61–70 of 435 posts
It will be first adopted by pirates for sure
Largely due to the CPU over head of H265, though I am not sure why more people do not use GPU encoding over CPU Encoding, I have never been able to notice the difference visually
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's what AV1 is.
https://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?Art... Care to try your luck?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, because the market is more than happy to pay a few cents or dollars per device to get better compression and lower transmission bandwidth. This observation has held true consistently in the 3 decades since compressed digital media was invented.
The market is rather unhappy. E.g. Win10 doesn't ship an H265 codec because it's too expensive.
It's interesting that they are able to continue improving video compression. You'd think that it would have all been figured out by now. Is this continued improvement related to the improvement of technology? Or just coincidental? Like, why couldn't have H.266 been invented 30 years ago? Is it because the computers back in the day wouldn't have been fast enough to realistically use it? Do we have algorithms today tha…
Compared to 30 years ago, we now have better knowledge and statistics about what low level primitives are useful in a codec.
E.g. jpeg operates on fixed 8×8 blocks independently, which makes it less efficient for very large images than a codec with variable block size. But variable block size adds overhead for very small images.
An other reason can be common hardware. As hardware evolves, different hardware accelerated encoding/decoding techniques become feasible that gets folded into the new standards.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The dirty secret of video codecs is that you can't make a modern video codec that isn't patent encumbered, which in turn makes it so that even if they wanted to be open, they go for defensive patents, which in turn perpetuate the situation. At least the patent licenses usually used with MPEG mean that private use of open source implementations is free.
> The dirty secret of video codecs is that you can't make a modern video codec that isn't patent encumbered Why is that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The dirty secret of video codecs is that you can't make a modern video codec that isn't patent encumbered, which in turn makes it so that even if they wanted to be open, they go for defensive patents, which in turn perpetuate the situation. At least the patent licenses usually used with MPEG mean that private use of open source implementations is free.
> The dirty secret of video codecs is that you can't make a modern video codec that isn't patent encumbered Why is that?
Now compound this by the fact that a) trying to make an exhaustive patent search to get a verifiable claim that you don't infringe on any patent is very problematic b) known patent pools like MPEG-LA are known not to cover everything.
So you can make a reasonable bet that you avoid infringing patents by avoiding patents from MPEG-LA and few other better known groups, but you can't actually guarantee that you're not infringing on any patents.
This resolves, sort of, into a game of chicken and depends heavily on whether a lesser known patent holder decides it's worth it to bother executing against you... but even if they don't, unless they come out with a royalty-free license, the possibility of patent is a Damocles' Sword hanging over your codec.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does x264 etc get away with it?
They are compliant with MPEG patent licenses - they distribute source code you have to compile yourself and for non-commercial use. If you build x264 or other open source implementation of h.264/h.265, and embed it for example in commercial video conferencing software/appliance, you have to pay patent licensing fees for that product . It's also why Firefox downloads a blob from Cisco to handle MPEG-4 video - Cisco co…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The dirty secret of video codecs is that you can't make a modern video codec that isn't patent encumbered, which in turn makes it so that even if they wanted to be open, they go for defensive patents, which in turn perpetuate the situation. At least the patent licenses usually used with MPEG mean that private use of open source implementations is free.
> The dirty secret of video codecs is that you can't make a modern video codec that isn't patent encumbered Why is that?
The way to get around this is to exist in the EU and avoid providing anything to the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The dirty secret of video codecs is that you can't make a modern video codec that isn't patent encumbered, which in turn makes it so that even if they wanted to be open, they go for defensive patents, which in turn perpetuate the situation. At least the patent licenses usually used with MPEG mean that private use of open source implementations is free.
> The dirty secret of video codecs is that you can't make a modern video codec that isn't patent encumbered Why is that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, because the market is more than happy to pay a few cents or dollars per device to get better compression and lower transmission bandwidth. This observation has held true consistently in the 3 decades since compressed digital media was invented.
The constantly growing list of H265 patent pool organizations with various licensing plans made even Apple to join AV1 bandwagon.