

Requests for comment: MP4 Video - mmcclure
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/MP4_Video

======
TullamoreDude
Ok I will be the one nagging here.MP4 you usaually refer to the
Containerformat specified in MPEG-4 Part 12 and Part 14.My prof was so strict
about that MP4 is not a videoformat, I still have nigthmares from the MP4
analysis... (There is a Box in a Box in a Box and you have to describe each
and every property). Sorry for the inconvenience

------
Pxtl
tl;dr: because iOS.

~~~
DCKing
Safari and Internet Explorer only support H.264. Chrome, Android browser and
Firefox support H.264 (FF on Linux & Windows IIRC).

H.264 doesn't just get to iOS devices. It's the only way to make sure your web
video shows on ~98% of _all_ devices.

~~~
diminish
a question; on all the platforms you cited, you may switch to the right
browser to see open video formats. i'm curious on ios, can you do it? (i mean
chrome and other browsers on ios can they run non-h264 codecs?)

~~~
0x0
There is a VLC for iOS, but if you want efficient hardware accelerated video
playback (which you do on a battery powered device), you'll have to settle for
mp4 and the built-in CoreMedia framework. As a bonus it will also play
seamlessly in the system browser and any apps with a native UIWebView
component.

~~~
diminish
So coming to my question, since vlc isn't a browser, on iOS it is impossible
to support a browser which can play web videos using non-proprietary formats
as it appears. Sad.

------
wilg
I think this is a fantastic idea for Wikipedia. There have been tons of times
I've wanted to watch a video or listen to an audio recording on Wikipedia,
only to have it completely fail to work correctly on my device.

To me, it couldn't be more of a win-win: increased access and prominence of
video content on Wikipedia, but everything is also available or mastered in an
unencumbered format.

I just don't see how offering an alternative format makes Wikipedia "less
free" like the majority of editors seem to believe.

------
sheng
Why not webm?

~~~
acdha
You might find the lengthy discussion in the linked article answers your
question.

To summarize: 1\. Millions of visitors can't view WebM 2\. Most of the video
created today is H.264

~~~
sheng
thanks for the tl;dr summary, I may give the full discussion a try.

------
mtw
a bit late, vendors are now working on implementing the next version h.265
(better quality, much smaller size)

~~~
FooBarWidget
H265 has a smaller adoption base than even WebM. If we're talking about that
league anyway, then maybe Daala is competitive. They claim that it is better
than H265.

~~~
anon1385
Daala is years away from being usable, never mind achieving widespread
adoption. It is not competing with H265, it's competing with whatever comes
after H265.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
Different codecs are on different timelines, but unless H.266 comes much
faster than previous iterations, then Daala will be competing with H.265.

