Hello, any idea if this html webm format saves mobile broadband 3G bandwidth for verizon and att and customer, and by what factor ? I have limited 3G bandwidth. Any plans to make this default in Google Chrome and Android for youtube etc ?
Good, but probably improving the player would be a more important step. It's not that great-looking and it doesn't support most of YouTube's features. In my case it's even 10 seconds slower to start, which is pretty bad.
Is YouTube doing some sort of version detection before serving WebM? I'm running a Firefox nightly and can't get the website to serve me a WebM video for love of money ... :(
First, the HTML5 Trial limits videos to 720p even if they are uploaded in 1080p.
Second, the *BUG* where 1080p videos have the lower frame removed, effectively reducing their resolution into 1920x540 is still there. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiW6mNlJHtE The black bar on the right side should have been alternating black and white horizontal stripes.
BTW: what are the criteria to make WebM default without the opt-in?
Weren't you planing on some more general WebM option akin to the current "language, location, safe mode" options rather than the &webm=1 search url extension?
I've kicked those Flash plugins from my system yet I still stumble across non-WebM videos too often on youtube. It would be great if non HTML5 videos could be filtered if you detect that no plugin is a available to display Flash.
Finally !! The sequester like situation is coming to an end.
Hope the same happens with the infamous MP3 and this one is finally dropped so to eliminate patent abuse from the virtual entities that own what others (real people) create.
No corporation should be allowed rights over people or resources. They do not create, only "manage". No patent should be sold, as only non-exclusive permissions the ideal and origins of patenting.
In a fair world, at least.
Patents were created to protect inventors. Not to the abuse against everybody as we see. And specially not to use the Law as a weapon for threat.
In a world of justice, the only reason for making laws.
It would be nice if it worked with the current firefox nightlies. The same sort of people who are most likely to be interested in webm may also want to use the bleeding edge firefox.
This is especially a concern because firefox video support is still evolving and it would be terrible if youtube broke and it wasn't noticed until a release.
It would be great if had a page for showing the progress of the conversion. Like a page that shows the percentage of the catalog that is in WebM. Something like http://youtube.com/html5/progess
Yay, a solution to a problem that does not exist. A fringe unsupported codec that works in maybe one browser and few mobile devices. You might as well support Cinepack while you're at it.
Meanwhile, in Reality every mobile device shipping supports H.264 in hardware including every Android phone and tablet.
All this hassle so GOOG can try to weasel out of paying the MPEG LA fees.
I have one problem with HTML5 option @ youtube: there is almost never 480p video quality option. This forces me to use flashplayer, because 360p is unacceptable.
Ian, quit blowing smoke out of your butt and telling me it's fog. Firefox 4 supports WebM. Chrome and Chromium have for a while. *Internet Explorer 9* and *Safari* will eventually support it via plugins. If you think that's "maybe one browser" I'd hate to see the state of your checkbook.
Want to elaborate a wee bit? Not sure what you are getting at... The HTML5 spec is viewable on the w3c site, and it does not include, nor will it include, anything outside of the markup language itself. The plan going forward is to keep Apis not directly related to markup outside of the "standard" and track them under separate working groups.
I got a simple suggestion that might improve response time: Turn off the auto-play on videos, this will cut down on wasted resources when somebody clicks a video by mistake or when they are unable to watch it immediately.
Ugh. I'll take the patented h.264 codec any day over the low quality WebM. If I see a decrease in quality with videos I upload to Youtube, I'll simply go elsewhere. This decision by Google is pointless and a waste of computing power.
Would this have anything to do with why I can't see any videos from my Safari browser today? Not at all on embeds across the tubes and can only hear the videos on your site. Seems to work fine in Firefox, but a big bubkes on Safari... and I update everything immediately....
So. Have you just done something you should have mentioned to the Safari people a little earlier? Or did my browser suddenly lose it while I slept?
If the quality degrades there will be a backlash. Might sound silly to suggest this, but when you're dealing with 480p uploads, it's conceivable the Webm re-code might be inferior. I hope they don't underestimate that danger, like the did with the recent Google Video mis-step. A lot of people have a lot of very important material on youtube in 480p. If it suddenly looks poorer, it will erode many people's otherwise pristine Google experience.
