Google drops support for H.264 video in Chrome to push WebM - Page 8

Well the whole point of the MPEG-LA is to protect the patents.



H.264 used to require more processing power than the average machine could provide, things always improve.

Theora and WebM being set in stone is not good, codecs should continue to improve.

Show me an Android phone that looks the way it does now before there was the iPhone.

You almost got it right, but sort of backwards. Here's a correct summary:


In other words, Google looks out for no one but itself, which isn't necessarily an aberration in the business world, and, yes, Apple is looking out for its interests, too.

The difference here is that what Apple has decided is in its best interests happens to coincide with what's in the public interest: high quality, open standards that are widely accepted and implemented, and which further serve the purpose of freeing the Internet from proprietary content traps -- namely Flash. (Again, WebM isn't going anywhere.)

Google, apparently, has decided that promoting these widely adopted open standards isn't giving it the leverage it wants in certain markets. So, they dump the open standard in favor of a move that essentially drives content providers back into the arms of closed, proprietary Flash. (Again, because, WebM isn't going to be adopted by anyone who matters.) Sure, lot's of "open" and "openness" thrown around in their statements as justification, but it's just a smokescreen to hide the fact that they have abandoned open. (Just as Android effectively undermines the highly desirable, from a consumers perspective, forcing of carriers to be more open.)

Talk of "open" and "openness" from Google is just so much self serving bullshit. All they are really interested in doing is undermining anything that they perceive may allow anyone to gain success, any such success they see as limiting their ability to exploit markets. The mentality at Google in regard to this sort of thing is actually quite similar to Microsoft, where they have always felt they had to dominate in anything remotely related to their business, because every successful company is perceived as a threat. The only difference is their respective methodologies.

The shills require no more discussion: we all know they are among us. The deluded open source advocates are actually a sad case. Many of them are highly idealistic people who believe they are working for a greater good. Unfortunately, their uncritical acceptance of Google as the company that can do no evil, because, after all, they are always talking about their strong support for open source leaves them open to exactly this sort of manipulation by Google. The reality is that Google doesn't give a shit about the open source community, except as a demographic they can easily rile up with a carefully worded press release.

No one is getting rich directly from H.264. There are about 40 or so companies and organizations contributing IP to it. This is not a major source of profit for any of them.

Simply because they receive payment for their contribution you make baseless claims to their over all motivations. Microsoft did not want to support HTML5 at all originally.

BTW, where do I get my copy of Google's source code, all of it? I don't find it credible that they haven't used large amounts of open source code in their various products: Search, GMail, AdSense/Analytics, etc., etc.

So, shouldn't the source code for this stuff be made available when they provide the software to users, over the web? Or, is it OK for Google to freeload on the open source community? At the very least, there should be an audit -- I have a feeling they are violating open source licenses all over the place.

Probably why they use Python for everything.

GPL-compatible doesnt mean that were distributing Python under the GPL. All Python licenses, unlike the GPL, let you distribute a modified version without making your changes open source. The GPL-compatible licenses make it possible to combine Python with other software that is released under the GPL; the others dont.

So, they found a loophole that allows them to do an end-run around the GPL? But, still, I find it hard to believe all their development is in Python. I still think we need an audit of Google's code to see if they are in violation. I mean, after all, they are all about openness, they should welcome an audit.

anyone backing MPEG-LA and H.264 are either brainwashed or scum.

http://gigaom.com/video/nero-sues-mp...buse-of-power/

So, are you here as a shill or just deluded?

glad you had the capability to see the tie in....

but i really am not for apple, ms, or google. i think they all stink. but i am for open code no matter who releases it.

OK, we'll assume shill since you don't deny it. Glad we cleared that up.

So that means Samsung, Sony and others who make google products are scum as well?

That means Google is scum because they back it heavily on Google Video and YouTube.

I honestly don't know why anyone's gettign worked up. Opera browser works on my Iphone just fine.

Yep, everyone who isn't fully on the Google train when it leaves the station is scum. At least that's my understanding of what he said.

I see what you did there.

can i take more than 30 seconds to finish? i am trying to get my work done too...

