Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What's Cooking For Mesa & X.Org This Summer?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by yotambien View Post
    H264? At this point wouldn't vp8 make more sense? Or am I missing something?
    There are many similarities in modern high-end codecs, and much of the code can probably be reused.

    For better or worse, H264 is what most people use at the moment, so it's a good starting point.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by deanjo View Post
      Just the fact that availability of h264 encoded content dwarfs VP8 content.
      That, and that Google themselves already have a handpicked team working full time on VP8, it's hardly a project in need of coders. And given that VP8, despite being fully open and royalty free, is not really a 'community project', I'd say there are much better summer of code targets out there.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by XorEaxEax View Post
        That, and that Google themselves already have a handpicked team working full time on VP8, it's hardly a project in need of coders. And given that VP8, despite being fully open and royalty free, is not really a 'community project', I'd say there are much better summer of code targets out there.
        Ya, there is that as well. I also think there is a bit of hesitation of committing too much to VP8 until this MPEGLA challenge is settled.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by deanjo View Post
          Ya, there is that as well. I also think there is a bit of hesitation of committing too much to VP8 until this MPEGLA challenge is settled.
          What MPEGLA challenge? You mean MPEGLA pleading that anyone with patents in regards to VP8 would contact them?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by XorEaxEax View Post
            What MPEGLA challenge? You mean MPEGLA pleading that anyone with patents in regards to VP8 would contact them?
            Yup especially when Google isn't offering any kind of protection for adopters. Given the short span that MPEGLA has given for patent holders to come forward I think a lot of would be adopters are in a holding pattern until that all plays out. To invest heavily in VP8 right now with the outcome unknown wouldn't be a wise choice.

            Comment


            • #36
              Well, MPEGLA doesn't offer any protection to any of their licencees (as in those actually paying money to use the technology) so it's not as if you'd expect that Google would do this when they aren't even charging anyone anything to use their tech.

              MPEGLA's attempt at an attack on VP8 is nothing but a continuation of them trying to corner the video codec market, and VP8 is particularly dangerous to them since it's free and aimed at the web, which is something even all MPEGLA members have realised is where the future lie.

              I'd say that this desperate move of trying to borrow patents from someone else in regards to VP8 shows how well Google actually examined the patent situation before they released VP8, since MPEGLA already has tons of video codec related patents under their umbrella and still they are pleading for outside help.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by XorEaxEax View Post
                Well, MPEGLA doesn't offer any protection to any of their licencees (as in those actually paying money to use the technology) so it's not as if you'd expect that Google would do this when they aren't even charging anyone anything to use their tech.
                True however h264 has been around for a long time now with nobody challenging their ip. If there is a patent by someone outside the MPEGLA they are usually brought into the group.

                MPEGLA's attempt at an attack on VP8 is nothing but a continuation of them trying to corner the video codec market, and VP8 is particularly dangerous to them since it's free and aimed at the web, which is something even all MPEGLA members have realised is where the future lie.
                That might be true however motivations as to why they are perusing it really doesn't have anything to do with the end result.

                I'd say that this desperate move of trying to borrow patents from someone else in regards to VP8 shows how well Google actually examined the patent situation before they released VP8, since MPEGLA already has tons of video codec related patents under their umbrella and still they are pleading for outside help.
                I wouldn't necessarily say they are trying to borrow patents from others to make their case but more of a case is that they want to stand as a unified front and bring others into the fold for sure if they have a legitimate claim. The more claims against VP8 the easier it comes to see its demise. One way or another it will clear the air which is better then the typical sword rattling that goes on with software patents. This could also backfire on the MPEGLA now that the Department of Justice is investigating as well.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                  True however h264 has been around for a long time now with nobody challenging their ip.
                  VP8 has been around just as long as h264 has, and no one has challenged it's IP yet either. Well aside from a plea to do so from the mpeg-la which has yet to show any results as far as we know.

                  Given that VP8 and h264 are so similar in many ways, wouldn't it make sense that any submarine patents against one would likely hold against the other as well? Then the only difference is that prices for h264 and VP8 would both go up, but going from free -> charging something would be much worse that a slight price increase for h264.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                    VP8 has been around just as long as h264 has
                    Hardly, the first intial release of VP8 was 2010-05-19, h264 standard dates back to 2003.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
                      XvMC (MPEG2) for r600g is basically already done (Michael König), right?

                      I would say that it is exactly the right time to look at expanding this to more complex codecs and more modern APIs.
                      I believe that Younes Manton was the original developer of the XvMC/Gallium code via his GSoC project in ?2008?. I have no idea if Michael König used this code or not, but it did exist as prior art.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                        Hardly, the first intial release of VP8 was 2010-05-19, h264 standard dates back to 2003.
                        VP8 was around for a long time before google released the source code. And they were competing against mpeg-la, which made a little noise a few times about how it must be violating some of their patents.

                        For that matter, VP8 didn't bring very much that wasn't already present in VP7 before that. VP8 was mostly a simplification/optimization update to that codec.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by smitty3268 View Post
                          VP8 was around for a long time before google released the source code. And they were competing against mpeg-la, which made a little noise a few times about how it must be violating some of their patents.
                          VP8 in any form was never released to the public until Google acquired it. The last released codec from On2 was VP7. When the h264 spec was released On2's "New" codec was vp6 in October of 2003.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X