It would be nice if it formed with the accepted firefox nightlies. The aforementioned array of humans who are a lot of acceptable to be absorbed in webm may aswell wish to use the bleeding bend firefox.
WebM is first of all free and open source, which welcomes the collaboration of all the world and people who understand technology and collaboration appreciate this. H 264 is held by a few big corporations, and no John Doe is welcome to participate.(if they ask a polite question they get a f*** you in return, bad corporations...)
When I download a video from youtube to my desktop and burn it to watch on my dvd player the video comes out as big blotchy squares.How can I get the videos to play sharp and clear? Thanks Jay
Wow what a wonderful site! like it you guyz you are doing a wonderful work thanks, It is now easy to use because of the upgrade.< html5 music player,Thanks!
I have had problems with html 5 freezing using IE 9 (running Win7 HP)so it will be something I will watch for on YT. Problem of freezing does not occur with Firefox ? BUT...now buttons on YT do not work like "Share" and "Add" ??
Follow
Hello, any idea if this html webm format saves mobile broadband 3G bandwidth for verizon and att and customer, and by what factor ? I have limited 3G bandwidth. Any plans to make this default in Google Chrome and Android for youtube etc ?
ReplyDeleteThanks, Avinash
keep up the good work
ReplyDeleteGood, but probably improving the player would be a more important step. It's not that great-looking and it doesn't support most of YouTube's features. In my case it's even 10 seconds slower to start, which is pretty bad.
ReplyDeleteRight. Until Google locks it up like they did with honeycomb.
ReplyDeleteIs YouTube doing some sort of version detection before serving WebM? I'm running a Firefox nightly and can't get the website to serve me a WebM video for love of money ... :(
ReplyDeleteAwesome news!
ReplyDeleteWebM is a great format.
Thank you YouTube.
your html5 player sucks
ReplyDeletePoints for effort, NO points for execution.
ReplyDeleteFirst, the HTML5 Trial limits videos to 720p even if they are uploaded in 1080p.
Second, the *BUG* where 1080p videos have the lower frame removed, effectively reducing their resolution into 1920x540 is still there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiW6mNlJHtE
The black bar on the right side should have been alternating black and white horizontal stripes.
great job, a very welcome codec switch :)
ReplyDeleteWill you keep the Flv format available?
ReplyDeleteJust wondering: Will it ever be possible to watch WebM videos in iOS?
ReplyDeleteThank you!
ReplyDeleteBTW: what are the criteria to make WebM default without the opt-in?
Weren't you planing on some more general WebM option akin to the current "language, location, safe mode" options rather than the &webm=1 search url extension?
I've kicked those Flash plugins from my system yet I still stumble across non-WebM videos too often on youtube. It would be great if non HTML5 videos could be filtered if you detect that no plugin is a available to display Flash.
Wow.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how Google is going to respond to this screwing of all their Android users by....
wait a minute...
Is Google going to indemnify users if they have the WebM codec installed?
ReplyDeleteI hope they are using libvorbis to encode the audio, otherwise it will be a big mess-up
ReplyDeleteFinally !!
ReplyDeleteThe sequester like situation is coming to an end.
Hope the same happens with the infamous MP3 and this one is finally dropped so to eliminate patent abuse from the virtual entities that own what others (real people) create.
No corporation should be allowed rights over people or resources. They do not create, only "manage".
No patent should be sold, as only non-exclusive permissions the ideal and origins of patenting.
In a fair world, at least.
Patents were created to protect inventors.
Not to the abuse against everybody as we see.
And specially not to use the Law as a weapon for threat.
In a world of justice, the only reason for making laws.
It would be nice if it worked with the current firefox nightlies. The same sort of people who are most likely to be interested in webm may also want to use the bleeding edge firefox.
ReplyDeleteThis is especially a concern because firefox video support is still evolving and it would be terrible if youtube broke and it wasn't noticed until a release.
It would be great if had a page for showing the progress of the conversion. Like a page that shows the percentage of the catalog that is in WebM. Something like http://youtube.com/html5/progess
ReplyDeleteYoutube.com is been so fantastic, super great since it was started to introduced in the web.
