IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] A different perspective on the video codec MTI discussion

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Fri, 15 March 2013 18:37 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 DCD0721F8A7B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 11:37:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 vQ12GZ2iZWSR for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 11:37:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA7DD21F8A0C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 11:37:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0488139E23A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 19:37:34 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ob5yewZV2bh7 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 19:37:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:de0a:27:dc4b:da73:da24:d309] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:de0a:27:dc4b:da73:da24:d309]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED70239E03A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 19:37:32 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <51436A6C.2020204@alvestrand.no>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 19:37:32 +0100
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130221 Thunderbird/17.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <CA+23+fE3WRs5SxAUcsjWbxcjzQKxCtW7sdfHtAsbd7MbPyHAtQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+23+fE3WRs5SxAUcsjWbxcjzQKxCtW7sdfHtAsbd7MbPyHAtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020203050209060203070605"
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] A different perspective on the video codec MTI discussion
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, 15 Mar 2013 18:37:36 -0000

At a very high level, I find this line of argument puzzling.
I understand a lot of the details presented, but not this line....

"when the industry is ready, we can make VP8 MTI in the browser."

We live in a growing market.

When we have a growing market, and are intending to do a change, we 
always have a choice between early and late change.

The later we leave the change, the more devices there will be out there 
with "before-the-change" technology deployed.

If we think the switch to VP8 makes sense at any time in the future, 
it's less expensive to start the switch now than to start the switch later.

              Harald

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status