Tumblr 101: Tips And Tricks To Get Started
WATCH: Shredding On The Google Guitar!
Google backs Theora for mobile devices in the HTML5 video codec wars
The battle for HTML5 video codec supremacy just got even more interesting, with Google officially praising the "patent-free, royalty-free" Theora codec, and endorsing it for mobile use in particular. Theora is locked in a battle with H.264, which you may recognize as Apple's preferred codec for use with the HTML5 video tag. Thus far, Theora's biggest backer has been Mozilla, which included Theora support in Firefox either because it's so open or because Mozilla didn't want to pay the H.264 licensing fees, depending on who you ask. With Firefox as its only ally amongst the major browsers, Theora looked to be at a big disadvantage, but the Big G's endorsement should give it a boost.
This doesn't mean Theora will be popping up in Google Chrome all of a sudden. So far, Google has just backed Theorarm, an OGG Theora/OGG Vorbis decoding library built for the ARM processors that run Google's Android devices. Could Google put its full muscle behind Theora on the desktop? We'll have to wait and see as this video codec soap opera unfolds.
[via OSNews]
Comments
13
Subscribe to commentsHMMasterApr 10th 2010 9:55AM
But YouTube HTML5 only support h264 (as of now).
RichardApr 10th 2010 12:30PM
umm... Chrome already has ogg support built in.
Jay HathawayApr 10th 2010 2:09PM
It does, but it also supports H.264, and (as the previous commenter noted) YouTube still uses H.264 for its HTML5 mode.
Hugh Isaacs IIApr 10th 2010 2:24PM
@Jay Hathaway
That still has nothing to do with the fact that Theora is in Google Chrome.
EvenioApr 10th 2010 2:41PM
This is precisely what's meant by the expression, "cutting off one's nose to spite one's face".
cmsb55Apr 10th 2010 3:43PM
This is an example of when open source doesn't necessarily beat more closed standards. Tests have shown that H.264 is more efficient and simply better for this type of task. License fees don't have to paid for several years either so companies really don't have an excuse atm.
SilverWaveApr 10th 2010 9:19PM
"excuse" is not correct.
Not falling into the trap is correct.
Of course the license is free atm!
They have to build the user base up before exacting the toll.
King AntoniusApr 11th 2010 3:21AM
And wma is better than mp3. My point being that the "best" is not always the best choice.
Mark ProvanApr 10th 2010 6:05PM
And this is the same OGG/Theora that would use all of the bandwidth on the entire internet if YouTube used it?
hazardApr 11th 2010 8:18AM
So how does that compute? If you encode at the same bit rate with different codecs you more or less end up with the same size file. Real compression efficiencies are encoder specific not codec specific. H.264 can [in theory] give comparable to better image quality at lower bit rates than it's H.263 brethren, but the measures are very subjective at best and I'm yet to see a comprehensive example where this difference is shown to be significant and more importantly easily achievable.
Erik AndersenApr 16th 2010 5:57PM
That seems to be a false rumor:
http://people.xiph.org/~greg/video/ytcompare/comparison.html
It looks like theora is comparable or equal at higher bit rates and better than h.264 at lower bit rates.
SilverWaveApr 10th 2010 9:24PM
>"Theora support in Firefox either because it's so open or because Mozilla didn't want to pay the H.264 licensing fees, depending on who you ask. "
Nope!
Ask anyone, Mozilla didn't want to pay the H.264.
Why would they pay for a closed codec? Its against their principles and common sense!
Also Google have a plan.
They have bought up a lot of companies in this space lately...
It will be interesting to so it play out.
war59312Apr 11th 2010 12:29AM
Let's hope it's fully supported by all major browsers sooner than later.