ReplyDelete---Decorative Concrete
Yay, a solution to a problem that does not exist. A fringe unsupported codec that works in maybe one browser and few mobile devices. You might as well support Cinepack while you're at it.
ReplyDeleteMeanwhile, in Reality every mobile device shipping supports H.264 in hardware including every Android phone and tablet.
All this hassle so GOOG can try to weasel out of paying the MPEG LA fees.
I've seen videos in WebM, the quality is bad compared to no-WebM. Why is that?
ReplyDeleteWebM is not good format, quality is not good, support is not good, WebM is not good! h.264 is best!
ReplyDeleteI have one problem with HTML5 option @ youtube: there is almost never 480p video quality option. This forces me to use flashplayer, because 360p is unacceptable.
ReplyDeleteIan, quit blowing smoke out of your butt and telling me it's fog. Firefox 4 supports WebM. Chrome and Chromium have for a while. *Internet Explorer 9* and *Safari* will eventually support it via plugins. If you think that's "maybe one browser" I'd hate to see the state of your checkbook.
ReplyDeleteEpiphany (the Gnome webkit browser) supports WebM too.
ReplyDeleteWhy doesn't youtube fall back to HTML5 when Flash is not installed? It gives the illusion Flash is still a must-have.
h.264 is better.
ReplyDeleteWant to elaborate a wee bit? Not sure what you are getting at... The HTML5 spec is viewable on the w3c site, and it does not include, nor will it include, anything outside of the markup language itself. The plan going forward is to keep Apis not directly related to markup outside of the "standard" and track them under separate working groups.
ReplyDeleteI got a simple suggestion that might improve response time: Turn off the auto-play on videos, this will cut down on wasted resources when somebody clicks a video by mistake or when they are unable to watch it immediately.
ReplyDeleteUgh. I'll take the patented h.264 codec any day over the low quality WebM. If I see a decrease in quality with videos I upload to Youtube, I'll simply go elsewhere. This decision by Google is pointless and a waste of computing power.
ReplyDeleteWould this have anything to do with why I can't see any videos from my Safari browser today? Not at all on embeds across the tubes and can only hear the videos on your site. Seems to work fine in Firefox, but a big bubkes on Safari... and I update everything immediately....
ReplyDeleteSo. Have you just done something you should have mentioned to the Safari people a little earlier? Or did my browser suddenly lose it while I slept?
If the quality degrades there will be a backlash. Might sound silly to suggest this, but when you're dealing with 480p uploads, it's conceivable the Webm re-code might be inferior. I hope they don't underestimate that danger, like the did with the recent Google Video mis-step. A lot of people have a lot of very important material on youtube in 480p. If it suddenly looks poorer, it will erode many people's otherwise pristine Google experience.
ReplyDeleteIt would be nice if it formed with the accepted firefox nightlies. The aforementioned array of humans who are a lot of acceptable to be absorbed in webm may aswell wish to use the bleeding bend firefox.
ReplyDeleteNeevSoftware
Finally..I was hear about it and i was expect it more sooner this.
ReplyDeleterobot
WebM is first of all free and open source, which welcomes the collaboration of all the world and people who understand technology and collaboration appreciate this. H 264 is held by a few big corporations, and no John Doe is welcome to participate.(if they ask a polite question they get a f*** you in return, bad corporations...)
ReplyDeleteM2 i was expect it more soon.
ReplyDeleteGood blog: You should start many more. I love all the info provided. I will stay tuned:) makeup artist in Sydney
ReplyDeleteWhen I download a video from youtube to my desktop and burn it to watch on my dvd player the video comes out as big blotchy squares.How can I get the videos to play sharp and clear? Thanks Jay
ReplyDeleteerbcarter1@yahoo.com
Wow what a wonderful site! like it you guyz you are doing a wonderful work thanks,
ReplyDeleteIt is now easy to use because of the upgrade.< html5 music player,Thanks!
I have had problems with html 5 freezing using IE 9 (running Win7 HP)so it will be something I will watch for on YT. Problem of freezing does not occur with Firefox ?
ReplyDeleteBUT...now buttons on YT do not work like "Share" and "Add" ??