Google to push royalty-free VP9 4K video codec as H.265 alternative for YouTube

2456789

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 164
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    Can Google do anything right?

    'can' being the operative word here¡
  • Reply 22 of 164
    Love or Hate it if it doesn't support the iPad or the iPhone it's dead in the water.
  • Reply 23 of 164
    bloggerblogbloggerblog Posts: 2,474member

    According to the ISO/IEC, H.265 has been published back in November, why does Google want to push VP9?

    http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=35424

     

    Having said that, I'm not happy with what Google did with YouTube either, the advertising is way too intrusive. I understand the need for advertising and ROI, but there are ads everywhere on the website, banners in every movie, and video ads before every movie (almost). That's just too much.

  • Reply 24 of 164
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post





    'can' being the operative word here¡

    Hey Phil, Happy New Year! Ran 8 miles (slowly) on New Year's Day! :)

     

    It's like Google makes billions in spite of themselves! Same with MS! :) 

  • Reply 25 of 164
    paul94544paul94544 Posts: 1,027member

    no doubt it will be released as "beta" perform terribly for years just like screwyou docs and then they will start charging for it just like some of their other crap , no thanks scoogle. lets see what other open standard did they do this with hmmm oh yeah they tried that and then siad it ws open then took it away from developers - oh yeah A claiming it neededto be protetced oh yeah "Android" which is rapidly turning into an epic technical  fail

  • Reply 26 of 164
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    Hey Phil, Happy New Year! Ran 8 miles (slowly) on New Year's Day! :)

    All with a low HR, no doubt. Good work sir, even it being without any NY's resolution.
    It's like Google makes billions in spite of themselves! Same with MS! :) 

    Sad thing is these companies won't ever go away. No matter how much money the dumb in some black hole they'll always be around. And that's a waste of people; I'm sure the employees are quite capable in so much more, but are limited to what they can achieve due to narrow minded managers et cetera.
  • Reply 27 of 164
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,339member
    According to the ISO/IEC, H.265 has been published back in November, why does Google want to push VP9?
    http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=35424

    Is that h.265? I didn't see mention of it but perhaps.

    EDIT: A search of ISO/IEC docs returns no results for h.265.
  • Reply 28 of 164
    philboogie wrote: »
    Seeing the words 'free' and 'Google' in the same sentence seems ...off.

    Are you kidding? Expect the FOSS guys to respond with loving praise, much cooing, and come to the defense of Google in forums.
  • Reply 29 of 164
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,675member
    Are you kidding? Expect the FOSS guys to respond with loving praise, much cooing, and come to the defense of Google in forums.


    Already happening :D
  • Reply 30 of 164
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by bloggerblog View Post

     

    According to the ISO/IEC, H.265 has been published back in November, why does Google want to push VP9?

    http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=35424

     

    Having said that, I'm not happy with what Google did with YouTube either, the advertising is way too intrusive. I understand the need for advertising and ROI, but there are ads everywhere on the website, banners in every movie, and video ads before every movie (almost). That's just too much.


    It's called "MacTubes" and it's great! Just make sure you change the "player type" to Quicktime via Pref>Player

     

     

    BTW AI wouldn't let me post when using my Facebook to login, even though I have zero infractions. So....Now I have two accounts....YAY!

  • Reply 31 of 164
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    Is that h.265? I didn't see mention of it but perhaps.



    EDIT: A search of ISO/IEC docs returns no results for h.265.

     

    Your research skills are poor: http://www.vcodex.com/h265.html

     

    Clue: http://webstore.ansi.org/RecordDetail.aspx?sku=ISO/IEC+23008-2:2013

     

    Quote:


     

    Information technology - High efficiency coding and media delivery in heterogeneous environments - Part 2: High efficiency video coding

    ISO/IEC 23008-2:2013 specifies high efficiency video coding. It was developed in response to the growing need for higher compression of moving pictures for various applications such as videoconferencing, digital storage media, television broadcasting, internet streaming, and communications. It is also designed to enable the use of the coded video representation in a flexible manner for a wide variety of network environments as well as to enable the use of multi-core parallel encoding and decoding devices. The use of ISO/IEC 23008-2:2013 allows motion video to be manipulated as a form of computer data and to be stored on various storage media, transmitted and received over existing and future networks and distributed on existing and future broadcasting channels

     



  • Reply 32 of 164
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,339member
    Are you kidding? Expect the FOSS guys to respond with loving praise, much cooing, and come to the defense of Google in forums.

    VP9 already has a pretty long list of hardware partners, and they're not FOSS folks.
    "...ARM, Broadcom, Intel, LG, Marvell, MediaTek, Nvidia, Panasonic, Philips, Qualcomm, RealTek, Samsung, Sigma, Sharp, Sony and Toshiba" among others. Again it's not an either/or codec choice.
  • Reply 33 of 164
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post



    For what it's worth VP9 isn't just for YouTube. It wouldn't hurt to read up on it before dismissing it out of hand. YouTube will probably support h.265 too whenever it's gets done too according to articles.It's not an either/or video codec war.



    By the way, the articles author is making a bit of a stretch saying Google admitted that VP8 infringed on any MPEG-LA IP based on their being offered a license particularly since there's never been any mention by them that Google would pay any royalties. Google has never wavered from saying that VP8 was free of any patent encumbrances from outside parties.



    Perhaps Google did pay them something and perhaps they didn't, but it obviously wasn't much if anything since Google can freely sub-license any h.264 IP to any VP8 or VP9 user at no charge.

