Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody
I see you are dominating the thread again, spewing all this vitriol and propaganda, and then taking the author to task for doing what you yourself are so skilled at.
- You say it's "live now and it looks great," implying that it's already a done deal and ready for prime-time, but in fact you have to download a build of an unreleased product
to even see it.
Somebody is claiming that VP8 doesn't support/work well with HD...the fact that HD video is online that anyone can freely check out is a valid point to make. Stop whining and go check it out rather than pointing fingers at me and calling me names.
- You say the author "demonstrably doesn't know what he's talking about" by implying that he said VP8 can't do HD when in fact he didn't actually say that at all.
Interesting how I didn't say that either. He doesn't know what he's talking about because he said it doesn't lend itself well to HD or something like that.
- You talk about VP8 doing "HD" when you know the the stream is highly compressed and barely worthy of the name.
HD implies resolution. If the author meant something else, he used the wrong term and, again, didn't know what he was talking about.
- You quote big numbers in terms of the cash Mozilla would have to pay to support H.264, but don't give any reference, and worse, don't compare it to the actual revenue Mozilla makes. Even if your numbers are accurate, 5 million is a lot of money to an individual but hardly a drop in the bucket for a large concern like Mozilla.
You can figure out how to find the reference. It's all over the internet. Mozilla has even talked about it themselves. I've got no time to baby you with it.
Your excuse is it's small money to a company that gives its only product away. I'll let that speak for itself.
When it comes to threads on video codecs, you are the biggest propaganda machine I've ever seen. Seems to me you've got a lot of nerve referring to anyone else's posts as "propaganda" or implying that others are twisting the truth to their own ends.
Pot, meet Kettle.
I've got no stake in any codec. I just need to deal with them. Nothing I've said is propaganda, you just don't want to hear reality.
h264 is of slightly superior quality to WebM, but it is expensive with uncertain royalties in 2016.