network services that google provides. Giving google more traffic for it's video service. As more are able to afford network devices and more software clients can be written.
It perhaps helps Chrome OS too if it's on a tablet?
I say it's appears to be the future as there is less to pay in terms of patents. Making is cheaper to produce a device that uses the network services that google provides. Giving google more traffic for it's video service. As more are able to afford network devices and more software clients can be written.
It perhaps helps Chrome OS too if it's on a tablet?
Chrome uses FFmpeg, which already has a good amount of ARM optimizations and is around 10% faster than Theorarm on my Cortex-A8.
Maybe it's in the same vein as summer of code?
Maybe it's in the same vein as summer of code?
http://www.ffmpeg.org/legal.html
Q: Is it perfectly alright to incorporate the whole FFmpeg core into my own commercial product?
A: You might have a problem here. There have been cases where companies have used FFmpeg in their products. These companies found out that once you start trying to make money from patented technologies, the owners of the patents will come after their licensing fees. Notably, MPEG LA is vigilant and diligent about collecting for MPEG-related technologies.
Q: Is it perfectly alright to incorporate the whole FFmpeg core into my own commercial product?
A: You might have a problem here. There have been cases where companies have used FFmpeg in their products. These companies found out that once you start trying to make money from patented technologies, the owners of the patents will come after their licensing fees. Notably, MPEG LA is vigilant and diligent about collecting for MPEG-related technologies.
You can disable compilation of MPEG codecs if it makes you feel safer.
But I don't see what that has to do with my comment.
But I don't see what that has to do with my comment.
Sorry I thought you were suggesting that ffmpeg means that products developed by Google are not subject to license fees. We were talking about the future landscape of video not what happens now: Google are investing in the future.
E264 contains MPEG LA technology. Using ffmpeg for E264 would still mean that Google will pay fees/license the technology.
I'm sure Google's action is to encourage a practical replacement for E264. Then, at least, there is grounds to negotiate better licensing terms.
E264 contains MPEG LA technology. Using ffmpeg for E264 would still mean that Google will pay fees/license the technology.
I'm sure Google's action is to encourage a practical replacement for E264. Then, at least, there is grounds to negotiate better licensing terms.
H.264 hardware decode acceleration has nothing to do with WebKit, Microsoft based mobile devices will not come with WebKit and yet they probably will play H.264. By the way Chrome supported Theora last time I used it.
Maybe this relates to On2 acquisition by Google (Theora is a derivation of On2 VP3) and has nothing to do about Apple or HTML5 altogether, sadly the Apple bashing or praising dichotomy does not let us think outside the box about the large tech world around us.
EDIT: I'm not sure if Zune can play H.264 videos or not, but I still think MS will make embedded devices with H.264 as the default video format as everyone else in the future.
Maybe this relates to On2 acquisition by Google (Theora is a derivation of On2 VP3) and has nothing to do about Apple or HTML5 altogether, sadly the Apple bashing or praising dichotomy does not let us think outside the box about the large tech world around us.
EDIT: I'm not sure if Zune can play H.264 videos or not, but I still think MS will make embedded devices with H.264 as the default video format as everyone else in the future.
Google's big enough to have multiple eggs in multiple baskets
H.264 isn't good for mobile, it's a brute force approach to better compression. At the same time it is the new de-facto standard so its natural deficiencies have been worked around by providing acceleration via DSP, GPU or video acceleration chips.
H264 is the obvious choice to promote early adoption of HTML5 video but the long term goal should be multiple codecs with AAA support. I'm pretty sure Google understands that and others will follow as Theora proves itself.
Actual title: "Google boosts open video by funding ARM Theora codec"
Also, while I'm criticizing the tile, 'schizophrenia' as a metaphor for being in two minds about something is both tasteless and inaccurate:
http://psychservices.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/5...