Google Discontinues On2 Flix Engine Video Encoder

trawg writes "Google have recently discontinued sales of the Flix Engine, the last remnants of the purchase of On2 that they were selling directly to users. On2, developers of the VP8 video codec that formed the basis of their new WebM video format, was bought by Google early in 2010. The Flix Engine was a comprehensive API for Windows and Linux that allowed integration of On2 encoders directly into any software product. While you can still buy some On2 products from another company, it's not clear what effect this will have on Google's ultimate video strategy."

Comments

Watch this, large tech companies

[a Flatbed Darkly]

However large/successful/influential a company is, one must always take into account whether or not the product in question is actually necessary. Codecs are a flooded market.

Re:Watch this, large tech companies

[Opportunist]

Yes, but WHY are codecs a flooded market? Because every maker of some kind of crappy hardware thinks it's a spiffy idea to create its own proprietary format(s) that only their own products may used and can be compatible with, in an attempt to lock-in potential customers.

It's especially damaging to market transparency when it's done by makers of hardware. You can already see it happen where certain (cheap) video equipment can only export what you record with it in a "special" format so only the "special" software from the maker can work with it and only the "special" DVD player from them could play a DVD made with it.

It's not that we need fewer formats. What we'd really need is fewer of those lock-in formats that serve no purpose but to force people to buy overpriced, unnecessary hardware because they have no choice.

Re:Watch this, large tech companies

[sirsnork]

FInal Cut Pro comes with an Apple encoder and thats the default format it saves in. Unfortunatly you can't get he codec (even for decoding) seperately from FCP, so the only way to read a Final Cut Movie without it being reencoded is by buying FCP.. and thats Mac only.... Apple don't even release the decode codec for the Apple platform. I discovered this a little while ago and was reminded just how much lock in Apple goes for.

Re:Watch this, large tech companies

[jo_ham]

Apple's codec is not necessarily the default - you get to choose what format you want your timeline to use, and what format you want an export to use (either self contained or reference).

Back when I was doing it professionally, we were using sony's xdcam HD format right in fcp, since we were shooting on HD xdcam gear. We also had a small group of Sony z1's that shot in HDV for little projects.

We never used apple's pro res codec, and were never forced to. If you want fcp to work in a heterogeneous editing environment then it is easy to do from a format perspective - it supports many common professional formats, as well as its own prores codec, that you do not have to use if you don't want. Even if you somehow don't pay attention and get stuck with something in that format you can use compressor to convert it into something else. Just take the generation loss as a penalty for not paying attention to what formats you were using.

Re:Watch this, large tech companies

[jo_ham]

The codec is available for both Mac and windows on apple's site. Yes, a true example of "lock in".

Re:Watch this, large tech companies

[hairyfeet]

MP4. I had the "pleasure" of helping several customers on the run up to Xmas learn how to convert videos with this proprietary app or that, because apparently little PMPs were being pushed on sale at several retailers and everyone bought them for stocking stuffers. Nearly all were just using some funky format as a wrapper to help cover the fact they were using MP4. Since IIRC the chip that decodes MP3/MP4 is actually dirt cheap but the licenses to MP4 are not these company use funky formats to try to cover up their lack of a license.

I don't know of any BSD/GPL codec that will decode on those dirt cheap MP3/MP4 chips you get on those little PMPs, and it isn't like they have enough native CPU to decode anything that it doesn't have a chip for. Meh at least they don't make you convert the music into funky formats anymore. Either the license for MP3 must be dirt cheap or nobody gives a fuck about the license anymore, because they all had built in WMV, WAV and MP3 support, followed by whatever funky format they used for MP4.

Of course the big "gotcha" with the BSD/GPL codecs is that MPEG-LA has over 2000 patents that pretty much cover everything one has to do to get video to go from a file on a medium to a picture on a screen, so unless the guys in charge of Vorbis and Theora are willing to sign a contract saying they indemnify users of their codecs (which I doubt they would) then you are no more safe than if you just used MP4 or H.264 without a license. I'd say the only reason the guys making those codecs haven't been sued already is that no major OEMs have been pushing those formats in a popular PMP. If someone like Best Buy or Walmart were to release their own branded PMP that used those formats and took off I have NO doubt the excrement would hit the bladed cooling device. As it is now MPEG-LA simply can't be bothered to raise a stink and stir up bad will over such a tiny niche.

Re:And all the FCP types use it all the time

[jo_ham]

They were dumb then. You have to specifically select prores - if you asked for something else they could easily provide it. FCP supports far more codecs than just that one.

PEBKAC error on their part I think.

Google doesn't sell many products

[Animats]

Google sells very little, other than advertising. If they sold something for money, customers would insist on support. Almost the only thing Google sells directly to customers is the Google Search Appliance, which is available as a 1U or 4U rackmount server. The low-end version, the Google Mini, is sold with no support and a two-year replacement warranty. After two years, you're supposed to replace the entire unit. Google tried selling phones directly, and that lasted only for five months of 2010.

So it's not surprising that Google would drop a commercial software product. They don't sell any.

Oh, Boris ... what strategy?

[ScrewMaster]

it's not clear what effect this will have on Google's ultimate video strategy.

For that matter, Google's ultimate video strategy is unclear, quite possibly because they don't actually have one. Google is investing big money in lots of technologies, presumably hoping that one or more of them will become the "next big thing" when advertising is no longer the cash cow for them that it is now.

Re:Good riddance

[DontLickJesus]

You, my friend, are a moron. At the time digital video equipment was in a deciding moment. I personally suggested this format to a company, and it completely changed the game for them. Their storage space increased by over 10x, while resolution stayed the same. This was a vendor of security surveillance systems, and I was fired months later. The company blossomed due to my suggestion, even dropping an in-house developed MPEG codec.

VP6 was ahead of its time. It's deserved the money. Codecs involve more than web, and their development involves very specific knowledge in both high level math and computers. It's hard work that take loads of time. They deserved the money.

PS: My wife asked me to add an appendage about sucking a certain appendage.