[threeseed]

I think you're confused. WebM is a container not a codec.

And either way VP9 and AV1 are simply inferior codecs to H.265 in almost every way. And as for royalty free well that's because MPEG-LA has't ever sued but they did give a royalty free license to Google for patents infringed by VP9. And since Google accepted it does indicate that AV1 is likely to also be patent encumbered.

We would all like a royalty free codec but it isn't happening anytime soon. And so failing that I would prefer to go with the codec with the best support which by far is H.265.

[_punw]

> And either way VP9 and AV1 are simply inferior codecs to H.265 in almost every way.

Source?

AV1 is already beating HEVC in compression and it's not even finalized yet: https://youtu.be/lzPaldsmJbk?t=2416

[threeseed]

VP9 versus H.265: http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/Editorial/Featured-Ar...

Also the link you posted is using x265 which as the article suggests was ranked 4th out the 6 available encoders: http://compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/hevc_2016/MSU_H...

And whilst AV1 and H.265 are pretty close in PSNR where it is inferior is in vendor support. There are TVs for example available today that natively support H.265 whereas AV1 is still in development. Not to mention all of the terrestrial broadcast providers all using H.265.

[Veratyr]

> the link you posted is using x265 which as the article suggests was ranked 4th out the 6 available encoders

The other encoders there are commercial or not publicly available as far as I can tell, so it's hard to use them as a comparison. Plus according to that PDF, the best encoder is 0.85x x265, which is about the same as AV1 in its present state in the video I linked. And again, AV1 isn't even finalized yet, so I actually find it somewhat impressive that it can already compete against these highly tuned encoders with years of development put into them.

> where it is inferior is in vendor support

Of course there's no vendor support now, the codec isn't even finalized yet. However the codec is backed by Microsoft, Google, Mozilla, Qualcomm, Intel, AMD, ARM, Broadcom, NVIDIA, Adobe, Netflix and the BBC, i.e. all but 1 of the major browser and OS vendors, every major mobile, server and desktop processor company and the 2 most widely used video streaming companies.

[threeseed]

H.265 is already in shipping hardware from Sony, LG, Samsung, Intel, AMD, ARM, Nvidia etc. As I listed above there are at least 100+ more companies supporting H.265 than AoM. Including the most important of all the broadcast standard for terrestrial TV which is still hugely popular in many countries.

Also without Apple it's over. YouTube and Netflix will be forced to support H.265 or give up on iOS/OSX users (350 million users).

[Veratyr]

> As I listed above there are at least 100+ more companies supporting H.265 than AoM.

AV1 isn't finalized yet. Of course HEVC is being shipped in more stuff, it's being shipped at all. I'm not debating this, there's no debate. At present HEVC has more support than a codec that isn't yet finished. H.264 had more support when VP9 was being developed too, that doesn't make VP9 inferior to H.264.

> broadcast standard for terrestrial TV which is still hugely popular in many countries

Broadcast TV is a different world to the web and has very different concerns.

> Also without Apple it's over. YouTube and Netflix will be forced to support H.265 or give up on iOS/OSX users (350 million users).

This is demonstrably not true as YouTube and Netflix both currently and successfully utilize VP9, which Apple doesn't support. Apple users just get the inferior H.264 codec.

The question is really whether the browser and other OS vendors are going to start supporting HEVC and given the current patent situation, that seems impossible, so we're going to end up in a fragmented world where for web streaming, most users get AV1 while Apple users and anyone else who doesn't support AV1 gets H.264.

[abritinthebay]

> AV1 isn't finalized yet.

You keep saying that as if it solves anything.

Released > Unreleased.

Is that a criticism of the format's potential? No! But it may as well not exist until it is finalized... so it can't be a competitor to a format that has been.

[amaranth]

Google's answer to this is to (currently) support VP9 and H264. iOS and Safari users just get the inferior quality video.

[NuDinNou]

> VP9 versus H.265

AV1 it's not same thing as VP9