71–80 of 435 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GPL would seem like a very weird choice -- that would mean it couldn't be put into any closed source product?
It could still serve as a reference implementation.
Naively hoped I'd read 'this will be released to the community under a GPL license' or similar. Instead found the words 'patent' and 'transparent licensing model'. I appreciate that it costs money and time to develop these algorithms, but when you're backed by multi-billion dollar "partners from industry including Apple, Ericsson, Intel, Huawei, Microsoft, Qualcomm, and Sony" perhaps they could swallow the costs? It…
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.
Edited because I didn't know that some European countries accept software patents.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just found av1 is about 20 to 30% more efficient than h265. I guess there was no reason to use patented algs, but h265 is now significantly more efficient than av1. I would still take freedom over patented software
> Just found av1 is about 20 to 30% more efficient than h265 > […] but h265 is now significantly more efficient than av1. What did you mean?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?Art... Care to try your luck?
I think that's more a case of Sisvel trying their luck. I don't think they'll be successful. The Alliance for Open Media was careful to avoid potential patent problems during AV1 development. So, unless AOMedia seriously failed in that effort, AV1 will be alright.
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…
For me, this is another pointless advance in video technology. 720p or 1080p is fantastic video resolution, especially on a mobile phone. Less than 1% of the population cares or wants higher resolution.
What new technologies are doing now is re-setting the patent expiration clock. As long as new video tech comes out every 5-10 years, HW manufacturers get to sell new chips, phone manufacturers get to sell new phones, TV manufacturers get to sell new TVs, rinse, repeat.
Naively hoped I'd read 'this will be released to the community under a GPL license' or similar. Instead found the words 'patent' and 'transparent licensing model'. I appreciate that it costs money and time to develop these algorithms, but when you're backed by multi-billion dollar "partners from industry including Apple, Ericsson, Intel, Huawei, Microsoft, Qualcomm, and Sony" perhaps they could swallow the costs? It…
Is H.265 released under a GPL-like licenses? If not, how do softwares like Handbrake use it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just found av1 is about 20 to 30% more efficient than h265. I guess there was no reason to use patented algs, but h265 is now significantly more efficient than av1. I would still take freedom over patented software
> Just found av1 is about 20 to 30% more efficient than h265 > […] but h265 is now significantly more efficient than av1. What did you mean?
that sounds great, but this is a press release with no real technical details. can anyone in the know add some context? for instance, whats the tradeoff? I assume more CPU? webrtc based video chats are all still using h264, did they not adopt 265 yet for technical or licensing reasons? what is the likelihood of broad browser support for h266 anytime soon?
This makes it great for a company like Netflix or YouTube, but less good for one-to-one and/or battery sensitive use cases like video calls. However, specialized chips help, and some mobile devices can record in HEVC in real time (mine from 2019 can). I believe current smartphones have HEVC encoding hardware, but I'm struggling to find a source for that right now.
I haven't seen the details of this new codec yet, but it's quite possible it also has a large encoding cost which will make it better suited to particular use cases, as opposed to a blanket upgrade.
[1] http://www.praim.com/en/news/advanced-protocols-h264-vs-h265...
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…
Here is a hint: > Because H.266/VVC was developed with ultra-high-resolution video content in mind, the new standard is particularly beneficial when streaming 4K or 8K videos on a flat screen TV. Compressing video is very different from gzipping a file. It's more about human perception than algorithms, really. The question is "what data can we delete without people noticing?", and it makes sense that answer is differ…