AV1 already wins handily as a codec, and the only thing keeping it from being adopted more broadly than is currently the case is lack of hardware decoders on older hardware. This problem naturally solves itself as old hardware gets replaced.
Even then, dav1d is a remarkable piece of software, and software decoding is pretty viable for AV1 thanks to it. Many places have already adopted AV1, and you should expect to keep seeing it get adopted as time goes on.
Better hardware encoder support would help, too. It's insanely inefficient to encode without that dedicated hardware, compared to h264/h265, where dedicated hardware support is there.
I was hoping Apple would add it when they shipped the M4, and now M5, but nope.
Hardware encoder support I think is generally less critical. Decoding is the process that needs to happen real-time, while most encoding can be done far in advance, unless you're live broadcasting or operating at YouTube-scale.
While I agree, my point was that encoding needs to be more efficient, both in time, and resource consumption. That isn't quite there yet, for AV1. It is improving, albeit slowly.
It's too bad the GPU prices are utter insanity due to the LLM pyramid scheme poaching global RAM. I read an article yesterday that said Apple is likely eating that RAM overhead as a loss to ensure their long term strategy.
I still wonder why video is about the only thing for which a restricted format is still the "industry standard"?
We nowadays take photos in JPEG or WebP format, draw raster images in PNG or WebP format, vector graphics in SVG format, our documents are PDF or OOXML or ODF or HTML, all of which are (at least technically) open standards. Video is the only thing that still mostly runs on formats with restrictive patents.
Shit I hadn't heard of that. That makes me sad. I know from reading developer blogs at the time that they tried to use less established techniques in some places to try and avoid similarities. Let's hope it proves to be enough in the lawsuit. That would be horrible if some dusty encumbant can crush the new codec at a critical time of its global adotion.
MKV is a container format for bundling together streams of audio, video, and text. It does not provide the actual video compression, which is still typically h.264 or h.265.
The other answer you got hits it on the head already.
Here's an additional piece of info you might like: The webm container format is actually a specific subset of Matroska. The big players in the web recognised that it was a very useful open container format and adopted it for the web. They took a subset to make implementation in browsers easier and more uniform.
Absolute financial parasitism. This is why we can't have nice things. People who own a license of something critical can just sit on their asses decades on end and collect unearned income from other companies who will in turn move to cost to the consumers.
Remember when Martin Shkreli was thrown in jail for hiking the price of medicine by 5555%? That was 2017, but when something like this happens in 2026 nobody bats an eye.
Since the first version of the standard was completed in May 2003 (22 years ago) and the most commonly used profile (the High profile) was completed in June 2004[citation needed] (21 years ago), some of the relevant patents are expired by now,[75] while others are still in force in jurisdictions around the world and one of the US patents in the MPEG LA H.264 pool (granted in 2016) lasts at least until November 2030.
51 Comments
pricklypearbear@lemmy.world · 122 pts · 147d
Hope this pushes the royalty-free alternatives more. That's a crazy jump.
VibeSurgeon@piefed.social · 74 pts · 147d
AV1 already wins handily as a codec, and the only thing keeping it from being adopted more broadly than is currently the case is lack of hardware decoders on older hardware. This problem naturally solves itself as old hardware gets replaced.
Even then, dav1d is a remarkable piece of software, and software decoding is pretty viable for AV1 thanks to it. Many places have already adopted AV1, and you should expect to keep seeing it get adopted as time goes on.
RedSnt@feddit.dk · 24 pts · 147d
AV1 has recently gotten involved in a lawsuit by Dolby saying that they're breaking like
54 of their patent, so there's some issues there as well: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/03/av1s-open-royalty-free-promise-in-question-as-dolby-sues-snapchat-over-codec/VibeSurgeon@piefed.social · 34 pts · 147d
These things always happen because of how dumb software patents are. There's no guarantee the lawsuit will stick, nor do I necessarily expect it to
deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz · 15 pts · 146d
It's even worse than that: the USPO abrogated their responsibility to evaluate patents for prior art and conflict with other patents to the courts.
So they just issue patents willy nilly and expect courts to decide which ones 'win'.
plz1@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 147d
Better hardware encoder support would help, too. It's insanely inefficient to encode without that dedicated hardware, compared to h264/h265, where dedicated hardware support is there.
I was hoping Apple would add it when they shipped the M4, and now M5, but nope.
VibeSurgeon@piefed.social · 11 pts · 147d
Hardware encoder support I think is generally less critical. Decoding is the process that needs to happen real-time, while most encoding can be done far in advance, unless you're live broadcasting or operating at YouTube-scale.
