6 ms·
I'm hoping future Apple chips have AV1 decode support as well. If Intel, Google, Qualcomm, and Apple all add AV1 support in hardware, it would become the gold s
by BluSyn 5y ago
I'm hoping future Apple chips have AV1 decode support as well. If Intel, Google, Qualcomm, and Apple all add AV1 support in hardware, it would become the gold standard as far as codecs go. Right now it's all a mixed bag.
- ChuckNorris89 5y agoConsidering Apple's love for proprietary everything and their large market share, I wouldn't be surprised to see them roll out their own codec in SW and HW, same how they developed Metal instead of using the open Vulkan.
- threeseed 5y agoa) Apple has always been an active part of the MPEG standards group for decades so not sure why they would roll their own. b) CoreGraphics and CoreAnimation are underpinned by Metal. If you were building an OS that was going to be used by every device you make (computer, phone, tablet, monitor, watch, TV streamer, headset) would you rely on an open source project that you don't control and may have different values, wishes, roadmap etc than you.
- jhasse 5y agoyes
- throw0101a 5y ago> If you were building an OS that was going to be used by every device you make […] would you rely on an open source project that you don't control and may have different values, wishes, roadmap etc than you. Apple's XNU kernel is a derivation of open source OSFMK and FreeBSD kernels, and Apple's Darwin has large components of FreeBSD userland. They use (se)L4 for running their Secure Enclave. I remember in the early days of MacOS where entries from the FreeBSD release notes would appears as word-for-word copies in the Apple ones.
- mhh__ 5y agoYou could still open source the work afterwards.
- ______-_-______ 5y agoApple participated in many of the OpenGL working groups for decades, but they still rolled out Metal.
- threeseed 5y agoOpenGL is not a low-level graphics API.
- ______-_-______ 5y agoSure, and MPEG isn't AV1. Apple was welcome to hop onboard Vulkan. My point is: Apple's involvement with OpenGL for decades didn't mean they wouldn't abandon it and roll their own. Apple's involvement with MPEG for decades doesn't mean they won't abandon it and roll their own.
- kalleboo 5y agoApple wouldn’t do their own video codec, they’d adopt VVC[0], which is what looks like what will become the standard for non-web video (e.g. DVB over the air broadcasts in Europe) [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Versatile_Video_Coding https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Versatile_Video_Coding
- trissylegs 5y agoAlthough apple is a founding member of AOMedia so they might be on board with AV1 https://aomedia.org/membership/members/ https://aomedia.org/membership/members/
- chockchocschoir 5y agoNot sure why that would matter. Apple is currently a "Promoter Member" of Khronos Group (the non-profit consortium behind Vulkan) but still did their own thing with Metal instead of going with Vulkan.
- rched 5y agoVulcan did not exist when Apple shipped Metal. If it had I think there is a good chance they would have adopted it but we'll never know for sure.
- bla3 5y agoIsn't Apple ProRes exactly this? (I don't know codes well, this is an honest question.)
- larkost 5y agoNo. ProRes is designed to be a good compression scheme for editing. That means it has to be designed in a way that make jumping to arbitrary frames and scrubbing very fast, as well as it needs to focus very hard on near-elimination of compression artifacts. In comparison compression systems designed for playback, like AV1, can have more occasional key-frames (points that you can easily jump to, then work your way to other frames), and it is more ok to have compression artifacts, especially ones that are just going to look like motion blurs when played back. So the compromises between features and size of the output stream are different.
- bla3 5y agoCodecs, not codes.
- rched 5y agoI don't think the Vulcan/Metal comparison is useful here. Metal shipped before Vulcan so it was never an option for Apple. The case of AV1 is different.
- stingraycharles 5y agoOut of curiosity, what is the big difference of AV1 vs h264 and HEVC / x265 ? As someone who mainly cares about blu-ray / large movies, I was under the impression that HEVC was becoming the gold standard. Is that not the case, and/or is AV1 the next iteration, and/or do they solve different problems?
- LeoPanthera 5y agoThe only significant difference is patents and licensing. In terms of actual compression, HEVC has slightly better efficiency. AV1 is supposedly a "free" format, but I wouldn't bet my business on it. The patent situation is unclear. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AV1#Patent_claims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AV1#Patent_claims
- dvdkon 5y agoThere are just so many patents on things both specific and vague, that you can't ever be sure you're not infringing on some. As far as I know, all serious companies using HEVC pay to licence relevant patents, while the big players using AV1 don't. If I was building a business than had a choice of codec, I'd rather bet on AV1. Worst case, you get dragged into a legal battle, but so do Youtube and Netflix.
- threeseed 5y ago> Worst case, you get dragged into a legal battle, but so do Youtube and Netflix Except that's not how legal cases work. Just because all three of you infringe doesn't mean lawsuits will result for all three. It's quite likely they would allow Youtube and Netflix to continue infringing to promote the growth and adoption of the codec whilst they go after smaller players who won't be able to put up a fight.
- tcptomato 5y agoSorry, but what you say doesn't make any sense. You think that YouTube and Netflix will just sit by as precedent is decided next to them? And the right owners having already won in court would just ignore the biggest "offenders"?
- jug 5y agoI unfortunately expect, given tradition, that the next move for Apple will be to H.266 / VVC in hardware, not AV1. VVC was finalized in 2020 and there is some influence backing it already where although DVB will evaluate AV1, they've already hopped on VVC.