Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 39 of 39

Thread: Google Gets Ready With VP9 Codec

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by toyotabedzrock View Post
    They have HW already for vp8. I think nvidia already built it into their mobile chips. And I'm pretty sure other chipmakers are about to ass well.
    VP8 support is specified as part of the Android Multimedia framework since Android 2.3.3.

    See Table 1. Core media format and codec support:
    http://developer.android.com/guide/a...a-formats.html

    In order to meet this Android multimedia framework requirement, most current ARM SoCs (as used in mobile devices) include hardware support for VP8:
    http://wiki.webmproject.org/hardware/arm-socs

    It is not a case of "About to", for most makers of ARM SoCs it is more a case of "already do". Qualcomm, Apple and Sony are the holdouts.

    No doubt all of those who already include VP8 support in hardware will be quick to include VP9 support as well in their newer ARM chips.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    158

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    IIRC any programmable DSP that can support H.264 can also accelerate WebM. And almost all Android devices have a DSP that can accelerate H.264.
    Almost all Android devices since Android 2.3.3 have a DSP that can also accelerate VP8.

    See under "Systems with dedicated VP8 support" on this page:
    http://wiki.webmproject.org/hardware/arm-socs
    Last edited by hal2k1; 05-13-2013 at 06:50 AM.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    714

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kivada View Post
    Now will they finally put their foot down and kill off Flash and their Pepper API? Beat H.265 to market and force all Android phone makers to support it.
    God I hope not. The PAPI Flash is the only decent flash available on Linux.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drag View Post
    God I hope not. The PAPI Flash is the only decent flash available on Linux.
    I'm pretty sure the idea was that they would make Flash obsolete as a whole, not just stop releasing Flash on Chrome.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,001

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drag View Post
    God I hope not. The PAPI Flash is the only decent flash available on Linux.
    I am just curious, but how is that so?
    I know that Adobe Flash Player via the Pepper API is at version 11.7, while the normal NPAPI version is stuck at version 11.2.

    But what really is the difference?
    What difference does it make?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Prescience500 View Post
    Prehaps not, but it will weaken MPEG LA by significantly driving down the prices that they'll be able to charge people. That means it'll hurt their ability to develop new codecs in the future because they won't have as much money to spend on it because it won't be as profitable.
    You don't understand the matter. MPEG LA is just an agency. They don't own any patents and they don't develop any codecs. Anyone who wishes to seek to license MPEG patents can just go to the actual patent holders and try to get a better deal.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    I am just curious, but how is that so?
    I know that Adobe Flash Player via the Pepper API is at version 11.7, while the normal NPAPI version is stuck at version 11.2.

    But what really is the difference?
    What difference does it make?
    11.2 supports DRM (but you need to have the ancient "hal" running)
    Pepper flash does not support DRM (on linux).

    You can watch google play movies with 11.2, but not with 11.7.

    http://support.google.com/chrome/bin...&answer=108086
    Last edited by ChrisXY; 05-13-2013 at 04:47 PM.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,058

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pdffs View Post
    Let me know when libvpx encode performance isn't absolutely pathetic. I was hoping to use HTML5 video for a realtime streaming application, but the MP4 container is a piece of crap and can't be stream encoded, and libvpx performance is so bad that maxing an IVB i7 results in blocky unwatchable crap with a realtime deadline. Until they fix performance, flash is sadly still the only option for on-the-fly encodes, and libx264 is still absolutely light years ahead in terms of performance and output quality per CPU cycle.
    You obviously don't know what you're doing. You certainly can do mp4 file streaming. Move the metadata to the front of the file and it will stream happily. qt-faststart is one utility that can do it for you. (qt and mp4 are pretty much the same).

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droidhacker View Post
    You obviously don't know what you're doing. You certainly can do mp4 file streaming. Move the metadata to the front of the file and it will stream happily. qt-faststart is one utility that can do it for you. (qt and mp4 are pretty much the same).
    You obviously don't read properly - I said it can't be stream encoded, and was quite clear that I was doing realtime encoding. MP4 can not be encoded as a stream, it can only be converted to work with streaming after the entire encode is complete.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •