Re: [video-codec] draft-filippov-netvc-requirements-01

["Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <[e-mail]>]

-----Original Message-----
From: video-codec on behalf of Thomas Daede
Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 at 12:36 AM
To: "[e-mail]"
Subject: Re: [video-codec] draft-filippov-netvc-requirements-01

>On 07/21/2015 07:10 PM, Ali C. Begen (abegen) wrote:
>> Sorry your links do not prove much. When you use a vpX or opus enabled device or browser youtube most likely sends the content with those codecs. But the world has many other devices or browsers  that are not capable of rendering them so...
>
>And your lack of links doesn't prove much either :)

If you google for encoding.com’s global media report 2015 you will see that they report HLS being the market leader with 75%, then smooth streaming comes along (in the streaming domain). Neither of these use vpX/opus to my knowledge. 

You can also google JW player’s trends in online video report, and you will see that webm only has 9% share.

If you stream youtube to your iOS devices today, it is h264 and aac. This also happens with most browsers other than chrome and firefox. Needless to mention, apple tv, Roku, all those streaming players (probably except chromecast) do not use vpX/opus to my knowledge. 

Also do not forget about the connected TVs, all those devices already have to support h264 and most new ones support h265, too, and that is what they use to stream online content. Hybrid settops that are in our houses (from any cable/iptv/sat provider), they support the existing well known codecs. Honestly speaking, there are still boxes out there that only support mpeg2 not even h264 because it probably costs more to the service provider to replace them.

Netflix, the largest streaming company for tv shows, movies, (and has the largest worldwide subscriber number) does not use vpX/opus. Amazon prime uses avc and aac.

>
>> I did not mean to create a codec discussion but looks like it is to late to revert back. Opus is a great codec and it is widely used but only under certain apps and conditions. But there are lots of other codecs that it will never replace.  I hope netvc will be equally or even more successful.  But again there will be other codecs that it will never replace nor it should. So my point is we should focus on where we have the highest chance to succeed in a reasonable time frame. 
>
>I am honestly not sure what codecs Opus will "never replace", other than
>maybe lossless codecs, codecs that run at bitrates too low to have
>practical uses on the Internet, and future codecs that have not been
>invented yet.

As I mentioned situation is different (better) for opus than netvc, but if you are telling me that opus will replace AAC, or other multi-channel technologies (like dolby stuff), I disagree.

>
>In addition, I think spending effort on the high latency case is not
>nearly as high a toll as you think. Pretty much the only bitstream
>feature that is needed for high latency support is bi-predicted frames.

It is more than that. Even if we have an on par or better codec, it may not get adopted due to the reasons we do not control. Hence, I said, we should focus our energy where it can make the most impact.

>And Thor already has these.
>
>_______________________________________________
>video-codec mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec