Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue
cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> Mon, 28 October 2013 03:21 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 33D1411E8302 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 20:21:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.441
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.441 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.842, 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 SlYhvS4oLA+5 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 20:21:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-f169.google.com (mail-qc0-f169.google.com [209.85.216.169]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4730B11E82EF for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 20:21:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qc0-f169.google.com with SMTP id x12so3530831qcv.0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 20:21:26 -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=zrQDTyKBvi0yiYIw4t6T2kah1eZ1JzfPdKLHqoRnQsI=; b=glSwVIHfgZaA+BV7EhDcuRr9k45iFGBQTRPKQIuQuJeaJGOiDN8BpfQNQkBYzEbdKS Og0oQYixnSsPo/s9oT78dFCZfIhcRZD+VgDMw+J7C80iblKqCKwKcUe0Wo7IIso0o7Fb QMwFwuJm+knpt2+Xd+ssUXoVu3R+GzPwg2x7Tk6WHmNAMso9jRgAL5irpUW8KcxrEv9o AjOblKIrwS/GF+u0+v9JuLgkcRXerVDPnpi6GwURogsul9JqOkqjd7Pl6y71xho10wHz Y92+BgzFEhmjJYxmlRNMowZriaGgo1j5Gy1FfxtQMSdxMbhoqRRV3HuE9VwoiNRdVDzI R3bQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQl4lgU4mC5IcbQfa5LtWyP69jCFQA+7lCVEqC/SYuM1luqWYICvvDVNTSsCQTFJYbgZ1MKz
X-Received: by 10.224.29.131 with SMTP id q3mr26729116qac.37.1382930486682; Sun, 27 Oct 2013 20:21:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (206-248-171-209.dsl.teksavvy.com. [206.248.171.209]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id e7sm27986032qag.7.2013.10.27.20.21.25 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 27 Oct 2013 20:21:26 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <526DD833.2060309@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 23:21:23 -0400
From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
References: <52681A96.2020904@alvestrand.no> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A4843D45DC08@TK5EX14MBXC266.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <5269764C.4030801@librevideo.org> <52698758.5040404@bbs.darktech.org> <CAD6AjGSb5syh0HO+89fH8cGZ0zqM6gYLPj3aeTRQLN0u8W4cSg@mail.gmail.com> <5269F098.2020904@alvestrand.no> <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB7620A0F272E@008-AM1MPN1-043.mgdnok.nokia.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B0BF358@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <CAGgHUiRtXUAJTotAFX7YwQ6cS_OD-MpAb+898c6OYxm7D5xXKw@mail.gmail.com> <FCBEDCB500188C488DA30C874B94F80E1C01158C@xmb-rcd-x03.cisco.com> <CAOJ7v-1iV4_SvToRYYtDZszxkSDF0qmrS4YN8w7OFQ3p29CaDw@mail.gmail.com> <526AE703.8000409@bbs.darktech.org> <CA+9kkMC=RrmAEyd0uWjpPhvCGuUnj5ATmuZrA7FnAxXhqMJXrg@mail.gmail.com> <526C15CD.5020601@bbs.darktech.org> <526C3FE4.2040301@alvestrand.no> <526C4686.2080702@bbs.darktech.org> <CABkgnnVJUaEgk3tQ-4kJq3SC=CKbz=fCy-ZJQBwwXWWzk--6xw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnVJUaEgk3tQ-4kJq3SC=CKbz=fCy-ZJQBwwXWWzk--6xw@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] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue
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: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 03:21:36 -0000
On 27/10/2013 5:09 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > On 26 October 2013 15:47, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote: >> what's going on with Microsoft and Apple? > I can't speak for Apple, or Microsoft. However I am able to share > some information. > >> What's their official position >> regarding MTI? > For Microsoft at least, their position on MTI remains that specifying > MTI is not preferable. You can find plenty of elaboration on this > subject if you search around a little. However, it is also > Microsoft's view that it is extremely important to respect the > consensus process. > >> Will it impact their intent to bundle WebRTC in their >> browsers? > That would be pure speculation. Microsoft has a policy of not > revealing any information about unreleased and unannounced products, > and it seems like Apple act similarly. I think it unlikely that you > are going to get any information on this subject. Asking repeatedly > is likely to annoy more than it is to get more answers. I suggest > that you concentrate on the issues, and try to keep speculation to > yourself. Hi Martin, I understand. I'm happy to hear your official stance on MTI and Microsoft's commitment to the consensus process. Thanks, Gili
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Basil Mohamed Gohar
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Monty Montgomery
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Silvia Pfeiffer
- [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Basil Mohamed Gohar
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Silvia Pfeiffer
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Markus.Isomaki
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Bo Burman
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Basil Mohamed Gohar
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Bo Burman
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue David Singer
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Bo Burman
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Basil Mohamed Gohar
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Silvia Pfeiffer
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Silvia Pfeiffer
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cb.list6
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Karl Stahl
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Markus.Isomaki
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Markus.Isomaki
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Lorenzo Miniero
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Leon Geyser
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Markus.Isomaki
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Jeremy Laurenson (jlaurens)
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cb.list6
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Justin Uberti
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Justin Uberti
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cb.list6
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Monty Montgomery
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Jeremy Laurenson (jlaurens)
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Karl Stahl
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue tim panton
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Leon Geyser
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Martin Thomson
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Victor Pascual Avila
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue David Singer
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Monty Montgomery
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Jack Moffitt
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Jeremy Laurenson (jlaurens)
- Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue Basil Mohamed Gohar