Jan Ozer Is NOT a Compressionist

by : Brandon Wirtz

Just because someone writes for StreamingMedia.com, doesn't make them an expert in the space.  Most the time it means quite the opposite.  I work for a company that is betting on H.264, but I quite strongly think Jan Ozer's piece (OS) about Microsoft dumping VC-1 is so poorly researched that Jan should consider a change of careers.

In every test I have conceived (and many of which's results I have published) VC-1 has performed on par with h.264,  Winning in some tests, losing in others, depending on what I optimize for, Encode Time, Quality Per Bit, Bits Per Quality, etc.

Generally VC1 Dominates in VOD.  The Toolset for VC1 on Shiny Disc make VC1 the leader in Quality for Blu-Ray.  The lower play back requirements make it ideal for Mobile Devices, the lowest cost of tools makes it ideal for consumer video enthusiasts. 

H.264 Suffers Greatly from not being as "standard" as everyone thinks it is.  Working with Sigma, Broadcom, Amino, and others simply picking H.264 Main @ Level 3 doesn't mean that your encode will play back.  There are restrictions on total Motion Vectors per frame, VBV Delay, Reference Frames and other things too numerous to name.

VC1 on the other hand has been very straight forward.  If a device support a profile and level, it does so with out exception.  This makes ensuring that your encode will work on any target device that claims it should play it.

If Jan wants to talk people out of a codec, Killing off VP6/VP7 makes more sense.  Getting rid of the huge number of containers that h.264 can live in would make a lot of sense too.  MOV, MKV, FLV. 

Why did my company go with H.264 if I think VC1 is so great?  I came in late.  DRM which for various reasons is better for our model on Transport Streams than ASF (yes VC1 can live in TS but not everything supports that). 

To Summarize: VC1 is my choice for Shiny Disc (blu-ray) it is also my choice for Cross platform delivery, because it has a lower CPU requirement.

For Mobile Devices I am torn between 3gp and VC1.  VC1 doesn't have quite the adoption, and 3gp is ugly.

For IPTV there are too many variables to make a definitive choice.  I don't disagree with our choice to use h.264 transport streams, my job would be easier with VC-1 but it would be harder for other parts of the org. 

You must be registered with one of the registration services we support in order to comment.