

Monty: And where did VP8/9 go wrong? - zmk
http://xiphmont.livejournal.com/61927.html?thread=458727#t458727

======
ZeroGravitas
Interesting theory. I'd be interested in reading the multi-page version,
though possibly he'd be happier spending his time on his more constructive
educational output. But maybe two distinct voices calling for royalty-free
codecs with different strategies is better than one united front anyway.

I noticed that Brendan Eich (edit: sorry it was Robert O'Callahan
[http://lwn.net/Articles/572540/](http://lwn.net/Articles/572540/)) challenged
people recently in a comment (sorry can't recall exactly where) to name anyone
who has done more for the cause of royalty-free codecs on the web than
Mozilla.

Clearly he didn't just forget about Google (in fact I think he brought up
Chrome's H.264 support in the same comment), so he obviously thinks their
contribution doesn't measure up to Mozilla's. I'm not sure I agree.

Now Mozilla's done all sorts of good stuff (hiring many of the Xiph team is
just the latest in a long list) but I think the big corporate moves of Google
with Android, WebRTC, Hangouts, Youtube, buying VP8 etc. which might add up to
literal billions in investment in royalty free codecs are probably going to
have more impact overall.

Google's obviously pissed a lot of folk off along the way, but I'd say that's
more a measure of their success than failure.

Obviously I'm not privy to the conversations that Mozilla and Xiph are having
with various industry participants but from the outside, probably mostly due
to leverage from Android, Google has basically everyone (Qualcomm, Samsung,
nVidia, Intel etc.) on board with VP8/9 now with the exception of Nokia, Apple
and Microsoft (who, not coincidentally, were the exact same group that killed
Theora as a lowest-common-denominator fallback video in the W3C--because our
cute cat videos and educational animations are so much better as gifs--as well
as being the three companies most threatened by Android). I don't see failing
to convince them as a PR failure, quite the opposite I'd consider convincing
them some kind of miracle.

On the subject of Apple, Microsoft and Nokia, have any of those three publicly
committed to using Opus? I mean Microsoft helped build it (via their Skype
purchase) but as far as I'm aware there's nothing but ominous silence. Monty
seems hopeful but not certain, which doesn't fill me with confidence.

It's particularly relevant as WebRTC just failed to name an MTI video codec
mostly because "people might ignore that part of the standard" yet, as far as
I'm aware there's no clarity that the aforementioned will even implement
WebRTC itself, never mind support Opus.

They're all still happily ignoring Xiph's Flac, many years later, so there's
plenty of precedent for ignoring widely used and popular free codecs long
after any patent bogeyman fades from view.

~~~
zmk
SILK was designed to be open from the start - both standard and code sense.
Even Opus was quite far alogn before Microsoft appeared in the scene. So
Microsoft did not have chance to affect the process.

Fun link: [http://www.microsoft-careers.com/key/OPUS-codec-
jobs.html](http://www.microsoft-careers.com/key/OPUS-codec-jobs.html) lists 2
Patent Analyst jobs :)

~~~
ZeroGravitas
Well, they have a chance to affect the process if they simply don't implement
it in WebRTC (or simply don't bother to implement WebRTC). And even if they do
that, they can decide not to implement it in HTML5 web audio or their phones
and just generally not support it whenever they feel it's not strategic for
them to do so.

I think they use speex in Xbox live (and WebGL in IE) so it's not impossible
that they'll make use of it, but who can predict what these corporations are
up to.

[http://www.microsoft-careers.com/job/Redmond-PATENT-
ANALYST-...](http://www.microsoft-careers.com/job/Redmond-PATENT-ANALYST-Job-
WA-98052/25220800/)

As well as the general scariness of that job listing, I enjoyed the
juxtaposition of the last item in the list of requirements:

 _" 10+ year’s work experience and/or research in at least one of the
following technical areas. This experience can be education, work experience,
or a combination of the two, but must be at a technologically deep level.
Experience working with multimedia in the devices and services space is a
plus, as is knowledge of media services exposed by cloud computing systems.
Ideally, an understanding of the current state of the technology in use by all
major players in the industry.

Audio and/or Video Codecs: Information theory and data compression. Strong
knowledge of at least one current high definition video codec such as
H.264/HEVC, VP8/9 or audio codec such as Vorbis, Opus, Siren. Deep
understanding or direct experience implementing multimedia data compression
and decompression algorithms.

Speech: Statistically-based trained and untrained speech recognition systems,
ideally with modern conversational understanding systems. Strong technical
understanding of deep neural networks or hidden Markov models and the
underlying science behind them. Speech recognition engines, speech-enabled
applications, or speech recognition services/APIs exposed by cloud computing
systems.

Image processing: All aspects of image processing from acquisition and
compression to processing and error/image correction.

Streaming media. Experience with development of the technologies underlying
playlists, trick play, time shifting, media player. Conferencing systems
including speaking person recognition,

A degree in computer science, computer or electrical engineering or physics or
significant work experience in software or hardware development

Experience in patent analysis and/or supporting patent licensing activities is
desirable but not required

Strong communication and presentation skills, with the ability to explain
complex situations to diverse audiences

Demonstrated outstanding written and verbal communication

Demonstrated advanced knowledge of Excel, proficiency in PowerPoint"_

I wonder if Powerpoint proficiency will be a deal-breaker.

~~~
zmk
This is indeed scary.

It's hard to imagine a person with all those skills and who prefers to grind
patents instead of doing something productive.

------
ZeroGravitas
Related, Monty getting righteous on behalf of VP8 during the Q&A on WebRTC
MTI, calling out blatantly anti-competitive moves on behalf of the patent
cartels:

[http://recordings.conf.meetecho.com/Recordings/watch.jsp?rec...](http://recordings.conf.meetecho.com/Recordings/watch.jsp?recording=IETF88_RTCWEB_II&chapter=part_9)

~~~
zmk
I think there is one quite simple aspect that both Monty and reporting around
WebRTC misses in general: there are actors involved who fear WebRTC itself,
because well-working WebRTC will hurt their business. The "war" of VPx vs.
h264 is just a tool to postpone working WebRTC.

The quite obvious name is Microsoft (with Skype and Nokia). Apple and Cisco
also seem to benefit from stalled standard. Google is only one that has would
benefit. Mozilla perhaps too, but Mozilla is just a browser, with no weight in
the matter.

