4 ms·
In the last Theora/H.264 thread on HN, I recall somebody saying that VP8 was better than H.264... when VP8 was new, and H.264 encoders were still largely experi
by thristian 17y ago
In the last Theora/H.264 thread on HN, I recall somebody saying that VP8 was better than H.264... when VP8 was new, and H.264 encoders were still largely experimental. Nowdays, things like x264 and commercial codecs shipped with QuickTime are better than VP8.
There's an interesting post about the problems with VP8 posted by an x264 developer here: http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=292 http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=292
- ZeroGravitas 17y agoActually that author/developer usually specifically calls out Apple's Quicktime as a very poor H.264 implementation, so if he says VP8 will be nearly as good as the second best H.264 implementation then he's saying that it will be much better than Apple's. That probably applies to Adobe's encoder and in fact the vast majority of commercial H.264 encoders. Considering he's an x264 developer that article is very positive about the quality of the VP codecs. The stuff he's down on e.g. it being proprietary, licence fees, patents, big name corporate approval, mobile support, buggy encoder are all stuff people expect Google to fix quite easily (well apart from patents).