Microsoft: H.264 in HTML5 about support, not cash

updated 03:30 pm EDT, Mon May 3, 2010

MS says H264 video too ubiquitous to ignore


Microsoft backed up its choice of H.264 for HTML5 video today by casting it as a matter of supporting the audience. The video codec provides "great certainty" as gives developers the most possible support: most mobile hardware supports it and most software tools recognize it, the company said. It further gives Microsoft a clearer idea of what license rights it has and who it might have to pay.

The company's Dean Hachamovitch didn't want to discuss legal problems in depth but supported Apple's Steve Jobs in warning about Ogg Theora's possible patent issues. Being open-source doesn't automatically clear a technology for use, he said.

Hachamovitch was quick to defuse allegations that Microsoft as a member of the MPEG-LA H.264 group was profiting from steering users to the video format. The company receives "less than half" the money in royalties than it puts in to get the rights for device users, he said. Home users can also legally put up their own videos for free until 2016, and Microsoft is allegedly pressing MPEG-LA to extend the free rights past that point.

Other video formats are a possibility, but only once their legal issues have been cleared up. Internet Explorer 9 will still only officially support H.264 over HTML5 but will still support other plugins, including for Flash and Silverlight.

The executive's comments largely echo those of Jobs, who argued for technical reasons to use HTML5 and denied any pseudo-political reasons other than following a truly universal web standard. All iPad, iPhone and iPod hardware recognizes H.264 natively and runs for longer on battery than if they had to turn to the main processor.


By Electronista Staff

Other Articles

toggle

Previous Comments

  1. Bobfozz

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Jul 2008

    +4

    The cynics

    No matter what Jobs or MS says, those who believe companies shouldn't make any money will always offer the concept of "someone is making money off of this!" So.... wouldn't you if you were in their place or are you already a failed business person?

    Due to the internet, a force we didn't have before, "lies and misdeeds" will quickly come to haunt you. But what about those prognosticators and people who have absolutely NO evidence of anything being amiss, why don't they get tortured?

    Lots of these people siding with Adobe in the current conflict do not know that Adobe has a vested interest in Flash as they sell Flash programming tools, and even once in a blue moon update them although it seems to make little difference. I suggest that the Adobe head and those who are giving away Android phones come clean and tell us of what their interests are since they are not hardware manufacturers. Even most of the Flash developers know Flash has problems as do those of us who use the web.


  1. Jonathan-Tanya

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Oct 2004

    -4

    Home users cannot post their own videos?

    That's the worst idea for a standard I've ever heard of... we are supposed to be mollified that it doesn't go into effect until 2016, as if we are some kind of teenager that thinks the future will never arrive?

    One thing I know, is years pass....so in 2016, they hope to have turned the internet upside down, such that home users have to pay to upload the family video.

    Uhm, no way, no chance.... I'm completely against this insane idea, and I hope Google and Mozilla, who apparently have some clear thinkers amongst their ranks, win this fight.


  1. Jonathan-Tanya

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Oct 2004

    -2

    @Bobfozz

    For some reason you are casting this as "making money" vs. "free"

    Actually, both Google and Microsoft are very large, profit making enterprises.

    Google's profit model is such that, however, it allows for, even encourages the free upload of video's.

    Microsoft has a different model.

    It's not about preventing a company from making money, more about which model is more in tune with what made the internet great. Having to whip out your checkbook before you upload Timmy's B-day party...well let me put this without emotion - it's an obstacle. Those types of obstacles thwart the adoption of the internet as an insanely great networked tool.

    You write your checks to your hero's in big business, OK. But the model I like better, is Google's...no question about it. And I don't begrudge them their incredible profits - not for one moment.


  1. Makosuke

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Aug 2001

    +2

    Battery Life. Period

    To those against h.264, how many chipsets support the decoding of Theora or VP8 in hardware?

    That's right, zero.

    Now how many support h.264 decoding in hardware?

    The chipset in nearly every smartphone, netbook, and a whole lot of laptop and desktop computers as well.

    Until there is hardware support for a video codec on a smartphone playback of high-quality video is either prohibitively expensive from a battery life standpoint, or downright impossible due to lack of CPU grunt. The ONLY modern codec supported on current or even immediate next-gen devices is h.264.

    Which means that it will be a bare minimum of a year, probably much longer, before anything is going to support Theora or VP8 decoding on a cellphone in a practical way even assuming chipmakers were to start working on hardware decoders NOW--which there's no indication they are. Therefore, h.264 wins for now. Period. There is literally no other option at this point.

    And keep in mind, also, that the majority of Flash video today IS encoded as h.264. So if there's anybody who was against Apple's side of both the Flash and HTML5 video debates (maybe not), you're contradicting yourself.


  1. Jonathan-Tanya

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Oct 2004

    -4

    Education about Codecs

    Codecs are merely compression algorithms, that allow someone to express what is essentially, by its nature an analog video stream, in a digital way.

    The 'hardware' that accelerates compression algorithms is certainly not specific to H.264 - it takes a fundamental misundestanding of how computers work to think that it could be. Compression can be accelerated by a co-processor, and can work with a variety of codecs.

    Secondly the reason Steve Jobs lied and said "all codes are covered by patents" is because it set up his points quite nicely. However, in reality patents only last 20 years, and the Indeo and Cinepak patents were issued in the 1980's: you do the math.

    Secondly, when someone invents a new compression algorithm and chooses not to apply for a patent on it, or just released it to the public domain: thats completely legal to. There are most certainly codecs not covered by patent.

    So that leads to the specifics, what exactly is the MPEG LA group accussing someone or the other of, in regards to in terms of a patent violation?

    We may never know the answer to that, because its could very well be that issuing the FUD, is their entire purpose and they have no underlying patent violation. They have certainly never given a patent #, now have they.

    If you have a violation, state the patent #. Until then, shut up.


  1. iphonerulez

    Fresh-Faced Recruit

    Joined: Nov 2008

    -2

    It's always a conspiracy to some whenever

    a company prefers using one type of technology over another. Nothing is ever taken at face value. I know that there are valid reasons to dig deeply but there isn't always a hidden agenda. Steve Jobs takes the time to explain, but it's still suspected he has a hidden agenda and is using his points as a coverup for some nefarious deeds. At least with Microsoft agreeing to some points, then it should give Steve Jobs and Apple more credibility. Microsoft is keeping all bases covered with Flash and Silverlight.

    I still don't see why Apple is taking the heat of not supporting Flash. Why should outside parties except for developers and Apple mobile device users even care? I think that everyone should keep quiet and wait until Adobe actually delivers a decently working Flash solution for mobile devices. I'm skeptical about them doing that on anything below a 1 GHz processor unless Flash supports some other form of hardware acceleration.


Login Here

Not a member of the MacNN forums? Register now for free.

 
close
Photo
toggle

Network Headlines

toggle

Most Popular

10 Most Read

Recent Reviews

iHome iW2 AirPlay speaker

iHome generally isn't known as a luxury brand when it comes to audio, but it is prolific -- the company's docks and speakers are every ...

Logitech Ultrathin Keyboard Cover

One of the iPad's main weaknesses has always been productivity. It's not a question of apps; while it has taken a little time for a na ...

Logitech UE Air Speaker

If maybe a little more slowly than Apple would like, AirPlay is becoming a staple of the wireless speaker market for iOS devices. The ...

toggle

Most Commented

10 Most Discussed

 
toggle

Popular News