Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue

Lorenzo Miniero <lorenzo@meetecho.com> Fri, 25 October 2013 08:44 UTC

Return-Path: <lorenzo@meetecho.com>
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 3AD7211E82EA for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 01:44:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.719
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245]
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 CvBwnCBWsySp for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 01:44:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpdg2.aruba.it (smtpdg220.aruba.it [62.149.158.220]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 292F011E82C8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 01:43:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lminiero ([143.225.229.175]) by smtpcmd01.ad.aruba.it with bizsmtp id hLjs1m0113niPy701Ljsrr; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 10:43:53 +0200
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 10:43:52 +0200
From: Lorenzo Miniero <lorenzo@meetecho.com>
To: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
Message-ID: <20131025104352.7333ee91@lminiero>
In-Reply-To: <526A25C0.6080406@bbs.darktech.org>
References: <52681A96.2020904@alvestrand.no> <526826AF.5030308@librevideo.org> <52690090.2050609@alvestrand.no> <BBE9739C2C302046BD34B42713A1E2A22DFCD683@ESESSMB105.ericsson.se> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A4843D45DC08@TK5EX14MBXC266.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <5269764C.4030801@librevideo.org> <52698758.5040404@bbs.darktech.org> <CAD6AjGSb5syh0HO+89fH8cGZ0zqM6gYLPj3aeTRQLN0u8W4cSg@mail.gmail.com> <5269F098.2020904@alvestrand.no> <526A25C0.6080406@bbs.darktech.org>
Organization: Meetecho
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.2 (GTK+ 2.24.19; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: 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: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 08:44:34 -0000

Il giorno Fri, 25 Oct 2013 04:03:12 -0400
cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> ha scritto:

> On 25/10/2013 12:16 AM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> > On 10/25/2013 01:13 AM, cb.list6 wrote:
> >>
> >> There is no holding back vp8, it can always be negotiated.
> >>
> >> My guidance is no mti.
> >>
> >> I, for one, am tired of the gang-land ipr turf wars and posturing. 
> >> This argument is all about ipr, and ietf is explicitly setup to
> >> punt on all ipr issue because they are hard.
> >>
> >> Any layperson can see there is no concensus to be found. That's
> >> why we designed for codec negotiating and negotiating away from
> >> failure is left for implementation
> >>
> > Formalistically, the people who argue for abandoning an MTI, like
> > the people who argue for adapting an antiquated codec, have not put
> > in a draft by the chairs' deadline of October 6, so have not made a
> > proposal.
> >
> > But I'm not the one who argued for this to be put on the agenda for
> > 2 hours.
> > The people who pushed for this to be on the agenda for 2 hours need
> > to come forward and say why they believe this is a good use of our
> > time. I haven't yet heard a VP8 proponent saying so.
> >
> > So far, apart from learning a bit more about configuring x264, I 
> > haven't seen much new information.
> 
>      I think the real elephant in the room is whether Apple and 
> Microsoft (who are on the H264 bandwagon) will decide to implement
> VP8 just because you mandate it or whether they will side-step WebRTC 
> altogether. FireFox's market-share is decline so more and more this
> is becoming a story of Chrome vs IE (on desktop) + Safari (on mobile).
> 
>      The real question we should be asking is how to get Apple and 
> Microsoft on board. If we could get everyone on board, the question
> of what codec should be used would melt away (hint: there is no
> objective answer to this question).
> 
> Gili


The real question is not whether or not Apple and Microsoft will
implement VP8, but when they'll deign to start working on something
WebRTC at all. As most of the H.264 advocates in general, I'd dare to
say (at least from what I've seen so far).

Lorenzo


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