Yeah, but too bad Mozilla are retarded. Atleast Webkit/Safari is doing something useful.
Before blaming Mozilla, take a look at IE 8 which is used by ~1/3 of all internet users and which doesn't supports <video> at all.
Mozilla is retards for supporting OGG for the <video> tag, which to be totally honest.. Who the hell uses OGG for anything?! (No offence, Scawen).
Apple won't implement OGG as they don't want to get tied up in a potential patent case (as Ogg/Theora hasn't been proven to be legally patent-proof), so instead support something that people use, and that they have the rights to; H.264.
IE is a moot point, as they've always been the special kids that while everyone else is in class, learning maths, they're out painting tree's and chasing butterflies.
the Video tag is a trainwreck, Google and Apple are going for the H.264 way, and Opera and Mozilla are going for Ogg/Theora. While Microsoft are trying to push Silverlight on everyone as their alternative to flash+svg+<video>+etcera. Flash is tragic as it's slow as shit, Silverlight/Moonlight (Linux) isn't any better than Flash, and everything being in HTML is "good", but will never be successful as everyone has their own idea of politics and implementations of a layout engine.
Opera has their own engine that has quirks, Mozilla has Gecko which has quirks and isn't great, IE/Trident is a ****ing trainwreck, Safari/Chrome/Webkit has quirks, but it's been proven to be more accurate with web layouts, even with sub-standard HTML and CSS.
Internet browsers suck for this reason, however there is still hope, as unknowingly, more and more people are using Webkit based browsers (Chrome, Safari, MobileSafari, Future Blackberry Browser, etc).
Apple won't implement OGG as they don't want to get tied up in a potential patent case (as Ogg/Theora hasn't been proven to be legally patent-proof), so instead support something that people use, and that they have the rights to; H.264.
IE is a moot point, as they've always been the special kids that while everyone else is in class, learning maths, they're out painting tree's and chasing butterflies.
the Video tag is a trainwreck, Google and Apple are going for the H.264 way, and Opera and Mozilla are going for Ogg/Theora. While Microsoft are trying to push Silverlight on everyone as their alternative to flash+svg+<video>+etcera. Flash is tragic as it's slow as shit, Silverlight/Moonlight (Linux) isn't any better than Flash, and everything being in HTML is "good", but will never be successful as everyone has their own idea of politics and implementations of a layout engine.
Opera has their own engine that has quirks, Mozilla has Gecko which has quirks and isn't great, IE/Trident is a ****ing trainwreck, Safari/Chrome/Webkit has quirks, but it's been proven to be more accurate with web layouts, even with sub-standard HTML and CSS.
Internet browsers suck for this reason, however there is still hope, as unknowingly, more and more people are using Webkit based browsers (Chrome, Safari, MobileSafari, Future Blackberry Browser, etc).
The ones that don't want to pay licensing fees.
I understand that, but there's a reason there's no licensing fees on Ogg. Additionally, just becuase there's no licensing fees, doesn't mean that they still can't get raped by an overzealous patent holder that something in Theora happens to violate.
H264 makes more sense. It's more widely supported (iPods to PS3's and more play it natively), it's proven as being a pretty decent format for video, and there's open source implementations as well (X264). Ogg just doesn't make sense, especially for the <video> tag, as it'll still require a website to carry/store 2 (or 3) versions of 1 video file (1 for Flash, 1 for H264, 1 for OGG). Atleast with H264, you can get away with 1 version, and either play it through HTML, or Flash.
H264 makes more sense. It's more widely supported (iPods to PS3's and more play it natively), it's proven as being a pretty decent format for video, and there's open source implementations as well (X264). Ogg just doesn't make sense, especially for the <video> tag, as it'll still require a website to carry/store 2 (or 3) versions of 1 video file (1 for Flash, 1 for H264, 1 for OGG). Atleast with H264, you can get away with 1 version, and either play it through HTML, or Flash.
The player size is 854x480, now with some black bars on the side. For about a week or so, the player size was 960x480, no black bars, and I uploaded one test video at 2:1 aspect ratio to test it, and during that one week or so, it filled the player window. However now, it's back to black bars on the sides and tops. The original size of the video is 1440x720 (which is what you get if you use the javascript to download the .mp4 file). Link to that test video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vC72qIiP57U
Is there anyway to force a specific window size? I don't see an option for resizing the optional window mode to a specific size. Seem the only way to force this is to set the desktop size to some fixed value (1280 or 1920), then go to full screen.
