Is that really the case? Indisputably? I'd like to learn more about that.
Also, even if VP8 takes over Ogg Theora's position as a competitor to H.264 as a web standard, it will still face some problems.
One is that in moving to HTML5, many videos being served through flash are already encoded as H.264 and could be served through HTML5 without re-encoding. VP8 would still require conversion for a full transition away from flash to be made.
Another problem is IE support for VP8... hopefully they'll be willing to support it in a timely manner.
Why do people keep stating it like an eternal truth that Flash can't support VP8. They've added video codecs at least three times in the past.
All those codecs have been bought in so it's not NIH syndrome. One of them was VP6! And if you think they're allergic to open source codecs then note they just adopted Xiph's Speex as a better alternative to NellyMoser for voice a year or so ago. I'm sure they appreciate not having to pay licence fees as much as the next giant corporation, and understand that customers appreciate that too.
(edit: just realised the post I'm replying to is actually saying something different i.e. that existing Flash video is often H.264 and so can be moved to HTML5 without touching the video file itself. I think the point is that Google doesn't want to move from Flash to HTML5, they want to move from royalty-bearing codecs to open source and open standard friendly codecs, so yes replacing those H.264 files is required regardless. Flash will become optional as a side-effect.)
you fail to realize that windows has codec management built into the system.
a browser should never concern itself with codecs. that's what system APIs are for.
you can teach IE6 about VP8 by just installing a codec into the system. if that's not done by the IT dept. or your neighbor's kid, you either don't have the need to play back VP8 or whoever gives you VP8 content also tells you how to install a codec.
My point with IE is that a lot of content providers don't want to use something that everyone doesn't have access to out of the box. Yes, people can install the codec, but for websites to start using it in a widespread manner it would help for all the major browsers to package it.
Is that really the case? Indisputably? I'd like to learn more about that.
Also, even if VP8 takes over Ogg Theora's position as a competitor to H.264 as a web standard, it will still face some problems.
One is that in moving to HTML5, many videos being served through flash are already encoded as H.264 and could be served through HTML5 without re-encoding. VP8 would still require conversion for a full transition away from flash to be made.
Another problem is IE support for VP8... hopefully they'll be willing to support it in a timely manner.