H264 and other codecs playback support if backend can do it

H264 and other codecs playback support if backend can do it

At the moment Opera allows only WebM playback, but use gStreamer for playback anyway. Please add h.264 playback if backend supports it. It would be nice to have all other codec support if backend supports it. I have many more plugins installed and can already watch h264 videos, but the Opera seems to block that feature on HTML5 video enables websties.

This is another time I don't like Opera being closed source because this feature would have been working already long time ago if the sources were available... until now that was not the problem in fact I am loyal Opera user for many many years, I have proposed many features to opera that were implemented, data synchronization, 64-bit version, FreeBSD binary, etc. Still some features are missing like Linux ARM binary, backend codecs detection, and others that might end up in switching to another open-source solution... Please provide more manpower for features that might steal your users :-)

please note that it would be the only chance to see some websites (i.e. vimeo) on open-source platforms (i.e. freebsd) where flash is not and will not be present due to adobe policy...

sure dude, you only have to donate to OperaSoftware 10 000 000 $ or so, so they can afford paying for the license for H264 - it is not free2use, so license-fee is due. you in?

I think he means that a plugin (GStreamer) would play it, not Opera. I don't know if that's legal in USA, though.

you see, this is why i prefer open source, no $10 000 000 is required to enable simple feature that is already working in the backend, i am sure those money could be spent on something more creative :-) but if the licensing is the issue, then you might be right, even if gstreamer can play it, opera is not allowed. i just wonder why people use closed source commercial codecs on their websites... :-(

anyway, allowing/enabling use of any backend codec, including X264 [1] a free solution to play H264 [2], might do the trick..? :-)

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X264
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264

x264 is not a free solution. It's open source, but to legally compile and include it in your product you have to pay the fees, at least if you intend for your product to be used in any country that thinks software patents are a good idea.

Note that Firefox also does not include h264 support. Note that both Apple and Microsoft are members of the MPEG LA and, while they still have to pay their fees too, stand to benefit from h264 remaining a de-facto standard. I'm still wondering if Google do still intend to drop h264 support from Chrome like they said they would nearly a year ago.

Is hard to use codecs from system (K-Lite, CCCP, e.t.c.)?

Originally posted by ikevs:

Is hard to use codecs from system (K-Lite, CCCP, e.t.c.)?

the question is not if it is hard, but if it is legal to do so (without having to pay loyalty fees).

They don't need to add the actual x264/mp3 plugin for gstreamer themselves, you know. It will be enough if they allow other people to do so. That is to support latest standalone/external gstreamer build.

the whole point of "video" tag in HTML5 was to get rid of plugins - so we don't have to use QT/WMP/FLASH/pureEvil® for playback. using plugin here would be like getting a car so you have a pace to store your bicycle.

this is why i think opera should use backends to play any of the possible video contents, then opera has nothing to do with the contents, then it is full responsibility of the person who and where puts some contents and the one who views it - some people/countries prefer open standards others prefer closed standards - but the lawsuits cannot forbid/force whole planet to use one solution or another, this would ultimately result in spread and development of open standards for end users, while companies could still use closed solutions for their internal use/products :-)

Originally posted by BtEO:

but to legally compile and include it in your product you have to pay the fees

at least in the US of Ass

Originally posted by bleicher:

get rid of plugins

in gstreamer content a plugin is what actually decodes the media, You can think of a plugin as the implementation of a codec, not like a browser-plugin that lives in it's completely own world and is only composed into the page.

anyhow, @topic: if it is really the case that opera explicitly excludes other installed gstreamer plugins than ogg and webm then +1 for disabling that check (when legally possible of course - oh how much I hate software patents - good thing there is no such shit in the EU )

OT: ... actually I'd really like to see Opera simply closing their US office, because then you can just say "fuck you all".

I think Bleicher meant "FlashPlayer" "QT" "Silverlight" or any other closed source plugin. Sure, gstreamer also use dynamic library to be included into Opera runtime, but I think this is treated somehow different than "an ordinary" plugin (such as VLC-browser-plugin etc) because it is dynamically linked into Opera binary..? How gstreamer treats different formats this is another story unrelated to Opera :-)

The problem with H264 websites is still the website owners prefer to use H264 over WebM [1], which is the problem that legally enforces users to pay even for decoding media if they want to watch :-( Until 2010 being a holder of the H264 encoded media required fees! This should have never happened! For me it does not matter what codec is used until I have free working access to the content. This is why it matters that Flash does not have player on any platform (or simply open player), also this is h264 websites can be considered a bad idea. I think this business model will be the main reason why users turn back on such solutions... but it is also necessary so stimulate the OpenSource community to create alternative solutions :-) The piratebay stuff here is nice to cite :-) Today I also noted that Polish Public Television use Silverlight for multimedia streaming [2] which seems to be even worse than flashplayer :-( Who.T.F. work at those places? :-(