Note that 1920x1080i or 1280x720p HDTV from a cable company uses 38.8 mbps, but that 1080i is 60 fields per second, equivalent to 1080p at 30 frames per second. Are there any consumer camcorders that record at 38.8mpbs?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vC72qIiP57U
Is there anyway to force a specific window size? I don't see an option for resizing the optional window mode to a specific size. Seem the only way to force this is to set the desktop size to some fixed value (1280 or 1920), then go to full screen.
Note that 1920x1080i or 1280x720p HDTV from a cable company uses 38.8 mbps, but that 1080i is 60 fields per second, equivalent to 1080p at 30 frames per second. Are there any consumer camcorders that record at 38.8mpbs?
The video is without borders in fullscreen and thats what matters but your upload seems to be a low bitrate anyway.
Not any consumer camcoders but they use different compression technics so dont compare the bitrate exactly.
Maybe a RED ONE would save you but thats 25K at least
Average bitrate of his video is 2054kbit/s.
its way low for 1080p!
Of course if, like me, you live in the middle of nowhere down south and use a BT line, your 1.5mbit line will download at about 30kb/s max. And don't even think about uploading anything at the same time as browsing.
Just as a point of interest, here are my speedtest.net results:
Can i showoff plz
Don't you have rich neighbours with unencrypted ~20mbit/s wifi? :3
I think it's more the fact that I live in a village of about 1000 people, mostly over 50, and the phone line probably hasn't been upgraded since about 1996.
Also I would kill to get an upload speed that is 100 times my current one.
Also I would kill to get an upload speed that is 100 times my current one.
There's easier way, moving to properly-european country like Sweden, Finland, Latvia, Germany, etc.
btw, I see you uploaded quite a lot of HD videos to YouTube
That would be probably a big agregation as well. Mean your line is in the most frequented time shared with other people. Will be probably 1:50 as the 30KB would showing that. Thats very common for anykind of xDSL connection to have really high agregation. Usually much lower for cable,wifi or optic.
Yeh, also the line could be old one. Not even copper so that makes another problem.
I leave it running overnight. Anything more than 5 videos and it still isn't done 10 hours later.
We're too busy killing "terrorists" and "saving" banks to care about broadband tbh
You must be kidding man. And btw the animation does no need so high bitrate as normal films/videos. Thats old.
I dont think thats the issue really
Its all well and good offering this ultra high quality capability, but i think they would be far better off removing the f--kin stupidly retarded and pointless 10:59 limit as it's such a pain in the ass!
They say its to stop people putting copyrighted films and tv shows up on youtube, but it doesnt, all you get is 'film' part 1/11 followed by 'film' part 2/11, etc.... so it is no deterrant at all, and all it does is makes it a p i t a if i or anyone else wants to upload something longer than that straight off my phone or something.
If i wanna upload something lets say 18 mins long i have to drag it onto the PC, convert and re encode it from MP4 to WMV or AVI so it works with movie maker, chop it down, re save it, and saving it then re encodes it again, so as opposed to a vid directly as it was, i have a vid in a crappy format that has been converted and then re-encoded twice, which loses quality.
They say its to stop people putting copyrighted films and tv shows up on youtube, but it doesnt, all you get is 'film' part 1/11 followed by 'film' part 2/11, etc.... so it is no deterrant at all, and all it does is makes it a p i t a if i or anyone else wants to upload something longer than that straight off my phone or something.
If i wanna upload something lets say 18 mins long i have to drag it onto the PC, convert and re encode it from MP4 to WMV or AVI so it works with movie maker, chop it down, re save it, and saving it then re encodes it again, so as opposed to a vid directly as it was, i have a vid in a crappy format that has been converted and then re-encoded twice, which loses quality.
Vimeo is where it's at - file size limits, but not length limits. And much less chavvy than YT, which scores it bonus points. Not perfect though (so don't claim I said it was!)
I just put any longer vids on my practically dormant myspace account, thats the only thing i use it for now, i currently have a 31 minute video on there with no problems, plus if i think of the minutes vs megabytes ratio, i swear uploading to myspace was quicker than uploading to YT anyway! 
Agreed, quality wise at least. Even the "standard" videos on there are a quality YT can only dream of, (even in HD!!).
If you're referring to the .MP4 video you can download from youtube, that's after youtube has compressed the video and lowered the bit rate. The orignal video was 1440x720p, 30 fps at 10 mbps, and a .WMV file. The youtube recommended H.264 format was coming out blocky looking when they first started doing 1280x720, so I switched to .WMV format. I don't know if the H.264 issue at youtube has been fixed yet.
1
2
1080p is coming to YouTube!
(49 posts, started )
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG