Need help how to choose the best quality streaming video from youtube

[jagabo]

H.264 is also open

h.264 is covered by patents. If you want to make a commercial product that uses it you will have to pay royalties.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Patent_licensing

[pandy]

H.264 is also open

h.264 is covered by patents. If you want to make a commercial product that uses it you will have to pay royalties.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC#Patent_licensing

WebM (VP8) is patented too (Google is patents owner)...

In terms of specification both H.264 and VP8 are open (there is available documentation and different implementations can be created) and yes, Google claim that VP8 is free from licenses but this is only Google claim (and Google risk), but royalties is a different story - VP8 is royality free but H.264 royality is usually part of price paid by customer when customer buying device capable to decode H.264 - i see no advantage VP8 over H.264 when anyway customer pay money for H.264.

[jagabo]

VP8 is royality free but H.264 royality is usually part of price paid by customer when customer buying device capable to decode H.264 - i see no advantage VP8 over H.264 when anyway customer pay money for H.264.

Eventually products that play VP8 should be cheaper because they won't have to pay royalties.

[pandy]

VP8 is royality free but H.264 royality is usually part of price paid by customer when customer buying device capable to decode H.264 - i see no advantage VP8 over H.264 when anyway customer pay money for H.264.

Eventually products that play VP8 should be cheaper because they won't have to pay royalties.

This not happen (perhaps only Google products can ignore worldwide standards such as H.264) - H.264 is used worldwide as broadcast video codec - can't be ignored by vendors. And cheaper how much? 0.5$? 0.95$ - when tablet or smartphone cost 59.95$??
Also VP8 is highly limited when compared to H.264, for example there is no 3D support (MVC), no scalability (SVC), lower overall quality, higher power consumption (H.264 is designed to be implemented without floating point calculations).

So VP8 probably will be used by some IP broadcasters, but probably will end as unique and characteristic only for Google environment solution - in other words can't be ignored but also will be not used widely as H.264.

[jagabo]

Obviously, VP8 isn't a major player at this time. But in the long run an open spec, open source, royalty free video codec should be a good thing.

[pandy]

Obviously, VP8 isn't a major player at this time. But in the long run an open spec, open source, royalty free video codec should be a good thing.

VP8:
- spec is closed (same closed and same available as for H.264 http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H.264-201201-I/en ), but closed because can't be "openly" changed or updated for a new functionality,
- source is open but same is for H.264 http://iphome.hhi.de/suehring/tml/ (or x264 source http://git.videolan.org/?p=x264.git;a=summary )
- royalty free only if Google will prove that VP8 doesn't infringe any not Google owned patents (which is not 100% sure and a bit doubtful knowing that VP8 use lot same ideas as other video codecs)

[manono]

@manono:
Well, if you have to choose, what version would you choose?

I don't know, 360p, 480p? It doesn't make much difference.