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

1356789

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 164

    Google needs to be legally required to support h.264 and h.265 right alongside this BS. They’re in the same position Microsoft had in the ‘90s in regard to Internet video content.

  • Reply 42 of 164
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    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

     

    Still obtuse as ever.

     

    How about the Microsoft patents that virtually EVERY SINGLE Android OEM pays license fees to MS to use (including heavyweights like Samsung). The ones where Google was crying like a baby saying MS was "extorting" fees from OEM's. Google claimed Android was free as well. Turns out it's far from free.

  • Reply 43 of 164
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post





    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.

     

    No, you mentioned them in terms of FOSS (and I see you edited your post as well).

     

    Wait, are you going to try to use a logical fallacy? If I say I can't find any cases of VP9 infringing then you're going to claim that it doesn't? Do you think we're stupid enough to fall for your tricks after seeing you use them countless times in the past?

     

    Don't worry, one year from now when we find out Google was again lying and stealing I'll make sure to revive this post for you.

     

    Of course there's no cases of VP9 infringement yet - it's only been available recently and nobody has had time to see what aspects of VP9 may or may not infringe. But of course you'll try to use that as proof that it doesn't infringe.

  • Reply 44 of 164
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by s.metcalf View Post

     

    I wish YouTube would just die.  Google has no concept of quality software or the end user experience.  What else do you expect an advertising company to do to a video sharing site but turn it to shit.  Google has no history or background in video.  They know the web and they know how to track you and sell your information to advertisers and that's about it.

     

    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.


    They have on apple TV.  Apple TV's Vimeo app works great.

  • Reply 45 of 164
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,339member
    cfugle wrote: »
    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.

    Google already said they'd also be supporting h.265 as well in YouTube. Why are so many here still trying to position this as a codec war?
  • Reply 46 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.

    H.265 is also called High efficiency video coding.  Which the link he provided is for.

  • Reply 47 of 164
    U
    s.metcalf wrote: »
    I wish YouTube would just die.  <span style="line-height:1.4em;">Google has no concept of quality software or the end user experience.  What else do you expect an advertising company to do to a video sharing site but turn it to shit.  Google has no history or background in video.  They know the web and they know how to track you and sell your information to advertisers and that's about it.</span>


    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.
    unless Apple buys Vimeo
  • Reply 48 of 164
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,339member
    No, you mentioned them in terms of FOSS (and I see you edited your post as well).

    Wait, are you going to try to use a logical fallacy? If I say I can't find any cases of VP9 infringing then you're going to claim that it doesn't? Do you think we're stupid enough to fall for your tricks after seeing you use them countless times in the past?

    Don't worry, one year from now when we find out Google was again lying and stealing I'll make sure to revive this post for you.

    Of course there's no cases of VP9 infringement yet - it's only been available recently and nobody has had time to see what aspects of VP9 may or may not infringe. But of course you'll try to use that as proof that it doesn't infringe.


    Nope, that post was not edited (one of the few that wasn't LOL)

    Actually I invited you to list any examples of where Google was found to infringe on anyone else's patents, not just those pertaining to VP9. Foot-stomping and pitchfork carrying while screaming Theft!" seem a bit hollow without evidence and certainly doesn't make it a fact. Manufacturers who license Android and also pay Microsoft a license fee for "double-secret patents" that might or might not apply to Android is hardly proof of infringement.
  • Reply 49 of 164
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,339member
    mechanic wrote: »
    H.265 is also called High efficiency video coding.  Which the link he provided is for.

    Thanks. That's helpful.
  • Reply 50 of 164
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,339member
    edit
  • Reply 51 of 164
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by s.metcalf View Post

     

    I wish YouTube would just die.  Google has no concept of quality software or the end user experience.  What else do you expect an advertising company to do to a video sharing site but turn it to shit.  Google has no history or background in video.  They know the web and they know how to track you and sell your information to advertisers and that's about it.

     

    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 think Youtube was designed to be crap, so you have to scroll and click more. So they can tell their customers (advertisers) that there is a lot more engagement with the site.

