Live data from Hacker News

Google added HEVC support in Chrome

bitmovin.com

101–110 of 225 posts

Re: Google added HEVC support in Chrome

#101

Why do pirates prefer hevc over AV1? I assume they don’t care about intellectual property so I assume it comes down to technical quality of the algorithms? Maybe they have moved to av1 and I just don’t know it. Either way the quality of the piracy scene has always seemed vastly better than legitimate channels, up until Netflix.

Some discussion on this question 2.5 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19362098

Re: Google added HEVC support in Chrome

#102
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It forces anyone who wants to decrypt (or encrypt) to write a full MP4 parser MP4 is seriously one of the easiest binary formats to parse, and even if you couldn't use an existing parser it would probably be the simplest part of whatever you were actually building.

> it would probably be the simplest part of whatever you were actually building Unless you've written a Widevine client, downloaded from DASH, parsed MP4, decrypted MP4 samples, then reassembled the decrypted fragments, then you're really not in a position to be making this claim. I have done all the above, and the MP4 parsing was by far the most difficult part of the process, and that includes parsing Protocol Buffe…

I haven't done anything with Widevine , but I have written multiple BMFF parsers, and I'm intimately familiar with how many different boxes/atoms there are. Luckily you can implement them incrementally because the box hierarchy is so normalized.

It's actually my go-to project when I'm trying to learn a new language, because the problem itself is simple enough to understand, but it forces you to learn the idioms about the language you're learning. What is the idiomatic way to represent different box types? How do you read values with specific endianness from a buffer? How do you seek through a file's contents without loading the whole 10GB movie into memory?

Re: Google added HEVC support in Chrome

#103
post #98
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There may be more than one person posting on HN.

While true, I think it was illustrating the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" approach HN takes to Google in general.

> HN takes to Google in general

Not exclusive to HN. Humans just have different opinions.

Re: Google added HEVC support in Chrome

#104
post #55
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you tried to encode anything with av1? Even with a high end CPU it's just not feasible, I tried with ffmpeg and it was encoding a single digit fps per seconds. A video of just 10min would take many hours, on the other end h265 encoding is slow but doable. Edit: just retried on my laptop: 0.6fps with a 11th Gen Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-1135G7 @ 2.40GHz Using the lastest version of ffmpeg with the sample from the wiki:…

For what it's worth, Intel & Netflix's AV1 encoder SVT-AV1 is extremely fast -- it changed my mind about what encoder rates are possible with AV1, to the point that I'm very happy with realtime CPU encoding.

> Netflix's AV1 encoder SVT-AV1 is extremely fast

https://netflixtechblog.com/svt-av1-an-open-source-av1-encod...

Re: Google added HEVC support in Chrome

#105
post #85
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ironic, not one week ago there were a bunch of complaints on this site saying that Google was abusing their position of power (controlling YouTube, Chrome, Android TV, etc) by pushing AV1. Now they bring HEVC support to Chrome and the top comment is another complaint! (That said, I agree with you. I think a codec being royalty free is a very good reason to prefer it to other codecs.)

There may be more than one person posting on HN.

wait, what? Are you sure that's true?

I think maybe you're responding sarcastically to yourself while eating this burrito.

Re: Google added HEVC support in Chrome

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Because HEVC has hardware support, right now, so it's faster. Most new hardware supports hardware decode for AV1 too. There were 1-2 generations prior to the current one that had HECV but not AV1, but that sample size will become irrelevant over time. >People don't much. Well, clearly people who make decisions do. If you ask an average person on the street if they care about HEVC or AV1, they don't. If you ask Netfl…

PS5, XBox One, Chromecast, iPhone, iPad, AppleTV support HEVC but not AV1. And they represent a significant proportion of video consumption devices.

> PS5, XBox One

From https://netflixtechblog.com/bringing-av1-streaming-to-netfli...:

"Netflix has also partnered with YouTube to develop an open-source solution for an AV1 decoder on game consoles that utilizes the additional power of GPUs."

Re: Google added HEVC support in Chrome

#107
post #99
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope that AV1 doesn't get the same treatment as Opus though: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33158475 Royalty-free matters less when it turns out these bad actors can punish people for it. It's a little worrying frankly.

It already exists https://www.sisvel.com/licensing-programs/audio-and-video-co...

Oh "great". Software patents were such a mistake.

Re: Google added HEVC support in Chrome

#108
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> HEVC with Widevine DRM is not supported This isn't true at all. True, HEVC doesn't support Box level encryption like MP4 does, but nothing is stopping anyone from just AES encrypting an entire fragment, as has been used for years with HLSe. The fact that MP4 uses box level encryption is one of the stupidest tech-related things I have ever seen. It forces anyone who wants to decrypt (or encrypt) to write a full MP4…

That's an interesting perspective. Some corrections are in order. MP4 encryption, specifically Common Encryption addition to ISO BMFF has two levels of partial encryption. - Each frame's media bytes are encrypted independently of other frames. MP4 boxes themselves are not encrypted. This is done so that applications can parse container metadata such as codec params and timestamps without depending on the secure decry…

I don't buy these rationalizations at all. As was previously said, HLSe has been using fragment level encryption for many years, with AVC and MP4, so we know its possible. This is not theoretical. https://paramountplus.com and https://cbc.ca and others use HLSe on some streams currently. You don't need box level encryption, and requiring it just add pointless MP4 parsing and overhead.

Re: Google added HEVC support in Chrome

#109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There hasn't been a successful lawsuit yet Why would it come to a lawsuit ? Companies would simply just pay the royalty. That's how it has been for previous codecs.

Previous codes have been designed and sold as patented codecs. AV1 is meant to be royalty free by design. The claimants of the alleged patents can ask for money, but eventually somebody will refuse due to the very explicit royalty-free promise in AV1, and there should be a lawsuit. We have not seen that yet. As a practical matter, even if people are paying money silently, it would get on the grapevine. We haven't eve…

Even if creator said it's royalty free!, it's not guaranteed that there are no patent violation.

Re: Google added HEVC support in Chrome

#110
post #80

Why do pirates prefer hevc over AV1? I assume they don’t care about intellectual property so I assume it comes down to technical quality of the algorithms? Maybe they have moved to av1 and I just don’t know it. Either way the quality of the piracy scene has always seemed vastly better than legitimate channels, up until Netflix.

It comes down to the fact that HEVC is supported by more devices. 1080p and lower resolution versions of pirated movies still come in H264, because that is supported by even more devices...

This is it. Lots of poeple use stuff like Plex, on devices that will handle QHD HEVC but not QHD AV1. Not to speak of every other device...
Post reply on HN