IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Discussion on codec choices from a developer who doesn't come to IETF

Jim Gettys <jg@freedesktop.org> Fri, 04 May 2012 14:38 UTC

Return-Path: <gettysjim@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4F0321F879F for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 May 2012 07:38:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IbXOOv0saHVq for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 May 2012 07:38:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4162B21F879A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 May 2012 07:38:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yenq7 with SMTP id q7so3391240yen.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 04 May 2012 07:38:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=LQjHey60KbVS3HyMOjyW2Jb/l7mMEk5icTFd5uI+f0U=; b=ojOOwjbEK7qGscriQuoCkbdoT0kZ7don8mJdErww3OcqC+LaLdUC4d/zeBj30qwByF 3k8DJdMxODk/G4DW0wcpSH2n8UKBEQSBjSkH74hfkeFE/+OJeEYavJfm9QrIaL6rrA5S zS0OI3FBbxmCHsDYYP6WIFbBgZUiXvcMEoCf08/s6qzEEt4GxyiQhqbNUUtmTHS3nNzg TIAYuTFpYkk9ghQCDfO2+2shzGwPrC5OYbCiIw8enAlkMKDtgDk8YriibdSrD2XU/5oZ ORuLuyOGESXsqbnEkb2186dV2Ru15RUKZss0DM/Gda2j7750APVQdnSQb6AFN8JjjOff G1LA==
Received: by 10.236.185.167 with SMTP id u27mr6130523yhm.32.1336140947394; Fri, 04 May 2012 07:15:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.0.4] (c-24-218-179-128.hsd1.ma.comcast.net. [24.218.179.128]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f40sm13486635ani.16.2012.05.04.07.15.45 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 04 May 2012 07:15:46 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Jim Gettys <gettysjim@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FA3E48E.1050204@freedesktop.org>
Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 10:15:42 -0400
From: Jim Gettys <jg@freedesktop.org>
Organization: Bell Labs
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120329 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dean Willis <dean.willis@softarmor.com>
References: <5B26F813B14D224999A508377061EDBBB1215C@EX2K10MB1.vb.loc> <A9FB11DB-8617-4ED6-BDB4-689FD5E7C0C7@softarmor.com> <20120504104446.2d7b2715@lminiero-acer> <CAOHm=4scg-+QnU2g_Tbmc1c615rrRO=oiUCAQ3nL4JORU+3Zmg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOHm=4scg-+QnU2g_Tbmc1c615rrRO=oiUCAQ3nL4JORU+3Zmg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Discussion on codec choices from a developer who doesn't come to IETF
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 14:38:04 -0000

On 05/04/2012 10:10 AM, Dean Willis wrote:
>
>
> On May 4, 2012 3:45 AM, "Lorenzo Miniero" <lorenzo@meetecho.com
> <mailto:lorenzo@meetecho.com>> wrote:
> >
> > Good arguments but this WILL cut out a lot of content producers or
> > interested folks. As you pointed out, you asked someone "who develops
> > serious enterprise video stuff", not the student, the geeky guy or the
> > small startup who wants to try and make some business with a
> > "funny-hat-chat" or "send-your-friends-a-silly-postcard" application
> > based on RTCWEB, that is, what is supposed to be the real fuel behind
> > innovation in RTCWEB in the future.
>
> I am more worried about the guy implementing a WebRTC security camera
> that uses an embedded Linux kernel and a software video encoder. Each
> unit might "produce" video 24x7. But there is no MPEG-LA licensed
> browser or OS or encoder chip to fall back on. The whole product might
> sell for less than it might cost him to license the codec.
>
+1

The number of embedded devices, smartphones, cameras, etc, are rapidly
outnumbering the number of conventional desktop/laptops, and are FAR
more cost sensitive than those uses, and not necessarily going to have
bought out the patent for conventional video playback.

So I don't find arguments that come from "Enterprise" environments by
themselves at all compelling, but merely one more factoid to join the
other factoids in the discussion.
                    - Jim

v2.14.0 | Report a Bug | By Email