The 2010 Google I/O Developer Conference Roundup
by Ganesh T S on May 28, 2010 2:00 AM ESTThe 2010 Google I/O Developer Conference saw Google's moves in the consumer space, away from its Internet search stronghold.
Android had always been gaining momentum, and the good reception that was accorded to Froyo was always on the cards. We will cover Froyo in a separate article after evaluating it when it is pushed to our Nexus Ones.
With its VP8 open sourcing, Google has managed to open up a can of worms. It is a great thing for consumers in the short run. In the longer term, we feel it wouldn't be of any benefit to consumers to have both VP8 and H264 codecs for different applications.
Google TV, as a software platform, is a laudable initiative. We hope it will get open sourced soon, as an Android port on the x86 platform has innumerable possibilities. On the hardware side, as a dedicated set-top box, things don't look that rosy. Fortunately, Google doesn't have much to lose in that perspective, as long as Google TV manages to reach the television in some form or the other. In this scenario, the open sourcing would create ports for the HTPC. Google would also do well to tie up with other TV manufacturers and TV programming providers (such as Comcast / DirecTV) to bring Google TV on their sets and STBs.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
22 Comments
View All Comments
ganeshts - Friday, May 28, 2010 - link
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. The post, I see, was made on Thursday morning, and the draft for this article was prepared much before that.I will update the article and we will see how this pans out when other people join in to discuss the post you have linked.
iwodo - Friday, May 28, 2010 - link
One thing we should consider when we compare x264 ( the best of H.264 encoder ) to WebM ( VP8 ), is to use Baseline profile for H.264 only. Because one of the biggest advantage / argument for H.264 is hardware acceleration. For where hardware acceleration matter most, the Mobile sector, their hardware decoder only/mostly support Baseline profile. So if we use a High Profile H.264 quality compare against VP8 and then assume most mobile gadget can get hardware acceleration is simply unfair comparison.VP8 doesn't have a spec. At least not in its current form. It can only be called a Commented / Documented Reference Encoder.
ganeshts - Friday, May 28, 2010 - link
While your indication that hardware acceleration is available only for Baseline Profile H264 might hold true for yesteryear's devices, present generation chipsets support even High Profile 4.1 with just some bit rate restrictions.Compare Tegra 1 and Tegra 2 chipsets, and also take a look at Chips&Media IP series on their website. Previous generation used to support only baseline. Present generation can do L4.1 High Profile with 10 Mbps restriction for Tegra 2 and 30 Mbps restriction for the Chips&Media IP (Coda series). (Chips&Media is used in the Shanzai PMP chipsets such as those from Telechips and can decode 1080p videos on to small PMP screens / output to HDMI also).
VP8, as a spec, people say, is comparable to only Baseline H264. Personally, I feel we are regressing on the quality we could have, because H264 hardware decode is maturing fast. VP8 will take some time to catch up, and unless a new version of the codec appears to catch up with High Profile, will always lag on quality. VP8 is going to take quite some time to catch up on that front.
iwodo - Friday, May 28, 2010 - link
Yes. Today's new chips set may support High Profile. But how many of them are shipped?Compare to Millions of iPhone / iPod Touch Devices that still only support Baseline Profile.
ajp_anton - Friday, May 28, 2010 - link
One of the x264 developers wrote a blog about VP8:http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/?p=377
There are comparisons somewhere near the end with both screenshots and the whole video downloadable.
x264, high profile: http://doom10.org/compare/x264.png
x264, baseline profile: http://doom10.org/compare/x264baseline.png
VP8: http://doom10.org/compare/vp8.png
CountDown_0 - Friday, May 28, 2010 - link
I'm not saying that Froyo, Google TV and WebM are not interesting, but... One thing I noticed is that nobody seems to have spent a single word about Google Wave. Does this mean bad news for that project?Casper42 - Friday, May 28, 2010 - link
What about it? Its been out for a while now so its kinda old news.Also doesn't tie in much with Anandtech, being mainly a hardware site.
awaken688 - Saturday, May 29, 2010 - link
"In a perfect world, we would have no software patents and everyone would be capable of using the best technology available. However, for now, we will have to put up with these types of laws and patents."You need to keep obvious bias from your articles. Not everyone in the world thinks everything should be open-sourced and free for all. As much as the patent trolling and patent squatting sucks, the core fundamentals of the system are what drive a lot of innovation. Many of these companies wouldn't even bother putting in the R & D if someone else could just come in and steal it without having to pay that cost.
Long story short, keep it technical, objective, and less biased.
ganeshts - Sunday, May 30, 2010 - link
Thanks for your comment.This article is meant to be Anandtech's take / opinion on the introductions. So, there will definitely be a bias.
For an unbiased report, we have DailyTech's articles.
Also, many engineers who work in the industry believe that software patents are not that great. Patents that reflect actual hardware / system designs make more sense. Otherwise, we end up with patents like the one issued for 'Linked List' [ Check this out: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/7028023.html ]
flatline403 - Saturday, May 29, 2010 - link
I assume Ganesh is not a native English speaker. This is a good article with good technical details, but it's badly in need of careful editing.