Re: [rtcweb] Platforms that support H264

Gili <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> Sat, 02 November 2013 20:01 UTC

Return-Path: <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
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 D723021E80DF for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 13:01:38 -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=[AWL=0.001, 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 p-fIkai8GULW for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 13:01:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-f175.google.com (mail-ie0-f175.google.com [209.85.223.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9BC821E80D8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 2 Nov 2013 13:01:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f175.google.com with SMTP id aq17so9596416iec.20 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 13:01:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=mB03mswxMl/GeSbzO4pEgCiITde6HOm3oWSDRfNKgNE=; b=aCh1H3Hfkc99yA/BGe+nyHxwNr5Dd7CqXAaYu0EvUM/0Yw8hkUdyxkNMWRuiQ8hNUU InIUtmYz8shIN34A4pPOxOabYbQa5EhNBRmwKcFwolvrdFOQLAv4y3ZyqK6cXXbWamc4 qXn1hll8opM+a7K4kf/SeyouSC2fUJrDnC8SE7w3msbiSaiZmnSDlGawzhNTkHSzMgI2 phYteMvmWLvC1E6+nsz5kkwfSMeg75XfrTv0sbk2YOUas34q3jdpl6FXmCNL/H8aIx2A VmfHlcvgQz1pRmuRxBRWXdYVsPCvRtemCJfSWUN/A9lGmCrSCLESauRuu3cITbk8obpl wMjg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlOFgi8lS7X8Plew6ENeTBkcWG0raF36Wxu1qlpH6e3uhR73jduRMj8P5NMhhSAZcmqJ0O0
X-Received: by 10.51.16.3 with SMTP id fs3mr6763647igd.53.1383422492293; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 13:01:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.123.174] ([70.28.107.51]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id f19sm4289736igz.1.2013.11.02.13.01.31 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 02 Nov 2013 13:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <52755A0E.4020007@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 16:01:18 -0400
From: Gili <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
References: <CAOqqYVEER_HprgauRawO+_gGdLdMY1MUY8jrMhhi3yVDL31bFg@mail.gmail.com> <52740478.6030109@nostrum.com> <CAOJ7v-2+_4QZwc8vEtdwVDWSP-d-z+ggB0u+VM6WnA=f-k4-XA@mail.gmail.com> <BLU404-EAS261C783EDA4575EE1A7E53593F40@phx.gbl> <52750E3C.9060206@bbs.darktech.org> <CABkgnnVR9=oWVzRaRuD701tvZCtp+SO1n6c65hJELLVfB8QcOA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnVR9=oWVzRaRuD701tvZCtp+SO1n6c65hJELLVfB8QcOA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Platforms that support H264
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: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 20:01:39 -0000

Martin,

     I fully understand why Firefox would be happy but as someone who 
plan to integrate WebRTC into a non-browser application, especially on 
iOS, Cisco's solution simply does not work. I appreciate their 
contribution, but again, it simply doesn't help my use-case.

Gili

On 11/2/2013 11:02 AM, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 2 November 2013 07:37, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
>>      I can't think of a single platform that supports real-time H.264
>> encoding/decoding natively today.
> That's a very strange way to put the question.
>
> Let me put another spin on it, and please excuse the example...
>
> Skype runs on more platforms than you might think.  Those platforms
> can all support H.264 to the extent that Skype requires.
>
> Cisco's generous offer opens almost the same capability to anyone,
> with the caveat that some platforms currently remain closed.  Of
> course, you could let your ideals get in the way of progress.  Me, I'm
> a pragmatist.  This gift represents a great opportunity for people who
> actually care about the practical outcomes.
>
> There's been a lot of mouth-gazing of gift horses on this list of
> late.  I sure hope that this isn't representative of the real
> sentiment of the community.  I'd like to think that people are better
> than that.
>
> (BTW, I understand and respect Harald's position.  From where he sits,
> I'm sure that his conclusion makes perfect sense.)