[whatwg] H.264-in-<video> vs plugin APIs

[Chris DiBona]

Hi greg;

I'll pass this on, it's a good post. Have you considered other kinds
of video tests as well? (something cell shaded, more movement/action,
etc...) as it stands, it's useful, with more examples, it might be
more convincing as an argument for Theora.

Chris

On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 1:15 AM, Gregory Maxwell<gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 8:00 AM, Chris DiBona<cdibona at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Comparing Daily Motion to Youtube is disingenuous. If yt were to
>> switch to theora and maintain even a semblance of the current youtube
>> quality it would take up most available bandwidth across the internet.
> [snip]
>
> I'm not sure what mixture of misinformation and hyperbole inspired
> this remark, but I believe that it is misleading and to leave it stand
> without comment would be a disservice to this working group.
>
> I have prepared a detailed response:
> http://people.xiph.org/~greg/video/ytcompare/comparison.html
>
>
> I understand that the selection and implementation of video,
> especially at the scale of YouTube, is worlds apart from such a
> simplistic comparison. But you didn't claim that Theora support would
> be inconvenient, that it would require yet-unjustified expenditure, or
> that the total cost would simply be somewhat higher than the H.264
> solution. You basically claimed that Theora on YouTube would destroy
> the internet.  I'd consider that too silly to respond to if I didn't
> know that many would take it as the literal truth.
>
> Even though I wish Google were doing more to promote open video, I
> appreciate all that it has done so far.  I hope that I'll soon be able
> to add a retraction or amendment of that claim to the list.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Greg Maxwell
>



-- 
Open Source Programs Manager, Google Inc.
Google's Open Source program can be found at http://code.google.com
Personal Weblog: http://dibona.com