VVenC 1.11 Brings More Performance Improvements For H.266/VVC Encoding

[Chugworth]

Stick? Pretty much no one on Phoronix has ever encoded a single frame in AV1. Who are preaching to exactly?

Actual video codec related people are on doom9 where I'm also quite active and vocal. And those people won't ask you what to use. They have rational considerations, not bigotry and hatred.

I'm astonished people even leave comments under this news piece. What's the point? I get it, for you only AV1 exists, a codec you had zero say in development and which was forced on you. What a time to be alive! Move on, this patent encumbered crap is only used for benchmarking. You don't have to smell or touch it.

I have actually done lots of encoding with AV1. I have done many frame-by-frame comparisons to tune my encoding settings for maximum space savings with minimum detail loss. The space savings that AV1 delivers can be pretty massive, especially on videos where the camera is mostly stationary. I'll agree, in my last post the phrase "stick with" was not the best choice since AV1 has not been widely adopted yet. Change "stick with" to "adopt".

Also, I think it is a rational decision to pick a codec based on the license type. Even if one is better technically, the license type can hinder your ability to use it. It's like picking a sports car with square wheels.

[avis]

Also, I think it is a rational decision to pick a codec based on the license type. Even if one is better technically, the license type can hinder your ability to use it. It's like picking a sports car with square wheels.

For end users there's nothing rational about that. The codec licensing situation is a concern for businesses only and only those businesses which have certain obligations in regard to codecs. There are many clauses for MPEG codecs which allow you as a company to use them completely for free.

[Chugworth]

The codec licensing situation is a concern for businesses only

On Linux, how to I get Firefox to play H.265 files?

[avis]

On Linux, how to I get Firefox to play H.265 files?

Ask Mozilla, not me. I use mpv/ffplay for that.

They are fine with supporting H.264 though which is not free yet.

[Toggleton]

Ask Mozilla, not me. I use mpv/ffplay for that.

They are fine with supporting H.264 though which is not free yet.

Firefox has a Cisco licence that they share so video conferences work.

Cisco provides this program under the terms of the BSD license.
Additionally, this binary is licensed under Cisco’s AVC/H.264 Patent Portfolio License from MPEG LA, at no cost to you, provided that the requirements and conditions shown below in the AVC/H.264 Patent Portfolio sections are met.
As with all AVC/H.264 codecs, you may also obtain your own patent license from MPEG LA or from the individual patent owners, or proceed at your own risk. Your rights from Cisco under the BSD license are not affected by this choice.
For more information on the OpenH264 binary licensing, please see the OpenH264 FAQ found at http://www.openh264.org/faq.html#binary
A corresponding source code to this binary program is available under the same BSD terms, which can be found at http://www.openh264.org

And we have the problem that some big linux distributions are scared of the licensing clauses of MPEG codecs that they drop support for it and people need to use third party Repositories for it. Not great user experience when videoplayback does not work out of the box

[avis]

Firefox has a Cisco licence that they share so video conferences work.

And we have the problem that some big linux distributions are scared of the licensing clauses of MPEG codecs that they drop support for it and people need to use third party Repositories for it. Not great user experience when videoplayback does not work out of the box

gmpopenh264 in Firefox is only for WebRTC. For H.264 playback it uses system APIs (ffmpeg in Linux). And it's implemented and works. They could have implemented H.265 support the same way. They decided not to.

And here's a funny thing: pretty much everyone now is entitled to H.265 support because they have HW which is licensed for H.265, that includes your GPU, iGPU or mobile SoC. But still Linux lawyers have decided not to support it for some reasons.

[Toggleton]

gmpopenh264 in Firefox is only for WebRTC. For H.264 playback it uses system APIs (ffmpeg in Linux). And it's implemented and works. They could have implemented H.265 support the same way. They decided not to.

And here's a funny thing: pretty much everyone now is entitled to H.265 support because they have HW which is licensed for H.265, that includes your GPU, iGPU or mobile SoC. But still Linux lawyers have decided not to support it for some reasons.

but your source just states that it was not implemented in openh264 back then.

Note: Firefox currently uses OpenH264 only for WebRTC and not for the <video> tag, because OpenH264 does not yet support the high profile format frequently used for streaming video. We will reconsider this once support has been added.

I trust a Lawyer more about the patent and licencing world than a random phoronix user.

[geerge]

I have encoded AV1, have an inactive doom9 account and eagerly await AV2. Where's the line for birdie to call me irrational for not wanting to support licensed crap and patent trolling, and will cookies be provided?

[rmfx]

Anyway it takes 10 years for a codec to be properly supported, so waiting for AV2 instead.

[daemonburrito]

I have encoded AV1, have an inactive doom9 account and eagerly await AV2. Where's the line for birdie to call me irrational for not wanting to support licensed crap and patent trolling, and will cookies be provided?

Starts here, the line for the hateful and irrational people who question software patents. On the Linux Hardware Review site.