On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 10:50:57AM +0300, Yaniv Kaul wrote: > We could throw many more into the thread. > When comparing video encodings, we must take into account: > - speed of encoding (many of the encoders are not fast enough for > real time, they may decode fast, but we need fast encoding too) > - quality (and how to measure it - see > http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/archives/472 ) > - features, flexibility, license, active development community, ... > > This is really not an easy task and there's probably not a > one-fit-all solution to it. Here's an example for some comparison - > http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/archives/102 > > Also, just a thought - say we do Flash pass-through (from guest to > client), have we solved perhaps solved 90% of the problem in > real-world usage?
How would you propose to do this? write flash plugins for major (ie, ff, chrome) browsers? (well, chrome can take ff plugins I think, so down to two) and fake a proxy for the real plugin on the client? > Y. > > On 06/23/2011 09:13 AM, Attila Sukosd wrote: > >How about WebM? > >http://www.webmproject.org/ > > > >Sounds like it could be useful :) > > > >Best Regards, > >Attila Sukosd > > > >----------------------------------------- > >DTU Computing Center - www.cc.dtu.dk > >att...@cc.dtu.dk, gba...@student.dtu.dk, s070...@student.dtu.dk > > > > > > > > > >On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 1:58 AM, John A. Sullivan III > ><jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com> wrote: > >>On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 23:49 +0200, Alon Levy wrote: > >>>On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 03:44:40PM -0400, John A. Sullivan III wrote: > >>>>On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 17:01 +0200, Alon Levy wrote: > >>>>>On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 09:56:28AM -0400, John A. Sullivan III wrote: > >>>>>>On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 11:27 +0200, Alon Levy wrote: > >>>>>>><snip>> Thank you very much for the explanation. It's pretty much > >>>>>>>what I > >>>>>>>>expected - that the codec is different, trading CPU efficiency for > >>>>>>>>bandwidth inefficiency and I certainly understand the reasons why. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Is there any thought or plan to make the codec configurable for those > >>>>>>>>who are willing to sacrifice CPU for bandwidth, e.g., VP8, Theora, or > >>>>>>>>H.264? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>I haven't done any testing on this but I think the cpu requirements > >>>>>>>are large. > >>>>>>>maybe with hardware doing the encoding this would work well enough. > >>>>>>>Technically > >>>>>>>just dropping in a different codec and extending the protocol doesn't > >>>>>>>sound like > >>>>>>>a lot of work. Patches welcome? > >>>>>><snip> > >>>>>>I wish I had the skill set to help in that way! Thanks - John > >>>>>> > >>>>>Would you be able to provide some benchmarks (choose some pc you have) > >>>>>for: > >>>>> encoding speed of > >>>>> VP8, Theora, H.264 > >>>>> for various bitdepths and resolutions (you choose, maybe just one - > >>>>> take the resolutions > >>>>> of a normal youtube window and a fullscreen of your choice). > >>>>>? > >>>>> > >>>>>Alon > >>>>> > >>>>I would be delighted to do so if it will help. I don't have a clue how > >>>>to. If you have a link or reference you can point me to, that would be > >>>>appreciated. Otherwise, it will be off to the world of Internet > >>>>research. Thanks - John > >>>It's been pointed to me off list that my suggestion was very inaccurate, > >>>and that perhaps > >>>we have other considerations, like prefering an open (source, no patents) > >>>codec like > >>>Theora even if it is worse then H.264 / VP8. Yaniv gave a link to an > >>>already old but > >>>interesting comparison: http://keyj.emphy.de/video-encoder-comparison/ > >>> > >>I believe H.264 is heavily patent encumbered even though free but I also > >>thought that VP8 was now not patent encumbered and as readily usable as > >>theora. It would seem to be the ideal candidate if using it as a real > >>time codec is feasible. Again, I'm way out of my depth and merely > >>spewing a couple of hours of Internet research. Thanks - John > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Spice-devel mailing list > >>Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > >>http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel > >> > >_______________________________________________ > >Spice-devel mailing list > >Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > >http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel > > _______________________________________________ > Spice-devel mailing list > Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel _______________________________________________ Spice-devel mailing list Spice-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/spice-devel