     

     The interface is even worse from a couple of years ago.  At least then you could scroll the other videos on the right while still watching the video.  They also replace standard HTML links with javascript so you can't easily open them in another window or tab.

     

    And on top of that, they now keep forcing Google+ on you.  They'll switch your youtube name with your Google+ name at times, and I get Google+ emails now.  Totally annoying.

     

    I guess when the user is the product, you deal with this crap.

  • Reply 52 of 164
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    No, you mentioned them in terms of FOSS (and I see you edited your post as well).

    Wait, are you going to try to use a logical fallacy? If I say I can't find any cases of VP9 infringing then you're going to claim that it doesn't? Do you think we're stupid enough to fall for your tricks after seeing you use them countless times in the past?

    Don't worry, one year from now when we find out Google was again lying and stealing I'll make sure to revive this post for you.

    Of course there's no cases of VP9 infringement yet - it's only been available recently and nobody has had time to see what aspects of VP9 may or may not infringe. But of course you'll try to use that as proof that it doesn't infringe.

    In other words, absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.
  • Reply 53 of 164
    unicronunicron Posts: 154member

    Unless there is hardware decoding (which VP8 lacked), it's never going to take off. Software decoding burns through mobile batteries quicker than anything. There's already h265 ASICs in production, AFIAK.

  • Reply 54 of 164
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,339member
    unicron wrote: »
    Unless there is hardware decoding (which VP8 lacked), it's never going to take off. Software decoding burns through mobile batteries quicker than anything.

    Isn't that what the hardware partners like Qualcomm, Intel, ARM, Broadcom, Sony, LG and the like would do, build it into the hardware?
  • Reply 55 of 164
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by BNZfive View Post

     

    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!


    In a thread where most comments are critical of the way Google tracks us everywhere we go, you complain that Facebook isn't tracking you enough. Unbelievable!

  • Reply 56 of 164
    Originally Posted by BNZfive View Post

    …using my Facebook to login…


     

    Aside from breaking the rules, this is your problem.

  • Reply 57 of 164
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,396member

    http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/12/google-tries-to-get-rockstars-android.html

     

    Google is one of those being sued for infringement. 

  • Reply 58 of 164
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,339member
    tmay wrote: »
    http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/12/google-tries-to-get-rockstars-android.html

    Google is one of those being sued for infringement. 

    Apple gets sued for patent infringement on a regular basis so I'm not certain of the point you think you're making. Is it noting that there's companies and individuals who may want to claim infringement? Perhaps it's that filing an infringement suit is tantamount to proof? Maybe you were trying to make some other point.

    By the way, there's a whole lotta little Rockstar children running around now. There's Bockstar learning how to sue Cisco, and Mobilestar trying to roughhouse with Android licensees ( Google too now).. One of the other siblings is Constellation rolling on the ground with Time Warner and yet another is Netstar, the one not playing nice with Google Search. Oh, and there's Rockstar's side-ride Spherix who took on a few of those old Nortel patents to try and make a buck or two with. Gosh they multiply fast don't they?
  • Reply 59 of 164
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

     

    In a thread where most comments are critical of the way Google tracks us everywhere we go, you complain that Facebook isn't tracking you enough. Unbelievable!


    You must be a tin foil fan I take it? This is a public forum, it doesn't matter how you log in, you're using the SAME IP ADDRESS as you do for ALL of your web traffic. You know that right? Also....  Where did you see me complaining about not being "tracked enough"? In fact I never complained, I asked a simple question thanks for being a D I C what you D I d there.......

     

    And Tallest, if one were to be breaking rules, wouldn't it be nice to know what rules were broken. I don' believe recommending software is against the rules and I do believe this forum allows login via FB.

     

    On topic... Why are you guys discussing this  with such heart? We ALL know it's a fail. We should be here discussing why, given the history (which tends to repeat itself), that has shown this codec will not succeed. 

  • Reply 60 of 164
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member
    Originally Posted by BNZfive View Post

    And Tallest, if one were to be breaking rules, wouldn't it be nice to know what rules were broken.


     

    Multiple accounts. Just message the staff; they’d be glad to help you out with fixing your first one!

Sign In or Register to comment.