[1] http://vimeo.com/forums/topic:25295
[2] http://www.tvp.pl/publicystyka/ekonomia-i-gospodarka/mowisz-mosz/wideo/10122011/5704469

Originally posted by cederom:

I think Bleicher meant "FlashPlayer" "QT" "Silverlight" or any other closed source plugin. Sure, gstreamer also use dynamic library to be included into Opera runtime, but I think this is treated somehow other than "an ordinary" plugin (such as VLC-browser-plugin etc) because it is dynamically linked into Opera binary..? How gstreamer treats different formats this is another story unrelated to Opera :-)

haha, that's exactly the point I wanted to make (that "plugin" in this case could be misleading as ppl might imagine something flash-like while it is just the way that gstreamer was designed), but after reading my post again I seem to have failed pushing that point home completely

Google's WebM v H.264: who wins and loses in the video codec wars?

OMG! Microsoft's Silverlight has open source player (mono+moonlight+moonshine) [1] and it works on my FreeBSD platform!!! Sorry, it is far more better than Adobe Flash :-)

btw. I have found Opera TV thread regarding use of x264 in gstreamer to play H264 media [2]. why that does not work in Opera desktop?

[1] http://go-mono.com/moonlight/
[2] http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=1116842

Uhm, the moonlight does not work well in Opera, but it works well in Firefox, there is even an online version of Quake game to test http://www.innoveware.com/ql3/QuakeLight.html

id like it, but last time i checked h264 was going to be free until a certain year, basically the company behind the codec is trying to push for theirs to become standard, then after a certain year start charging licensing fees. It would screw over everyone and make them a bunch of money

There's four places the MPEG LA can choose to charge for licensing fees — assuming you accept the validity of both their patent pool and software patents in general. (Similar rules also apply to MP3 and AAC I believe)

Distributing h.264 video in a commercial manner
Distributing h.264 video in a non-commercial manner*
Distributing software capable of encoding h.264
Distributing software capable of decoding h.264

Only the one with the * is currently free, and only until 2016 so far have they pledged to keep it as such. If 2016 rolls around and VP8 or some other worthy competitor meaningfully exists you can assume they will extend those terms further; no competition and it would not be at all surprising to see the current status removed.

This is why it is important in the long term for browsers like Opera, Firefox, and Chrome (if they ever get around to removing h.264 support) to fight this now. Even if it feels detrimental to the end-user in the short term.

Don't think the patent holders wouldn't think to charge you to upload that video you recorded on your phone to YouTube, or your own hosting, or whatever — if they thought they could get away with it without hastening the move to VP8(/Vorbis). PNG was developed and adopted pretty quickly when GIF patent holders emerged; only IE6's inferior transparency support and lack of animation really prevented total domination.

As you can see, this is not a matter of speed or efficiency because this will change, this is a matter of control who can get what. This is why Open Source and Free Software is so important, they create a real alternative for people that want to create their own solutions and share the results or even make money on them. There is nothing wrong in making money out of our mind's work, but such policy to charge everyone for everything related with a product simply does not make that product attractive and the only reason people want to use it because they are lazy and there is no other alternative. This is why alternative and open solution arise and they take great part of the market making such greedy approach short term :-) BSD operating system for instance is very very old and its still evolving giving good baseline for other commercial and open products still being free and open to the users in a old good fashion manner :-)

The main problem is that most of the users does not know how things work inside and how much work this require to operate, they simply use or steal other peoples work and they don't care, the problem arises when they are forced to pay themselves for the results, or they need to pay large amounts for a small change. This is why open source and free software cannot be stolen, but still can be used to make money, if you know how to use is or extend it, you are free to create a better solution and share it... blah blah :-)

Evil corporations like Apple and Google like to lock their users into one video codec, but Opera should be different and let the user use whatever codec they have installed on their system. Opera doesn't have to bundle the codec with the browser, just allow the browser to use whatever codec the user already has on their system.

Media player Classic, for example doesn't come with any codecs, the user has to provide them itself and then Media Player Classic is able to play back any video codec the user wants. Opera should be the same.

For example, I would want to playback with the DivX codec, because it has lower hardware requirements and it doesn't crash my computer like what WebM does and I have DivX already installed on my system.

So to summerize, the Opera video codec motto should be "bring your own codec". That way, the user can play whatever exotic video codec they want.

http://hacks.mozilla.org/2012/03/video-mobile-and-the-open-web/

^ Interesting now even Firefox is going for it, Then why not Opera? Catch up

Looks like the so called "open web" is a joke. Everyone starts to dance to Apple's and Google's tune. Maybe Google's announcement to drop H.264 was a part of their plan, to get head start.

I heard about firefox (right?) use hardware to decode h264. this is a good idea to support h.264 (which I think it provide better quality than webm and theora) and avoid legal issue.