Comments on: Taking a stance: Comparing video codec issue (H.264) to ActiveX

By: ThomasHansen

ThomasHansen — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 16:06:48 +0000

Thank you Mozilla for doing the **RIGHT** thing and not necessarily the “right” thing…!
The YouTube/H.264 video/HTML5 news was really quite disturbing for me … :(

By: SteveElbows

SteveElbows — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 21:27:10 +0000

Actually maybe I was wrong and they could choose to change h.264 license terms whenever they like with little notice, but without some rash and draconian changes Im not sure that h.264 licensing issues will cause large enough headaches to enough people to give the alternatives much momentum beyond the world of browser development. Certainly some extremely serious weight will have to be thrown behind alternatives for there to be any chance of displacing h.264, as the h.264 experience, tools & other practicalities have reached a mature level, along with the mass of content on various platforms which is already in h.264 format, make it a very steep hill to climb.

By: Jaaap

Jaaap — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 12:41:39 +0000

If mozilla does not have to include the H.264 source but can just use the codecs installed in the host OS, everybody wins.

I personally would like to be able to play a video in ANY format through a

By: SteveElbows

SteveElbows — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:39:27 +0000

Im really not sure about Checks assertation that the license for h264 ‘changes every year’ or the comments here that mention 2013 as being the year of woe for h264 licensing. As far as I know there are certain dates where it changes, and the big test will be the end of this year when the initial licensing terms end and a new policy takes effect. When that happens it could be very bad, but there is also every chance that they will keep the use of h264 free if you dont have millions of viewers, post very long videos or charge money for the videos. Time will tell.

I would far rather we were using something open, but the hurdles seem great. Its a waste of resources to have to offer video in multiple formats, there is a terrible lack off video tools that support theora creation, and h264 is dominating all over the place, including hardware decoding of the video. It will take a lot to change this picture, and there is something a bit funny about having to look to Google to save us. Not that their purchase of on2 is complete yet anyway, I think the on2 shareholders vote on it in February.

By: crock

crock — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 00:02:00 +0000

I agree with Mozilla on this one. Let’s leave it open.

By: CaptainN

CaptainN — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 21:37:08 +0000

Anyone working on a Theora decoder for Silverlight or Flash? I know the Mozilla folks don’t think it’s a good idea, but that doesn’t mean someone else couldn’t do it (I have neither the codec knowledge/experience or the time to get it). There are already two implementations of Vorbis (one in native C through Alchemy and one in a language called haXe, which can compile to AVM2 bytecode to run in Flash Player). I wonder what performance would be like if done through Alchemy.

By: azer

azer — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 16:58:24 +0000

There may be better codecs than open codecs but still we should support open standards. Like most of us, Mozilla is sure about that technology is being improved faster when it’s open. We have to support open standards, not capitalists who make slower development of the technology for making more money.

By: hansschmucker

hansschmucker — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:31:51 +0000

@mdmadph Of course it works, but it will be illegal without a license from 2013 on. A license that costs money.

By: mdmadph

mdmadph — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:15:10 +0000

@Welles1941 Chrome does, but youtube doesn’t, sadly enough.

@hansschmucker I don’t know, video hosting on my personal websites seem to work just fine. Don’t use youtube.

By: ronin691

ronin691 — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:08:19 +0000

Everyone has seem to have forgotten that Google bought On2.

All our effort should be convincing them to Open Source the older Vp6 codex ( which shouldn’t be that difficult ).

By: Welles1941

Welles1941 — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 15:04:21 +0000

I thought Chrome supported Vorbis and Theora. I also recall reading that Opera would support the open source codecs as well. Wouldn’t this make Safari the only one that doesn’t natively support them? This is of course excluding IE. Who knows if or when they will support anything at all…

By: hansschmucker

hansschmucker — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:51:41 +0000

The problem with h.264 is that after 2013, you won’t be able to legally publish a h.264 video on the net without negotiating a license with MPEG-LA. And that costs a whole lot of time and money, a lot more than anybody but YouTube and Vimeo can afford.
But since they can and since paying a few millions (there’s a limit for how much you have to pay MPEG-LA) isn’t a whole lot if you break it down per user, it doesn’t bother them too much. In fact they’re probably very happy, since h.264 gives them a monopoly for net video distribution (almost) free of charge.
So YouTube will really become the only way to host video. Isn’t that worrying?

By: iliad

iliad — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:38:59 +0000

As much as I admire Mozilla for taking the stance, if they’re alone in this they’re probably going to lose. I’d like to see Google joint he Ogg Theora camp and push for it.

By: jamienk

jamienk — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:54:02 +0000

The web should use only free open formats. Otherwise, we’re at the mercy of companies to charge us or otherwise do things their way instead of our way. Thanks you, Mozilla, for being on our side here.

This will be a long hard fight, I think. Apple, and soon MS will both push hard for formats that give them an advantage. I hope that Google and Adobe will take our side and bank that by creating tools that work with OGG, they can keep the field open. This means:

* Server components that translate to OGG on the fly
* Plugins that let other browsers display OGG [video]
* Integrate OGG into Flash, etc as first class citizen
* Push for OGG to be in all operating systems by bundling with Flash or any other commonly installed software
* Hardware decoding OGG in Nexus One

By: gram

gram — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:35:41 +0000

what about Theora can’t compare to h264 in quality? I prefer good looking images rather than open standards, until community will be able to make it far enough to release a competing product.

By: rasmusfl0e

rasmusfl0e — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:27:32 +0000

@JohnDeHope3: include the ogg src before the h264 src – simple as that!

By: fuzzy76

fuzzy76 — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:27:00 +0000

@JohnDeHope3 That is not something a browser can do by itself. The website decides what is sent to the browser, and the browser has to decode whatever it receives.

Personally, I think this is a huge mistake by Mozilla. That kind of license politics is what has kept Linux from entering the desktop market for years (who want an OS without 3d-acceleration or Flash available?). It makes Firefox an inferior browser compared to its competitors, and people will quickly learn that other browsers support video formats that Firefox doesn’t.

By: JohnDeHope3

JohnDeHope3 — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:12:07 +0000

My question is… if a browser supports many formats, is it common that they allow you to prioritize them? I don’t use firefox, but definately want to promote ogg theora, so I’d like Safari to use it when possible, over H.264.