[asterisk-biz] Re: [asterisk-users] H.264 *Not Patented*

[Matthew Rubenstein]

	One of the main requirements of the "best" codec is that it's widely
supported by PSTN carriers. They're the ones looking for the most
economical CPU/network bandwidth for the $license, generally preferring
G.729 to GSM. I don't think speex is as popular as even GSM.


On Sat, 2007-01-27 at 14:25 -0500, Michael Jerris wrote:
>      1. The case in question about H.264 seems to indicate that maybe
>         1 pattent on H.264 is invalid, there are many.
>      2. H.264 is a video codec, not an audio codec, so I suppose you
>         could encode audio on it if you wanted to plot the audio
>         signal on a graph and encode that, but not sure how useful
>         that would be (shamelessly stolen from a certain spandsp
>         author).
> 
>  
> 
> If your really looking for a good codec that isn’t encumbered by
> patents similar to g729, look at speex.  It is the best alternative
> with similar characteristics.
> 
>  
> 
> Mike
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>         On Sat, 2007-01-27 at 11:33 -0500, Lee Jenkins wrote: 
>         
>         > >
>         > >     How does H.264 compare with GSM and G.729 in CPU
>         demand (MIPS:Kbps) and
>         > > audio quality at low bitrates? GSM is $free, but G.729 is
>         higher quality
>         
>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
> 
> asterisk-biz mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
-- 

(C) Matthew Rubenstein