Really the best argument is...they don't tell people weather or not to use .gif, .jpg, .png for images why should Google be trying to impose their will on people as it relates to video codecs. Gif is a known patent troll. Chrome should disable it.

I think given that size is in fact an issue I think its best for the developers and content providers to only have to serve up one codec for the web.

IE will be supporting WebM btw...

Also h.264 is far superior to WebM but you could argue that WebM will never get the attention it needs to become better than h.264 or at the very least on par with h.264 if Google didn't put it's name on the line here.

let me add this to it so as to not cause confusion for you unibrows

"anyone backing MPEG-LA and H.264 are either brainwashed, scum or coerced"

so yes you could add google to that.

That also means the majority, if not all, of these companies are also scum for backing H.264.

•

http://www.webmproject.org/about/supporters/

Cool it with the personal attacks.

of course sony is scum. one of the worst. apple has become the new sony.

was i addressing you with that one? i don't think so.

So, everyone is scum, except the pure as the driven snow open source coders struggling to free mankind from the scourge of intellectual property?

And, if Google are scum, as well as everyone else, shouldn't we expect that they have an ulterior motive in backing WebM? Maybe, just maybe, they have an evil plan to pervert open source to their own ends... gasp!

because its fun to do when you are bored with work....ha.

Who you are attacking is irrelevant to the point. If anonymouse was making personal attacks against you Id tell him to stop, too. Go on if you insist, but I warned you for your own good.

yes, pretty much everyone is scum except for the open source coders.

oh. okay, so the 'tone' of ones post can be as slimy as you wish just don't use any exact derogatory word....

where were you when i objected to the use of 'freetard' and was told 'i shouldn't take it personally as it wasn't directed at me'? guess you weren't patrolling the streets that day.

removed the objectionable word from the post.

Be gentle with the innocent open source accolyte, he's on a mission from god.

i couldn't be. god is just a made up fairy tale to frighten the sheep of the world.

I didn’t see any freetard comment.

Anyway, according to the rules of the forum you can’t attack the person. You can go after their ideas. for instance, “Your idea is stupid” is okay, but “You are stupid” is not okay

While that might save you from being banned from the site it doesn’t make a foundation for a sound argument. Remember that the posters make up a small percentage of the total readers. You can say you don’t care what anyone thinks, but that isn’t true or you won’t be making an argument for your case in the first place.

You could further make your argument sound better by making sure an opinion is stated as such. For instance, “I think your idea is stupid.” You can further make your argument better by removing pejorative terms like stupid that put your opponent on the defensive and replace it with something less harsh and then explaining why you think so. “I think your idea doesn’t work. Here’s why…”


PS: Disparaging remarks about religion (and politics) also don’t help.

I think god is supposed to be Mr. Stallman.

I was speaking metaphorically. But, we all worship something, whether we realize it or not.

hmm, or i could read Weston's little book....nah.
are disparaging remarks about santa claus okay?

i like Woz, Wittgenstein, Peirce, Polya, Turing, Von Neumann, Quine, Weinberg.
oh and i would be okay with Bill Joy being a demi-god

those could be called gods and i wouldn't object ha.

profound.

No professional tools, not much use. Kinda hard to kill H.264 when there is only a promise and an absolute disaster of a WebM tech spec.

Yes, but, remember, this isn't really about promoting WebM. Even Google knows that isn't going anywhere. It's about propping up Flash, which won't kill H.264 either, since it depends on it. Basically, Google has decided it's in its best interest to try to sabotage direct HTML video.

Because they have seen the light of the currently completely uncontrolled use of Flash cookies. Those are wide open to really evil uses with absolutely no adequate oversight. Most people don't even know they exist or how much powerful they are when used "properly" from the trackers point of view. They are an advertisers wet dream compared to cookies just being a webmasters dream.

None of that really matters unless Google takes away H.264 from YouTube, then the DOJ will have to get involved. Not a likely scenario. The whole thing is a non-issue.

Yes, it was nicely played and shows just how poorly though-out every one of screamingfist's arguments are. The amusing part is he still doesn't understand how completely he destroys his own arguments. He probably still won't and he'll just get more frustrated and do an even better job now.