     

    Of course it would be a small amount. MPEG-LA charges very low rates for using H.264. This is why Google trying to force another useless standard down our throats ridiculous and self-serving. Claiming that VP8 is "free" and offers an advantage over H.264 (which CAN cost money for some users) is a very weak argument for the use of VP8. MPEG-LA has many provisions in place to use H.264 for FREE. Once you get to enough users/devices where you'd have to pay, the fees are going to be a minor part of your expense. And MPEG-LA has a cap on fees so large companies like MS, Apple or Samsung don't pay huge fees for the 100's of millions of devices they sell.

     

    Google originally announced VP8 was free from patent encumbrances. Then they settled with MPEG-LA. And Nokia is also in the process of suing vendors who use VP8 over their IP they feel is part of the spec. Convenient that you left that part out.

     

    Google is an IP thief, plain and simple. You carefully choosing your words isn't going to change that. They stole IP for VP8 just like they stole IP for Android and gave it away for free. Then they have the nerve to complain when companies go after them or their vendors for illegally using their IP.

  • Reply 34 of 164
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    VP9 already has a pretty long list of hardware partners, and they're not FOSS folks.

    ARM, Broadcom, Intel, LG, Marvell, MediaTek, Nvidia, Panasonic, Philips, Qualcomm, RealTek, Samsung, Sigma, Sharp, Sony and Toshiba

     

    Please. These are vendors who make devices that would use VP9, not companies who have donated or somehow provided the patents and IP necessary to make VP9 work.

     

    Android has a long list of hardware partners as well, but it has nothing to do with whether or not Android has stolen IP in it or if it's FOSS.

  • Reply 35 of 164
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,339member

    Thanks, but I wasn't doing a websearch at the time. I simply typed h265 in their search box.
    http://www.iso.org/iso/home/search.htm?qt=h265&sort=rel&type=simple&published=on
  • Reply 36 of 164
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,339member
    Please. These are vendors who make devices that would use VP9, not companies who have donated or somehow provided the patents and IP necessary to make VP9 work.

    Pretty sure that's just what I said sir. HARDWARE! Now if you want to discuss software patents and such to prove that VP9 is encumbered with IP belonging to others that Google has "stolen " feel free to cite examples as usual.
  • Reply 37 of 164
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    s.metcalf wrote: »
    Vimeo is a million times better.  I actually suggested Apple build a Vimeo app in the home screen of iOS but I don't think they will.

    I don't think Vimeo makes enough money yet to afford that.
  • Reply 38 of 164
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,339member
    Of course it would be a small amount. MPEG-LA charges very low rates for using H.264. This is why Google trying to force another useless standard down our throats ridiculous and self-serving. Claiming that VP8 is "free" and offers an advantage over H.264 (which CAN cost money for some users) is a very weak argument for the use of VP8. MPEG-LA has many provisions in place to use H.264 for FREE. Once you get to enough users/devices where you'd have to pay, the fees are going to be a minor part of your expense. And MPEG-LA has a cap on fees so large companies like MS, Apple or Samsung don't pay huge fees for the 100's of millions of devices they sell.

    Google originally announced VP8 was free from patent encumbrances. Then they settled with MPEG-LA. And Nokia is also in the process of suing vendors who use VP8 over their IP they feel is part of the spec. Convenient that you left that part out.

    Google is an IP thief, plain and simple. You carefully choosing your words isn't going to change that. They stole IP for VP8 just like they stole IP for Android and gave it away for free. Then they have the nerve to complain when companies go after them or their vendors for illegally using their IP.

    Do you have any examples of patents that Google has been found to infringe, which apparently qualifies as theft in your view? Other than two very old Lycos patents that PAE ("patent troll") Vringo bought it looks like a pretty sparse list. Much easier to find numerous examples of patent infringement by other techs, but of course those wouldn't be "theft" since it wasn't Google?

    As for Nokia I mentioned yesterday that they'd gone "lone wolf" when I first mentioned VP9. Pretty sure you would have seen it but in case you didn't.
    http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/161387/npd-chromebook-sales-outperform-macbooks-in-commercial-sector-as-ipad-loses-ground/200#post_2452610
  • Reply 39 of 164
    In the end isn't it which most popular devices are actually installed with the codec to play back all this amazing 4K video crap? If Apple supports their in-house codecs, along with historic versions but not Google's, they the point is moot. Google will be forced to update their systems to accept what their "shared" clients want. And secondly, as shown clearly, 80% of deployed Android devices never get current OS updates so they cannot even push a new codec anyways. It's true that they are seeming more and more like the monolithic MS each year passing. Who suffers most? The customer who make these companies uber-rich.
  • Reply 40 of 164
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post





    All with a low HR, no doubt. Good work sir, even it being without any NY's resolution.




    Sad thing is these companies won't ever go away. No matter how much money the dumb in some black hole they'll always be around. And that's a waste of people; I'm sure the employees are quite capable in so much more, but are limited to what they can achieve due to narrow minded managers et cetera.

    Yep! thx, bro.

     

    Agreed! I think SJ's greatest contribution to the world was corralling SW/HW "engineers/programmers" and not allowing them to put out subpar products! If it was up to MS we would all still be using DOS! Ugh!

     

    Here is Apple providing a blueprint on how to operate a healthy company and yet so many companies still take the Walmart approach of selling inferior stuff, at low prices in the hope of making a profit. (Sorry for the run-on sentences!) 

     

    Oh well! :)

Sign In or Register to comment.