> I do not recognise the sides in the battle quite like you have stated them. > Whilst its true that Apple were the first to really start pushing h.264, and > are the most likely not to allow other formats on their mobile devices, many > other important players in this game support h.264. Microsoft already showed > their hand - they are supporting H.264 in IE9. They already support it in > Silverlight and the XBox360, and I believe Windows Phone 7 devices will be > able to play it. > It really will be interesting to see what happens with browsers, Google will > certainly make Chrome attractive by presumably supporting all 3 of the > formats we are talking about, some others may follow suite as a result, or if > h.264 dominates html5 video on the web then Firefox may end up having to do a > workaround to provide support too, such as relying on the OS or a plugin to > do the job. > Flash is a big winner so long as there is html5 video codec mess in the > browser arena. This is another reason I dont want the <battle to be too > complex & prolonged.
If Google's VP8 codec forces H264 to remain free...then that's a huge win right there. The minute that H264 decides to start charging any site that uses their codec...people could just switch over to VP8. I think Flash is being forced to open up as well....and continue to innovate. It's also important for video tools as well. Be great to build a video editor (legally) without having to pay fees to use the core technology. Jay -- http://ryanishungry.com http://twitter.com/jaydedman 917 371 6790
