[RTW] [dispatch] Codec standardization (Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-alvestrand-dispatch-rtcweb-protocols-00)

[David Singer]

Heinrich,

'best' is not always IPR-cost-free.  Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.  You seem unable to see any other possibility than your own, alas.  I could wish for 'fates' for any number of technologies, but I don't: I choose them when they suit, and others when they don't.  I suggest we do the same.

I have no objection to the development and deployment of new codecs, with varying terms, quality, complexity, and so on. This is a varied market that deserves varied tools.  I do object to making decisions based on only one criterion, however.


On Dec 26, 2010, at 18:12 , Heinrich Sinnreich wrote:

>> I think we should consider the balance
>> between cost, risk, quality, and existing adoption, and it would be foolish to
>> omit cost-bearing codecs from that analysis, as H.264 is widely used already.
> 
> I am not sure where this discussion is going, though it reminds us of the
> discussions when arguing about SIP vs. H.323 in the IETF.
> "Everybody" was shipping H.323 in overwhelming quantity, but somehow the
> IETF did not buy it.
> 
> As an hopeless optimist; maybe H.264 will have the same fate since at least
> it's considerable IP baggage is so well known...
> 
> It is hard to imagine the IETF and indeed the market will ignore the
> creativity of all the codec developers out there and the evolving technology
> that empowers them. Plain self interest should motivate embracing new
> IP-free a/v codecs for the RTC Web. They will arrive anyway one way or
> another. 
> 
> [Well deployed technology has a proven way to make it over the threshold
> into history :-)] 
> 

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.