> Was it all but dead because people thought h264 was good enough, until 2.5 and 4k became more prominent in media consumption? (Lack of) a compelling use case

> Was it all but dead because people thought h264 was good enough, until 2.5 and 4k became more prominent in media consumption? (Lack of) a compelling use case certainly played a role. Sure, reducing bandwidth is in itself a noble (and potentially profitable) goal but why fix it if it ain't broken? Ie.: the h264 infrastructure for HD was already there, working fine. Another factor was that HEVC was full of new patents and the patent pool licensing costs hadn't yet settled.