H.265 requires getting a license from at least 2 patent pools[0], and who knows how many other patents are out there waiting to get sued over. If you want a new cross platform video codec, check out AV1.[1] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Video_Coding#P... [1] https://aomedia.org/av1/
The licenses have already been paid for the hardware implementation, that doesn't explain, eg, Chrome's refusal to leverage hardware decoding (and stop burning so much power on laptops).
Ask HN: Why does nobody support h.265/HEVC anymore?
71–80 of 170 posts
Re: Ask HN: Why does nobody support h.265/HEVC anymore?
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should Free software advocates need to "do better" than to argue from literal first principles? Fourier could call his transform a "process" all he wants, but that does not make it patentable. So yes, "oh, math."
These files have carefully constructed format though. To read and write the patented format goes beyond patenting math. I think cmrdporcupine was getting at something.
Yep, it's not like I think the patent is just. I think software patents are mostly junk. But saying "because it's math" is highly uninformative.
Re: Ask HN: Why does nobody support h.265/HEVC anymore?
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
The licenses have already been paid for the hardware implementation, that doesn't explain, eg, Chrome's refusal to leverage hardware decoding (and stop burning so much power on laptops).
I don't buy the patent argument. AV1 is not unique, it would not be hard to find some similarities in the math and argue infringement of one of tens of thousands of patents these companies sit on. The companies simply don't want to upset the largest tech companies, though apple already buys from them.
The AOM foundation has spent millions on legal reviews. There is always a chance of something slipping through, but that could happpen with any technology. Someone unknown company could come forward with a claim that h.265 infringes on a patent.
Re: Ask HN: Why does nobody support h.265/HEVC anymore?
#74HEVC has a long and complicated history. With H.264, it was easy - one patent pool. Any questions? Contact MPEG LA. How much did it cost? About $2 or so per device, no problem. Did you spend more than (IIRC) $14 million on licensing each year? It's free past that point. As for open-source software like Firefox, Cisco actually struck a deal to pay all the royalties if you used their OpenH264 decoder (they needed H.264…
> The only real place H.265 lives on …
Surely Apple devices count as a real place? I expect there are a lot more iDevices than 4K Blu-Ray players.
Re: Ask HN: Why does nobody support h.265/HEVC anymore?
#75Re: Ask HN: Why does nobody support h.265/HEVC anymore?
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, is a video codec really just "math"? There's a binary payload description and algorithms involved for applying said math as well. I'm no expert in the field, so I'm actually asking in good faith here...
Here is a list of the essential patents from the main pool: https://www.mpegla.com/wp-content/uploads/hevc-att1.pdf Find a single US patent that "claims" maths as GP argued. It doesn't exist.
I picked first US patent listed (US 7,292,636), and it's first claim says
> 1. For a bitstream comprising a first video picture, a second video picture, and a third video picture, a method of decoding comprising: computing a particular value that is based on (i) a first order difference value between an order value for the third video picture and an order value for the first video picture, and (ii) a second order difference value between an order value for the second video picture and the order value for the first video picture; computing a particular motion vector for the second video picture based on the particular value and a motion vector for the third video picture; and decoding at least one video picture by using the computed motion vector.
That certainly sounds like math to me.
Re: Ask HN: Why does nobody support h.265/HEVC anymore?
#77Because the US endorses the concept of "essential patents," meaning you need to pay a licensing fee to be lawfully allowed to perform the math that transforms data into A/V content. Never to mention the two blatant issues with this, being: 1) video codecs are the exemplary "we'll patent math and there's nothing you can do about it" scam, since that's literally all a video codec is 2) a process being "essential" to a…
Software patents should not be a thing... but the US neoliberalism fucked it up for everyone.
Re: Ask HN: Why does nobody support h.265/HEVC anymore?
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
This explains why browsers do not include their own software decoder, but they should not need a license to use the decoders provided by the host platform.
- Neither Linux nor Windows provide one, due to licensing costs - Most browsers do not deem it worth the risk of relying on host software decoders, as the plug&play infrastructure behind them usually translates into "nobody feels responsible for patching anything" which translates into incalculable vulnerabilities That leaves MacOS (why bother when Safari exists), iOS (dito), and Android (why bother when Android user…
Microsoft provides a separate h265 codec you can buy in the Microsoft store: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/p/uitbreidingen-voor-hevc-vi...
Some hardware comes with the codec pre-purchased (my laptop does). I don't think I've ever heard of anyone buying a codec in the MS Store, though.
I think most Android phones come with HEVC support. Mine did, anyway; I suppose it's up to the vendor to choose if they want to support it. Apps like VLC will also play the codec just fine. My camera app even records in h.265. This is a phone from Xiaomi, which not exactly known for their great software packages and compatibility.
I'm pretty sure Safari already supports h.265 because Apple switched to HEIF pictures while the rest of the world still just uses JPEGs for everything, and HEIF is pretty close to a single h.265 frame packaged as a picture. Not even Apple would be so foolish to switch default formats on their mobile devices and not support it across their software products.
Browsers don't feel like paying license fees over downloads of their free products and I can't blame them. Mozilla's h.264 decoder is only published along with it because Cisco had reached the license fee cap (which doesn't exist for h.265) and they decided to use their license so that Firefox can play videos freely.
I think Apple and physical disks formats are the only players heavily invested in h.265 right now. AV1 hardware decoding support is slowly coming along, so soon enough everyone can just use AV1 and be free of the proprietary patent bullcrap.
Re: Ask HN: Why does nobody support h.265/HEVC anymore?
#79AV1.
Re: Ask HN: Why does nobody support h.265/HEVC anymore?
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stupid question but… why?
1. The software patent examination process is pretty broken - a lot of companies try to patent everything without regard to is it obvious or innovative so if they get sued for patent violations they can counter sue; the patent examiners for whatever reason (law, lack of expertise, lack of staffing) keep approving patents for software that is obvious not-innovate normal state of the art things) then all of a sudden pe…
> the patent examiners for whatever reason (law, lack of expertise, lack of staffing) keep approving patents
Relative works for over 10 years as patent examiner, now a team manager, for EU: they are ordered to approve as many patents as possible. Having more patents is considered progress and innovation, more patents approved is a KPI. Unless they are ridiculous or illegal, they have to approve it and it is the job of people that are affected to fight to cancel the patents.