The Youtube WebM Dilemma

[kapanak]

So I was on SuperTube (paid version) trying to play a music video uploaded yesterday.

This specific video had up to 1080p quality, and I decided to stream the 720p version on SuperTube. Five seconds later I received a "Open Video Error!".

After using Keepvid.com to download this specific video, it turns out the video was part of the new wave of WebM encoded videos on YouTube.

To further confirm this issue, I specifically looked for WebM encoded videos on YouTube, sent it to my WP7, and copy-pasted the video name into SuperTube to try. Same error.

We all know that Microsoft is not going to support the codec, and SuperTube depends on Zune to play the .MP4 contained videos from YouTube.

Also, in some cases, the native YouTube app is unable to play the videos.

It is important to note that YouTube still encodes 360p videos using H264 and not WebM, as I was able to play those fine on SuperTube. LazyTube tends to play most of my test cases, with exceptions.

So, here I am presenting this potential problem (as YouTube will completely more to WebM soon) with WP7 YouTube and Video codec problem. What are you thoughts?

Any Ideas?


PS: To further confirm that 360p videos work and 720p videos do not, I downloaded the videos and uploaded them to my phone directly through Explorer (using the registry hack to make the device appear) and the 360p worked, while the 720p did not.

 

[vangrieg]

I've read and heard from my friends reports that there are problems with HD videos on Android devices, too. Whether this is due to WebM or not I don't know.

The whole world must bend over backwards now because Google doesn't like paying. No single SoC supports decoding WebM at this time, so it's not even up to Microsoft. Whether we will see hardware support for this new codec is questionable because it's not at all clear whether it's clean in terms of IP and patents. With open source stuff, the one who implements something is sued, not the one who wrote stuff.

 

[DMAND]

Serriously I dont see the need for Google to push WebM, H.264 is well supported, it's funny that google make a webM plugin for IE9 and MS make a H.264 plugin for chrome

 

[Marvin_S]

Serriously I dont see the need for Google to push WebM, H.264 is well supported, it's funny that google make a webM plugin for IE9 and MS make a H.264 plugin for chrome

native app on iphone is "missing" a lot of videos, many cant be played on mobile devices anymore. Also the copyrighted stuff or blocked in your country is getting worse. Its time for a good alternative to come up and all just switch away from youtube, unfortunately there is none and its a great service.

 

[N8ter]

I've read and heard from my friends reports that there are problems with HD videos on Android devices, too. Whether this is due to WebM or not I don't know.

The whole world must bend over backwards now because Google doesn't like paying. No single SoC supports decoding WebM at this time, so it's not even up to Microsoft. Whether we will see hardware support for this new codec is questionable because it's not at all clear whether it's clean in terms of IP and patents. With open source stuff, the one who implements something is sued, not the one who wrote stuff.

Only Andorid 2.3.2 (or 3) and above support WebM. Lower versions do not.

You can decode in software, but LOL on a mobile device that is kind of laughable. Say bye bye to your battery as this overworks your processor...

 

[ohgood]

native app on iphone is "missing" a lot of videos, many cant be played on mobile devices anymore. Also the copyrighted stuff or blocked in your country is getting worse. Its time for a good alternative to come up and all just switch away from youtube, unfortunately there is none and its a great service.

don't blame youtube for these issues. blame coyrights, drm, and people that think nothing should ever be redistributed. youtube is following what the lawyers say they have to.

 

[Marvin_S]

don't blame youtube for these issues. blame coyrights, drm, and people that think nothing should ever be redistributed. youtube is following what the lawyers say they have to.

I understand why. Its just stupid it has never been like this but as of recently there are a ton of videos being blocked. Even though the rights to broadcast have been always there and now they are just gone. So yeah no wonder people blame youtube if the exact same vids could always be watched trough officials channels then all of a sudden not supported in your country.

 

[vangrieg]

Only Andorid 2.3.2 (or 3) and above support WebM. Lower versions do not.

Android 2.3.3 cannot add hardware support for a new codec if it's missing in the device SoC. Or can it?

I can't imagine hardware support for WebM appearing overnight unless it's the same thing as MPEG4 Part 10 (which is what MPEG-LA will be happy to sue the hell out of everyone over).

 

[vetvito]

^ wow

http://m.engadget.com/default/artic...-it-webm-support/&category=classic&postPage=1

 

[vangrieg]

^ wow

Wow what exactly? Is it true hardware support or software decoding?

 

[N8ter]

It's probably software, but does it matter? Future SoCs may (most likely will) start supporting it in hardware because Google has the means to force feed it down consumers' throats. Once they finish transcoding all the YouTube content and switch to an HTML5 interface by default this can severely limit non-Android devices, especially if you don't want a device with Adobe Flash, since the site will stream WebM to your device.

Unless they keep H.264 versions as well, in which case I don't care.

But I don't like the way they are trying to force feed an inferior media codec down everyone's throats...

 

[vangrieg]

It's probably software, but does it matter?

You answered your question yourself a few posts ago:

You can decode in software, but LOL on a mobile device that is kind of laughable. Say bye bye to your battery as this overworks your processor...

Future SoCs may (most likely will) start supporting it in hardware because Google has the means to force feed it down consumers' throats. Once they finish transcoding all the YouTube content and switch to an HTML5 interface by default this can severely limit non-Android devices, especially if you don't want a device with Adobe Flash, since the site will stream WebM to your device.

I'm not at all sure about it. Judging by how they are treating their own Android customers, the majority of whom aren't using 2.3.whatever with WebM support, they just don't give a damn. It'll be up to OEMs and chip makers. And those guys may get in trouble with WebM because of possible lawsuits, not Google. So it'll most probably end with software decoding as supplied by Google (although even that won't save them because Google doesn't protect their OEMs in patent and other IP issues).

But that's just my guess.

But I don't like the way they are trying to force feed an inferior media codec down everyone's throats...

Exactly. I find this uber annoying. But not at all surprising.

 

[munkeyphyst]

Wow what exactly? Is it true hardware support or software decoding?

read the article, you'll understand the wow. Google sux

Sent from my SGH-i917 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App

 

[N8ter]

You answered your question yourself a few posts ago:

I meant does it matter in the grand scheme of things. Android phone users have gotten so used to poor battery life that most of them don't care. They'll just not use their phone for a couple days to post standby times on a forum and be happy.

What the underlying "what's it matter" meant (quite vaguely, I admit) what... Does it matter if it's software or hardware? Google's point is to promote their own codec by using their YouTube muscle, and they're going to make sure their own Browsers and Mobile platform are there first, which could potentially give consumers a reason to pick an Android phone over a competitor's...

So, does it matter if it's software or hardware if they are still accomplishing their goals (pushing WebM via YouTube down our throats and making sure Android is the first mobile OS to support it)?

 

[Hades32]

Can you give a URL of a video that is not available? I think it's a bug in the software. YouTube is NOT going to encode videos in WebM exclusively. All videos in every resolution should be available in H264 and WebM.
This might change as soon as Adobe release a WebM capable Flash Player (10.4 maybe)...

 

[vangrieg]

Can you give a URL of a video that is not available? I think it's a bug in the software. YouTube is NOT going to encode videos in WebM exclusively. All videos in every resolution should be available in H264 and WebM.
This might change as soon as Adobe release a WebM capable Flash Player (10.4 maybe)...

I can't give you a URL, but as of two days ago, my colleagues with DHD couldn't view a single newly uploaded HD video on YouTube with the built in client.

This may be because of a different problem though, that WebM is at fault is just my guess.

 

[N8ter]

Can you give a URL of a video that is not available? I think it's a bug in the software. YouTube is NOT going to encode videos in WebM exclusively. All videos in every resolution should be available in H264 and WebM.
This might change as soon as Adobe release a WebM capable Flash Player (10.4 maybe)...

YouTube is encoding all new videos in WebM, and transcoding a lot of others. I think most HD videos are being encoded to WebM.

Who are are you to say what they should be available as? You don't own YouTube, Google does...

 

[munkeyphyst]

YouTube is encoding all new videos in WebM, and transcoding a lot of others. I think most HD videos are being encoded to WebM.



Who are are you to say what they should be available as? You don't own YouTube, Google does...

I think he meant they should be, as in "if you check, you should find that they are encoded as both" not that he was stating what policies Google should be using. Whether he is right concerning the availability of both formats, I can't say.

Sent from my SGH-i917 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App

 

[kapanak]

I have just confirmed this further with many more recent HD updates (from 25th of April and onwards), as well as a couple of my own videos uploaded.

The 720p and 1080p versions ARE being encoded in WebM, while the rest of the formats are still in their older forms...

 

[yeahyeahyeah1981]

Leave it up to google to fragment the hell out of something.......
Here is what Ive noticed with youtube as of late...
"Vevo" videos(music videos by signed artists that are sponsored or something by Vevo) do not show up when searched for on my ipod touch or my girlfriend's iphone<<<< This is stupid and is recent. Maybe because of the no ads thing on ipod's or iphone...I dont really know. They do however work with fastcode's Supertube app which is great. I dont know how long this will last with Supertube but Im hoping it doesnt change. Somehow fastcode is able to write a workaround with their code I guess. Again I dont know. All the while Microsoft is having some sort of issue with getting a proper youtube app out there for some other dumb reason probably to blame on Google. However Microsoft does allow Supertube to break rules by allowing the download feature to keep going. Again this is weird.
Now Youtube is encoding all hd videos in some new format "WebM" which Im certain will further complicate things on the developer side of things. This is just confusing.
Im not saying Google should allow people to just use their service for free or without any restrictions but I do not like the fact that Google sucks everyone in by leaving everything open at the beginning and then closes it up once they establish dominance in the market subsequently leaving people stranded and with no other choices.