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

[Stephen Botzko]

I'm with Bernard and David on this one.

This is different from the audio case, as hardware acceleration is much more
important for video, particularly for mobile.

Stephen Botzko

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 12:02 PM, Henry Sinnreich <henry.sinnreich at gmail.com
> wrote:

> This should mark a good progress for the discussion ending this year and we
> hopefully can all agree:
>
> > These concepts of "self interest" not necessarily align with each other,
> let
> > alone with the
> > "self interest" of users, who may primarily care about how many other
> users
> > they can connect
> > with.
>
> The interests of users must be first and foremost in mind for defining a
> standard for the default video codec.
>
> It includes not passing the cost of licensing in perpetuity along to users.
>
> Given a choice for open source and/or free video codecs such as Theora and
> VP8, the IETF has several good options to choose from, also defining of a
> video codec from ground up.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Henry
>
>
> On 12/30/10 12:09 AM, "Bernard Aboba" <bernard_aboba at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > For video codecs, "self interest" may be influenced by a number of
> factors.
> >
> > For example, for a mobile applications developer, "self interest" may
> focus
> > on
> > aspects such as performance, battery life and maintenance costs.  If a
> given
> > codec is
> > supported in the hardware or operating system of their target platform,
> then
> > the developer
> > may perceive it being low "cost" to them.
> >
> > For a chipset manufacturer, "self interest" may be determined by the
> demand
> > for chipsets
> > incorporating a given codec, as well as the associated licensing fees.
> > Typically the goal
> > is to maximize revenue minus cost, not just to minimize "cost".
> >
> > These concepts of "self interest" not necessarily align with each other,
> let
> > alone with the
> > "self interest" of users, who may primarily care about how many other
> users
> > they can connect
> > with.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: rtc-web-bounces at alvestrand.no [mailto:
> rtc-web-bounces at alvestrand.no]
> > On Behalf Of David Singer
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 8:08 PM
> > To: Heinrich Sinnreich
> > Cc: rtc-web at alvestrand.no; dispatch at ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: [RTW] [dispatch] Codec standardization (Re: Fwd: New Version
> > Notification for draft-alvestrand-dispatch-rtcweb-protocols-00)
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > RTC-Web mailing list
> > RTC-Web at alvestrand.no
> > http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtc-web
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/rtc-web/attachments/20101230/8935e957/attachment-0001.html>