3 ms·
No guarantee, but the same team was successful at getting Opus (audio codec) adopted as MTI for WebRTC. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/84/slides/slides-84-rtcw
by graue 13y ago
No guarantee, but the same team was successful at getting Opus (audio codec) adopted as MTI for WebRTC. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/84/slides/slides-84-rtcweb-6.pdf http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/84/slides/slides-84-rtcweb-6...
On a purely technical level, Opus' performance blew the pants off the other options, which surely helped. If Daala can repeat that performance I think they have a good chance.
- cromwellian 13y agoWell, the fact that Skype and Cisco were already onboard and using it helped a bit and that audio codecs don't have the kind of deployment challenge that displacing H264 does. Surely, the argument is going to come around in 2015 or whenever Daala ships that H264/H265 hardware is too widely deployed on billions of mobile devices to justify a new codec. Does Cisco really want to WebRTC to succeed when it clearly commodifies their WebEx offering? The question is, what are they getting by ensuring H264 is MTI? What Mozilla and Google were going to get out of VP8 winning was pretty clear. So one has to ask what their motivation is for spending so much money to keep H264 as MTI.