| I, FOR ONE, WELCOME OUR NEW WEBM OVERLORDS |
[May. 19th, 2010|09:17 pm]
|
The title is mostly due to having seen three or four other blog posts simultaneously making this joke. It had popped into my mind too :-)
In case folks hadn't seen yet, Google (as everyone had
expected with bated breath) announced the open sourcing of VP8
today as part of the WebM project. WebM combines a Vorbis
audio stream and a VP8 video stream into a Matroska container for
use in web video. Then there are a whole lot of other tiny project details
like garnering industry support.
Yes, we've actually known for a little while this would be
happening. Google is moving quite fast after having their On2
purchase plans delayed several months. We'll have a press release
up soon expressing support in drier language, though it's mostly
an exercise in formality since everyone already knows our position.
Now that I'm actually allowed to talk about it, the important
bits to take away are:
-
Of *course* we (Xiph) support WebM. This is great news for
open source, open media, and our own plans at Xiph count on WebM
succeeding. How good the WebM news turns out to be depends on
what we make it.
-
Vorbis is part of WebM and will probably see a new uptick in
active development. WebM doesn't immediately affect
Theora (development of Theora continues along with VP8), but
that's vaguely irrelevant. The good of unencumbered media is the
point, not Theora or Vorbis or Ogg or any specific piece of
software. We're after a fundamental change to the business and
social environment. Software and software advocacy happens to be
the tool Xiph uses to effect change.
-
Open media is obviously philosophically 'clean' and good for
the public and good for social transparency. It's even better
for business. Business makes good money on the Web using Open
technologies. In fact, these are the only technologies that have
seen sustained success online. We fully expect that pattern to
hold.
Xiph has been locked in a political battle with a large
monopoly power for years now, and a political fight is not what
Xiph.Org is good at or built for. We're built to research and
develop media software. This announcement gives us breathing
room to get back our primary long term goal: leapfrogging the
proprietary competition. We don't want to be as good, we always
want to be better.
...so there's some officialness for you all :-)
P.S. I put the Xiph logo first because it's my blog and all. |
|
|
| Comments: |
![[User Picture]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/70118889/829507) | From: xiphmont 2010-05-20 07:18 am (UTC)
Re: What can you said about... | (Link)
|
"Do you believe that VP8 is more or less a rip off h264"
No. That's pretty serious hyperbole. Some design chunks look very similar even to the trained eye, but details matter in both code and patents. DS ignored the details.
"that there must be patents"
If any litigation materializes, I doubt it will be motivated by actual infringement. Here's where it's nice to have Google around.
"is imprecise, unclear, and overly short, leaving many portions of the format very vaguely explained."
Sadly, he's correct about this. We can fix the spec and write a good one after the fact, but this leaves up in the air how many bugs are undiscovered because no one documented the hard parts (so no one else could check them). Tim's been pouring over the code for weeks already and has caught a few such instances, I don't think any were major.
That said, despite Google's claim that things are already frozen, I'm sure that if a showstopper popped up they'd change their minds. I don't think there are any showstoppers. What we'll probably find in the future are instances of 'aw, geez, it would have been nice to change that if it wasn't too late.' We have some amount of experience dealing with that from Theora :-)
Edited at 2010-05-20 07:19 am (UTC)
From: (Anonymous) 2010-05-20 12:38 pm (UTC)
Re: What can you said about... | (Link)
|
And about the quality of the codec itself? Any preliminary comment about where it stands now and where it can get? (Is it competitive/better with good h264 implementations? Will it be? Is it really a better alternative than Theora?)
![[User Picture]](http://l-userpic.livejournal.com/70118889/829507) | From: xiphmont 2010-05-20 04:44 pm (UTC)
Re: What can you said about... | (Link)
|
Quality of the format: Theora was good enough and VP8 is solidly better than Theora (even current Ptalar). So, awesome, it's a pretty pure win.
I know everyone wants a 'but how does it compare to h.264' answer, or more specifically 'how does it compare to x264'. A: Total red herring; none of the orgs with money involved care much about that answer. It's only good for trash talking, not actually winning a fight. B: I don't actually know for sure yet. We've been concentrating on evaluating the spec and the codebase quality rather than drag racing it, because pinning VP8's success on a size contest completely misses the point.
Theora was already beating some h.264 encoders out there (no, not x.264) and VP8 at very least already beats more. As far as the sourcebase goes, it raises the ceiling over Theora on how far we can improve things. Neither h.264 nor VP8 will be holding still.
...but once I have a clearer picture of the answer to B, I'll still fess up ;-) Chances are the answer is 'about the same', at least right now. We'll see. | |