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 146d
On a media server encoding is typically done in real time
VibeSurgeon@piefed.social · 1 pts · 146d
It depends on what the receiving unit can decode. Sometimes there will be transcoding, but it's usually something you want to avoid.
plz1@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 146d
While I agree, my point was that encoding needs to be more efficient, both in time, and resource consumption. That isn't quite there yet, for AV1. It is improving, albeit slowly.
baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de · 2 pts · 146d
non apple chips can pretty much all hardware encode AV1 nowadays. it's really just apple doing its own thing again
plz1@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 146d
It's too bad the GPU prices are utter insanity due to the LLM pyramid scheme poaching global RAM. I read an article yesterday that said Apple is likely eating that RAM overhead as a loss to ensure their long term strategy.
schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de · 14 pts · 147d
I still wonder why video is about the only thing for which a restricted format is still the "industry standard"?
We nowadays take photos in JPEG or WebP format, draw raster images in PNG or WebP format, vector graphics in SVG format, our documents are PDF or OOXML or ODF or HTML, all of which are (at least technically) open standards. Video is the only thing that still mostly runs on formats with restrictive patents.
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 146d
AV1 is getting note and more common
onlinepersona@programming.dev · 6 pts · 146d
Which royalty free alternatives exist?
Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de · 10 pts · 146d
Theora, VP8, VP9, and AV1 are the ones that come to mind.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 146d
Didn't Dolby just sue Snap for using AV1? Claiming it uses similar techniques to h264 or 265 or something?
pricklypearbear@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 146d
Believe its similar techniques to h.265 for AV1. That's still going on....not sure if it will go anywhere.
Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 146d
Shit I hadn't heard of that. That makes me sad. I know from reading developer blogs at the time that they tried to use less established techniques in some places to try and avoid similarities. Let's hope it proves to be enough in the lawsuit. That would be horrible if some dusty encumbant can crush the new codec at a critical time of its global adotion.
boonhet@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 146d
I hope this lawsuit starts a trail of failures for Dolby and they go under.
01189998819991197253@infosec.pub · 3 pts · 146d
What about Matroska? That was open to begin with, wasn't it? Is it not good for streaming?
ayyy@sh.itjust.works · 17 pts · 146d
MKV is a container format for bundling together streams of audio, video, and text. It does not provide the actual video compression, which is still typically h.264 or h.265.
01189998819991197253@infosec.pub · 4 pts · 146d
Understood. They mentioned mpeg4 in the text, which (because of the MP4 container) got me on that route. Thanks for the clarification.
ayyy@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 146d
Unrelated, screw you for getting that jingle stuck in my head for another week.
01189998819991197253@infosec.pub · 1 pts · 146d
Lol what jungle? Or... do I even want to know?
Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de · 6 pts · 146d
The other answer you got hits it on the head already.
Here's an additional piece of info you might like: The webm container format is actually a specific subset of Matroska. The big players in the web recognised that it was a very useful open container format and adopted it for the web. They took a subset to make implementation in browsers easier and more uniform.
01189998819991197253@infosec.pub · 4 pts · 146d
I did not know that, and I do like that piece of info! Thanks!
Korkki@lemmy.ml · 64 pts · 147d
Absolute financial parasitism. This is why we can't have nice things. People who own a license of something critical can just sit on their asses decades on end and collect unearned income from other companies who will in turn move to cost to the consumers.
RedSnt@feddit.dk · 23 pts · 147d
Remember when Martin Shkreli was thrown in jail for hiking the price of medicine by 5555%? That was 2017, but when something like this happens in 2026 nobody bats an eye.
ParlimentOfDoom@piefed.zip · 24 pts · 147d
No? He was arrested for securities fraud, not for increasing the price of medication.
That's why you're not seeing anyone bat an eye now they didn't then either.
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 147d
Medicine is not a codec.
jtrek@startrek.website · 15 pts · 147d
See also: capitalism more generally
stormeuh@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 147d
More specifically late-stage capitalism. This is a classic example of rent-seeking by a capitalist who has cornered a market.
Maeve@kbin.earth · 1 pts · 145d
It's just capitalism. The fascism we're seeing is late stage capitalism.
Evotech@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 147d
Well it’s their developed tech and they see streaming sites raise their prices and rake money.
hitmyspot@aussie.zone · 10 pts · 147d
Existing licences are granfathered. So this seems more like a barrier to new entrants.
etherphon@piefed.world · 30 pts · 146d
baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de · 12 pts · 146d
dolby technologies aren't even the most advanced, they're just the most marketed, most expensive, most cutthroat in the industry
etherphon@piefed.world · 5 pts · 146d
possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 146d
What are the alternatives
Blackmist@feddit.uk · 4 pts · 145d
None if you want it to work on consumer hardware.
BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world · 22 pts · 146d
I thought h.264 patents are expired
Edit: it was patented in 2003, so 20 year period is gone already
olafurp@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 146d
Wikipedia covers it nicely:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Video_Coding?wprov=sfla1
quick_snail@feddit.nl · 6 pts · 146d
So paying is optional? I don't get it..
BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 146d
Neither do I. Most of h264 is either open domain now or it will be very soon
LodeMike@lemmy.today · 16 pts · 147d
They see the stupid sony lawsuit and want in.