The Ambiguity of "Open" and VP8 Vs. H.264

An anonymous reader writes "With all the talk about WebM and H.264, how the move might be a step backwards for openness, and Google's intention to add 'plugins' for IE9 and Safari to support WebM, this article attempts to clear misconceptions about the VP8 and H.264 codecs and how browsers render video. Firefox, Opera and Google rely on their own media frameworks to decode video, whereas IE9 and Safari will hand over video processing to the operating system (Windows Media Player or QuickTime), the need for the web to establish a baseline codec for encoding videos, and how the Flash player is proprietary, but implementation and usage remain royalty free."

Comments

kapach

[kapach]

:) http://forum-x.myartsonline.com/ Forum Online pharmacy

Re:Wow this is a bit onesided.

[Kalriath]

Oh get over yourself. The OOXML standard is at most as indecipherable as ODF (which is equally impossible to implement 100% - even the flagship product OO.o doesn't do it right). The fact that you don't like OOXML (and you would be hard pressed to find anyone that does - especially anyone who's had to write for it) doesn't make it not open.

The ISO still plays an important role in defining standards, and I'm pretty sure that they - and the rest of the world - don't give a shit that you don't think they mean anything.