IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] confirming sense of the room: mti codec

Andrew Allen <aallen@blackberry.com> Sat, 06 December 2014 13:06 UTC

Return-Path: <aallen@blackberry.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE02D1A9042 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 05:06:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yHdpd1uG2UkB for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 05:06:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-p02.blackberry.com (smtp-p02.blackberry.com [208.65.78.89]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 988151A9041 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 05:06:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xct105cnc.rim.net ([10.65.161.205]) by mhs214cnc.rim.net with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 06 Dec 2014 08:06:11 -0500
Received: from XCT116CNC.rim.net (10.65.161.216) by XCT105CNC.rim.net (10.65.161.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.210.2; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 08:06:11 -0500
Received: from XMB122CNC.rim.net ([fe80::28c6:fa1c:91c6:2e23]) by XCT116CNC.rim.net ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0210.002; Sat, 6 Dec 2014 08:06:10 -0500
From: Andrew Allen <aallen@blackberry.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] confirming sense of the room: mti codec
Thread-Index: AQHQEJCKEBti1FXXNkmH1ALOez9gJ5yBvm8AgAA6CwCAACgmAP//s+MwgADPGYD//+B8wA==
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2014 13:06:09 +0000
Message-ID: <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD23399884B8@XMB122CNC.rim.net>
References: <E3FA0C72-48C5-465E-AE15-EB19D8D563A7@ieca.com> <54820E74.90201@mozilla.com> <FCDCD184-549C-4111-ACDB-7C466A2EE9D1@apple.com> <548260D2.2020703@nostrum.com> <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD2339987D08@XMB122CNC.rim.net> <5482CEB3.8030000@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <5482CEB3.8030000@alvestrand.no>
Accept-Language: en-CA, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.65.160.249]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/dHeuP4QSapF-3mzCq7UoZG2BgNE
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] confirming sense of the room: mti codec
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 06 Dec 2014 13:06:19 -0000

Harald

I already stated my source (which I picked at random based on a google search :) ) in a previous email and we could argue about the accuracy of the statistics on one site or another, the statistical trends, what snapshot window in time to take, how to measure it (based on website usage or number of deployed units, etc). 

But I think my point was clear. Several significant players in the browser space that are supposed to implement the video MTI "compromise" are not in support of this "compromise".

Easy to get a hum to support both codecs from other people when they aren't the ones that have to implement both codecs.

Andrew

-----Original Message-----
From: rtcweb [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Harald Alvestrand
Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2014 4:39 AM
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] confirming sense of the room: mti codec

On 12/06/2014 03:23 AM, Andrew Allen wrote:
> Adam,
>
> However if you look at it another way:
>
> A majority of the market share of the desktop browser market (Microsoft and Apple) are against this and a significant share of the mobile browser market (Apple, Microsoft and BlackBerry) are against this.

Please .... if you bring market share into the discussion, tell us which numbers you are using.

Clearly you are not using StatCounter:

http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-browser-ww-monthly-200807-201411

http://gs.statcounter.com/#mobile_browser-ww-monthly-201311-201411



_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
rtcweb@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email