[whatwg] H.264-in-<video> vs plugin APIs
cdibona at gmail.com
Sun Jun 14 05:11:23 PDT 2009
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.
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.
> 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:
> 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.
> 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
More information about the whatwg