Google Announces WebM Community Cross Licensing

Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Guest

Guest
WebM can go suck an egg. Congratulations Google, while the state of the art is moving on to HEVC, you are dead-set on dropping back to something on-par with XviD.

Good job.
 

ravewulf

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
394
0
18,930
I don't care which one has better licensing unless all other considerations are about equal (they aren't).

I want the best technology. and that's h.264 (specifically the x264 encoder)

VP8 is only technologically on par to h.264 baseline, and that's the pitiful profile that regular iPods (not touch) and basic mobile phones use. h.264 main and high profiles (currently used by YouTube) blow VP8 out of the water.
 

x3style

Distinguished
Jul 25, 2006
67
1
18,580
[citation][nom]ravewulf[/nom]I don't care which one has better licensing unless all other considerations are about equal (they aren't).I want the best technology. and that's h.264 (specifically the x264 encoder)VP8 is only technologically on par to h.264 baseline, and that's the pitiful profile that regular iPods (not touch) and basic mobile phones use. h.264 main and high profiles (currently used by YouTube) blow VP8 out of the water.[/citation]
Matroska is part of the initiative,matroska had heavy development in the x.264 department, and x.264 is a free to use library, don't underestimate what's happening.
 

virtualban

Distinguished
Feb 16, 2007
625
0
18,930
I am in favour of any open and royalty free, be it a few year late on development and worse than the top dog. I am positive they will catch on and surpass the 264 format in performance, quality, filesize, overhead and bandwidth needed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.