Looking into the Crystal Ball: The Future of Open-Standard Internet Video

Julien Signes weighed in with his opinion. "The reality is that the 20 companies backing H.264 have a much-wider combined size and weight in the broadcast space than Microsoft. This makes me wonder to whether Microsoft will be able to maintain momentum."

Sorenson then shifted the discussion by posing this question: Given the fact that H.264 is guaranteed to be in the two new high-definition DVD standards (Blu-ray and DVD-HD), what does that mean to Internet video?

"Convergence of formats across all platforms (cell phones, DVD, etc.) signals a change in the way that content is created," said Signes. "It creates a critical mass of content in one format. Remember that H.264 support is now available native in QuickTime 7 on the Mac, is available in open-source Linux and Windows players, and will soon be available in QuickTime 7 for Windows. I think we’ll still have to accommodate all three formats on the Blu-ray and DVD-HD spec for internet video over the next two to three years, but the critical mass of H.264 professional video content delivery—including satellite, IPTV, broadcast content creation—is coming."

"I think Phil Smith’s business model of a multiple-decode set-top box will be the successful model for much longer than two to three years," On2’s McIntrye added, "simply because it allows consumer to see content in any format that they want. I also think, though, that content creators will need to need to continue to encode content in multiple formats."

Noting his appreciation for the multiple-encoder set-top box plug, Smith argued that content creators need to encode in multiple formats. "Content creators need to focus on the content and content protection and not worry about the ‘technology geek issue’ of what format to use to encode their content," Smith said. "Unless you’re sending content directly to end users and know that some of them use Windows Media, use H.264 to take advantage of the fact that H.264 can output profiles for content to be shown on cell phones, DVDs, Internet video, and studio-quality."

When asked by an audience member to describe his multiple-encoder set-top box, Smith replied, "Until everyone standardizes on one format, we have created a set-top box that uses a TI DSP to do the three major formats (MPEG-2, Windows Media, H.264). We can dump a codec from the DSP and load up another one within 50 milliseconds, making the consumer behavior of ‘flipping channels’ seamless between multiple format types. It’s also a pure IP set-top box, tested against Tandberg, Envivio, and other encoders. We’re also contemplating putting a general purpose processor (x86) on board to run Linux or Windows."

The session wrapped up with a brief discussion of two topics: first, how consumers will obtain IP set-top boxes (Smith feels they will be subsidized in the short-term by IPTV providers but, just like the telephone, customers will soon be able to select these devices in retail stores); second, a request from the audience for a synopsis of the benefits of using a standards-based codec versus a proprietary codec.

Dale Sorenson noted that mass production requires "drawing ‘a line in the sand’ to stop continual tweaks." He also noted that proprietary codecs over time become better since they can modify both the encoders and the decoders.

Signes noted, though, that "a standard like MPEG-2 or MPEG-4 is based on the decoder, which allows everyone to compete on how to make the encode better." He noted that MPEG 2 originally started at 6-8Mbps for standard definition transmission but is now consistently down around the 2-3Mbps range.

"Broadcasters could move to a downloadable encoder that would sit on a DSP or an application-specific integrated circuit," he added, "but it would not be a cost-effective strategy."