HTML5 video is still not a resolved problem

May 22, 2010 10:49 GMT  ·  By

The concept of same markup implies that users running different browsers, such as Internet Explorer, Chrome, Firefox Opera or Safari, can visit the same websites and get no differences for the content rendered, access video and audio seamlessly, enjoy the same experience with Cloud applications, etc. Same markup will blur the differences between browsers, with HTML, CSS, and script being rendered in the same way, without exception. Internet utopia? Perhaps.

Without a doubt, efforts from major browser vendors with the same markup goal in mind have never been more consistent. Mozilla, Opera, Chrome, Apple and Microsoft are embracing HTML5, CSS3, etc. with their browsers, or with future versions now cooking. Yet for all the efforts designed to help the web become interoperable there are barriers that seem impassable at times. And there continues to be a lack of consensus on some aspects of modern web standards that ultimately hurt web developers and end users.

One illustrative example in this regard is WebM, an initiative backed by Google, Opera, Mozilla and others designed to provide an open, royalty-free, media file format for the web. WebM brings to the table “VP8, a high-quality video codec we are releasing today under a BSD-style, royalty-free license; Vorbis, an already open source and broadly implemented audio codec; [and] a container format based on a subset of the Matroska media container,” from WebM’s description.

WebM is really about VP8 and about the holy grail of video codecs for HTML5. Consensus lacks in this respect, with a range of options available, two of which seem to have positioned themselves as best in breed, H.264 and Ogg Theora. VP8 is designed to become the de facto HTML5 video file format for the web, and is already enjoying support from Google, Opera, Mozilla and Microsoft. But at the same time there are inherent problems with WebM, some of which need to be resolved before browser makers can truly rally themselves behind the project with no exceptions.

1. Patent litigation “A key factor in the web’s success is that its core technologies such as HTML, HTTP, TCP/IP, etc. are open and freely implementable. Though video is also now core to the web experience, there is unfortunately no open and free video format that is on par with the leading commercial choices. To that end, we are excited to introduce WebM, a broadly-backed community effort to develop a world-class media format for the open web,” it is mentioned on the WebM website.

Håkon Wium Lie, CTO, Opera Software is perfectly right when he states that he didn’t patent CSS because he envisioned the web as open and freely usable. Unfortunately, Håkon Wium Lie is the exception and not the rule. Ultimately, intellectual property rights are decided in a court. Nobody’s disputing the “open” characteristics of WebM, but when it comes down to royalty-free, this is a whole different matter altogether.

Even Google mentions the possibility of patent violation: “WebM is an open-source project sponsored by Google. Google licenses its intellectual property that is covered by VP to VP8 users for free, under a BSD-style license. These licenses are revocable only if the licensee files a patent infringement lawsuit against the VP8 code that Google released.” VP8 was developed by On2 Technologies, which Google acquired earlier this year.

In a worst case scenario, Google would get sued for VP8 patent infringement and lose, making royalties necessary for the codec, at which point Mozilla and Opera are sure to back out and no longer offer support. Firefox and Opera currently play nice only with Ogg Theora precisely because the promise of royalty-free technology. But if speculations turn out to be right, and a patent pool is indeed being put together to attack open source codecs, Ogg Theora included, with obvious repercussions for VP8 and WebM, Mozilla and Opera will have very few options left, especially if they continue to be unwilling to pay royalties.

2. Contributing to the lack of consensus WebM is barely out and is already contributing to the lack of consensus. Sure, the project is benefitting from strong support, but there are those that are yet to define their position. Apple for example has not indicated in any way that it is willing to support WebM and VP8 with Safari. And don’t think for a minute that this is just about Mac OS X, it’s also about the devices that Apple is building, the iPhone, iPad, iPod, etc.

By refusing to support Flash, Apple has shown its ugly side, and there’s no telling that the hardware company won’t do the same with WebM. After all, Steve Jobs already indicated how strongly Apple was backing HTML5 H.264 to the detriment of Flash, what’s stopping him from deciding that he simply won’t support WebM? Just as any other company, Apple too will be opened to potential lawsuits related to patent infringement over VP8. Microsoft too is waiting it out, so to speak, before fully including VP8 in Internet Explorer, although IE9 will support the technology if a codec is installed in Windows.

3. Adding complexity for developers and content providers

While it is meant to simplify and resolve the problem of a single codec for HTML5, WebM si also contributing to increasing complexity. Developers now have a new technology to worry about when building their websites. Once again, while Firefox, Chrome and Opera will ship with VP8 by default, a codec will be required for Internet Explorer 9, and then there’s Apple that might not support the new project at all.

And then there’s the matter of actual videos served online. A new codec means that content providers will now have to encode their materials in accordance with not only H.264 and Ogg Theora, but also VP8. At the same time, H.264 and Ogg Theora have been around for quite some time, and only a small portion of all videos on the Internet actually play nice with these codecs. With VP8 content providers need to start everything from zero. Even Google is providing VP8-ready videos only as an experiment on YouTube. And there’s no telling how much time, effort and financial resources need to be spent in order to get the same level of VP8 support for videos as Flash has today.

4. Hardware support and acceleration

When it revealed that H.264 was the HMTL5 codec of choice for Internet Explorer 9, Microsoft made it clear that strong hardware support was a core reason contributing to the decision. For the time being there is absolutely no hardware support for VP8.

Here are some excerpts from the WebM FAQ: “Are there any portable media players that can play WebM files? - There are none in the market today but we’re working with hardware manufacturers to bring WebM support to a wide range of devices. Will WebM files play on my TV, set-top box, PVR, etc.? - Stay tuned! The WebM community is working with hardware manufacturers to bring WebM support to a wide range of devices.”

It is critical that end users be able to shoot VP8 videos with their devices and upload them online. Today this is not possible, simply because the codec has barely been launched. The situation is not the same when it comes down to H.264 for example. The vast majority of hardware and device manufacturers are backing the technology.

And of course, there’s hardware acceleration. Microsoft has already demonstrated the advantages of hardware accelerated HTML5, doing the same with VP8 is simply not possible today, also because of the lack of support. “If I have a video card that accelerates video playback, will it accelerate VP8? - The performance of VP8 is very good in software, and we’re working closely with many video card and silicon vendors to add VP8 hardware acceleration to their chips,” Google notes.

5. The future

Nobody can really tell at this point in time where WebM is going. While Google could, at least in theory, provide IP identification to all parties that license the technology, intellectual property protection is not enough. WebM is a young project, barely out of its shell, and it will take time before it matures. Maturity, as well as market consensus cannot be rushed, and all it takes is one company shipping millions of products per year, be them hardware or software, to ignore VP8 and it is enough for developers to work more to compensate for lack of support, and for content providers to decide whether it’s worth embracing the technology or not. In the end, users have no say in the matter, although same markup could benefit them immensely, and they're also getting hurt while it’s still lacking.

The new WebM-ready Firefox 3.7 Alpha 4 is available for download here.

Chromium 6.0.412.0 is available for download
here.

Opera 10.54 Build 21868 Beta with HTML5 WebM VP8 video support is available for download
here.

Internet Explorer 9 (IE9) Platform Preview 2 Build 1.9.7766.6000 is available for download here.