Slashdot Mirror
New Open Video Codec From Xiph/On2
xercist writes: "Xiph.org, the bringers of the mighty Vorbis codec, have done it again. The patents on On2's VP3 video codec have been effectively neutered, and it is being released under the BSD license for all to enjoy. The combination of VP3 video and Vorbis audio (in an OGG bitstream, of course) will be called Theora, and will soon take over the world. The ETA to a 1.0 release is approximately one year. You can also read an interview with Emmett Plant (Xiph CEO) here. The official press release will be up tomorrow, so don't complain about lack of mention on xiph.org just yet."
It's an uphill battle, that's for sure, and the DivX team is sure to come up with new features in a year. But does this open codec have a chance to overtake DivX? This could be another mp3/ogg debate, but more choices in video codecs is always better.
... do you "neuter" a patent?
Does anyone know how vp3 compares to other codecs that are already here or emerging, namely MPEG3 and DivX? Ogg is obviously making headway in the technical area of being the best lossy audio codec, and if vp3 can do the same, then hopefully this will give Free Software an edge in the media areas.
One problem here though; I suggest someone adapt the VP3 code to a GPL license, ortherwise Microsoft, Apple, or any other company could simply take VP3 and make it Free Software's worst enemy by not releasing specs on the derivative audio codec. Observe: we are just now beginning to see Sorenson codecs that are open source.
Xiph needs to realise they don't know how to name things. A good name is part of marketting. It doesn't matter if you and all your geek buddies can talk about Ogg Vorbis without feeling akward if all the other kids think it sounds like Klingon. Is it any surprise DivX is so widely used when the name was basically stolen off a product that had commercial marketting?
VP3 is a great name. Most people can even imagine what it stands for - video mp3 - which they would be very comfortable talking about. Why change it?
If it's GPL'd, the above isn't possible. However, it's also much more difficult to incorporate unhacked VP3 support into their players and encoders, because they have to write their own code rather than just using the available library. That is bad, because we (the free software using community) *want* them to add VP3 support to their proprietary players. Let me repeat that - VP3 support in proprietary software is a good thing.
Why, you may ask? Because if it is available in the software that everybody uses (which, sadly, at this point is still proprietary software), it might become a de facto standard, become the standard format web video clips, for instance, are encoded in, and thus free software users are no longer second-class citizens when it comes to video codecs. Additionally, it makes the ultimate migration of Windows users over to free desktops that much easier.
I believe even RMS has agreed, on occasion, that the BSD license can be appropriate if it helps free file formats become the standard.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo
--Andy Finkel (J. Klass?)
Porn sites' choices of video codecs are based more on installed base and ease of use than technical merit or licensing costs (remember, a decent porn site is profitable and can afford to spend money to make money). Far better to pay for a solution that your clients will be able to use than try to get away with a free solution that will do nothing but cause support headaches and (the bane of adult sites) chargebacks from dissatisfied customers.
Anything that involves a download and/or installation is bad news. People don't trust downloads from porn sites (though, to the best of my knowledge, there's never been a case where a porn site used a download for nefarious purposes). Beyond that, as we all know, some percentage of installations fail for one reason or another. If you have to supply even a link to a third party download, people will blame you if it doesn't work.
For these reasons, Windows Media is clearly winning the battle for porn site content, measured by new clips produced.
Real probably still has an overall lead in clips available for legacy reasons, but nobody is producing new porn in Real format. It comes back to support and chargebacks: Real tries so hard to trick people into the "free 14 day trial, $9.95/month" player that it generates no end of customer support headaches ("You said if I paid $29.95 a month I'd get free video... and now I have to pay another $9.95 a month for the player! You bastard porn sites are all the same! Lying, cheating scum! Why can't you operate like normal, ethical businesses?").
Not that I'd know anything about that industry.
Cheers
-b
So I take it they gave up on Tarkin then?
FWIW there's a (getting old) codec comparison on Doom9 (http://www.doom9.org/codecs2.htm#test1). VP3 comes out *really* badly.
Dave
I write a blog now, you should be afraid.
But video codec standardization is moving at a snails pace and still decreasing in speed.
Hmm. I wondered about this, and found this on the dev list.
From what I read the substanitve reason seems to be potential IPR problems (Apple's clause is vague, but worrying), rather than technical issues.
hth
Slashdot looked deep within my soul and assigned
me a number based on the order in which I joined
Open Source's strength is in making commodity software, the software people actually *need* and *care about*, free and open... part of the infrastructure of democracy if you will. There was no truly free audio before Vorbis, because only about six users in the world had computers that could play decent audio in 1993 (when the work on Ogg began). And by decent, I don't mean FM synth or mono 22kHz.
Similarly, there was no need for Open Source video until now because... no one used computer video in any great numbers until now. Yes, yes, Quicktime has been around for a while. I'm personally not excited about the 80x60 black and white 4 frames per second stuff from 1990, and neither is anyone else.
Real and Apple pushed proprietary standards at a time when it was not at all clear that many people cared about 'multimedia', and those that did could afford to shell out big money, or buy into a single vendor. That time is quickly passing. I use both audio and video on my own boxen every day, and Mom in Ohio is likely only a few years behind me on that front, so it's time to get ready.
(Nor was Quicktime 'first', you've simply forgotten its predecessors. That has nothing to do with my point above.)
Monty
xiph.org