Chrome Removing Theora Support
groups.google.com
Chrome Removing Theora Support
1–10 of 116 posts
Re: Chrome Removing Theora Support
#2Firefox as well: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1860492
It's a shame Theora never "made it". The peak of its popularity is long past.
Re: Chrome Removing Theora Support
#3FTA:
"Chrome will deprecate and remove support for the Theora video codec in desktop Chrome due to emerging security risks. Theora's low (and now often incorrect) usage no longer justifies support for most users. "
Re: Chrome Removing Theora Support
#4Is there any good video codec that the library is as small or not much bigger as Theora and that has no patent/license issue?
I tried to use VP9 in the past but it's like 20-40MBs a dll. The lowest I could find was dav1d and it's still around 4MB for the library dll and encoding AV1 and getting good compression rate was not trivial.
Re: Chrome Removing Theora Support
#5FTA: "Chrome will deprecate and remove support for the Theora video codec in desktop Chrome due to emerging security risks. Theora's low (and now often incorrect) usage no longer justifies support for most users. "
So I guess, regarding a theoretical "everything in the browser" future, the swiss-army tools like VLC and ffmpeg would either have to pack their own performant codecs in wasm, or stay as desktop / CLI applications.
(Not that it would make any sense to implement ffmpeg on top of WebCodecs on top of ffmpeg. Just needed an example.)
I hope I have not completely missed the train by focusing on other areas outside of web.
Re: Chrome Removing Theora Support
#6Is there any good video codec that the library is as small or not much bigger as Theora and that has no patent/license issue? I tried to use VP9 in the past but it's like 20-40MBs a dll. The lowest I could find was dav1d and it's still around 4MB for the library dll and encoding AV1 and getting good compression rate was not trivial.
Honest question. In which scenario do you care so much about the size of the DLL , these days ?
Re: Chrome Removing Theora Support
#7Is there any good video codec that the library is as small or not much bigger as Theora and that has no patent/license issue? I tried to use VP9 in the past but it's like 20-40MBs a dll. The lowest I could find was dav1d and it's still around 4MB for the library dll and encoding AV1 and getting good compression rate was not trivial.
How big is the VP8 codec? Did you try building libvpx with --disable-vp9?
Re: Chrome Removing Theora Support
#8Is there any good video codec that the library is as small or not much bigger as Theora and that has no patent/license issue? I tried to use VP9 in the past but it's like 20-40MBs a dll. The lowest I could find was dav1d and it's still around 4MB for the library dll and encoding AV1 and getting good compression rate was not trivial.
Honest question. In which scenario do you care so much about the size of the DLL , these days ?
Maybe to encode/decode video on a Mars rover.
Re: Chrome Removing Theora Support
#9Is there any good video codec that the library is as small or not much bigger as Theora and that has no patent/license issue? I tried to use VP9 in the past but it's like 20-40MBs a dll. The lowest I could find was dav1d and it's still around 4MB for the library dll and encoding AV1 and getting good compression rate was not trivial.
This feels like an absurd ask. Who cares how big the codec is? If you watch a 480p video for 10 minutes, won't that have overwhelmingly dwarfed 20MB or whatever of savings?
This feels like a gross gross misoptimization that is actively harmful to 99.999999999% of user experiences.
Re: Chrome Removing Theora Support
#10Is there any good video codec that the library is as small or not much bigger as Theora and that has no patent/license issue? I tried to use VP9 in the past but it's like 20-40MBs a dll. The lowest I could find was dav1d and it's still around 4MB for the library dll and encoding AV1 and getting good compression rate was not trivial.
Honest question. In which scenario do you care so much about the size of the DLL , these days ?
Embedded would be my guess.