3 ms·
In the web, with a lot of youtube-like sized videos, the quality of Theora is more than sufficient. Also, for vacation videos and the like, Theora provides a re
by vog 17y ago
In the web, with a lot of youtube-like sized videos, the quality of Theora is more than sufficient. Also, for vacation videos and the like, Theora provides a reasonably good quality.
In other words: Theora is already good enough for the "masses". It's not the technological inferiority of Theora that hinders its wide adoption.
I think it's that people use H.264 for everything and don't care about the licence and the alternatives. The only way to change that is to either (a) raise awareness of the legal issues with H.264 or (b) support Theora in every browser to make it the next video standard in the web. Then, sooner or later the "masses" will follow.
The article works on the former, although it's important to work on the latter, too.
- GHFigs 17y agoTheora is already good enough for the "masses". So it's acceptable to deliver a product you know to be inferior to someone because their content isn't important enough to you? Would you not be insulted if someone said they didn't think your home movies were worth encoding with the best available technology?
- ZeroGravitas 17y agoThat'll be why your vacation photos are in the lossless but patent encumbered JPEG-2000 format, rather than the less efficient, but patent royalty free JPEG?