Re: [rtcweb] Congratuiations on the Cisco announcement - but we still prefer VP8

[Emil Ivov <[e-mail]>]

+1 for VP8 as MTI.

Compared to VP8, H.264 baseline is only marginally better than H.263. This
makes it hard to justify the inconvenience of post-installation additions.

The whole point of WebRTC was: NO PLUGINS NEEDED!

Let's not through this out the window.

Also, while Cisco's grant is quite interesting for certain scenarios it
could be very problematic for others. For example: enterprises where
installations are handled in a controlled and automated way (e.g. scripted
image deployment) and where subsequent Internet access could be limited for
various reasons.

Emil

--
https://jitsi.org

On 31 Oct 2013 19:48, "Harald Alvestrand" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> We congratulate Cisco on their intention to make an open source H.264
codec available and usable by the community. We look forward to seeing the
result of this effort.
>
>
> Google still believes that VP8 - a freely available, fully open,
high-quality video codec that you can download, compile for your platform,
include in your binary, distribute and put into production today - is the
best choice of a Mandatory to Implement video codec for the WebRTC effort.
>
>
> Harald (sending this from my Google address)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>