[yaur]

Note that OpenH264 is terrible and probably isn't viable for anything besides video conferencing and/or screen sharing.

A couple of things from their github issues: It's much slower than x.264[1]

It only supports baseline profile and the developers aren't that interested in going beyond that[2]

IIRC this quality was lower than x.264 even when set to baseline profile... I'll see if I can dig up some statistics.

[1]https://github.com/cisco/openh264/issues/2067 [2]https://github.com/cisco/openh264/issues/1844

[TD-Linux]

You are right, it's not a good idea for anything other than video conferencing because of being Baseline only. I don't think that makes it "terrible" - WebRTC is only video conferencing.

That said, both Firefox and Chrome prefer VP8.

[acdha]

That's a pointlessly inflammatory statement, particularly in the absence of any explanation of what you're referring to. Are you referring to code quality, the fact that it currently only supports the baseline profile, etc?

[astrange]

The tuning is and will always be far worse than x264, because no commercial team will ever have the motivation to beat the years of video encoding maniacs' free time spent on it.

Plus the Cisco employees probably aren't any good at Touhou games. Presumably they're pretty good at tuning video calls though.

[TD-Linux]

x264 was and is a very good encoder for H.264, but it sounds a bit extreme to say that no one can ever beat it - real time streaming was never its primary use case. I think the real lack of motivation to improve it is because most of the interest is now in newer video formats, like VP9. Also, many of the developers of x264 were paid by the commercial licensing program, so I wouldn't say it didn't have any financial motivation.

Also, I'm proof that x264, in fact, does not have a monopoly on Touhou-playing video codec developers :)

[plorkyeran]

The commercial licensing for x264 came about well after it was largely "finished" (there's still ongoing work being done, but no major improvements since 10-bit support in 2010). The idea of maybe selling it one day never really came up when all of the work that makes x264 interesting was being done.

[acdha]

Yeah, my comment now looks a bit weird after yaur silently edit the original post to add everything after the first sentence.

I still think “terrible” is a bad choice of wording – “slow” would be an objective statement of fact and the fact that it's within a factor of 2-3 of x264 is worth knowing but hardly enough to say nobody could use it.