Better WebM's
You are currently reading a thread in /qa/ - Question & Answer
Why aren't VP9 WebM's supported by 4chan? It essentially halves the file size without sacrificing quality, and that could benefit the servers and the users.
Ask the developer through https://www.4chan.org/feedback
I'm sure it's something he'd consider implementing
>>349757
I did that months ago.
>>349764
Well the likelihood of you getting an actual response here is just as good.
I'd be for it if VP9 is supported in-browser by a majority.
>>349768
It's supported by Chrome and Firefox. Internet Explorer doesn't even support WebM's at all.
>>349789
That's about what I expected from IE.
Who knows, maybe the developer is working on an implementation right now
>>349796
Neither Safari nor Internet Explorer support WebM NATIVELY. Microsoft explained why in 2011, Apple doesn't really care. Microsoft's Edge will add native support in the future.
I'm all for it at this point. Google is already serving it to any desktop browser that supports it and now that ffmpeg's release cycle is so quick we're seeing major improvements in encoding speed and quality for us regular end users.
>>351219
VP10 will come out sooner than later too.
My most recent ffmpeg build defaults to libvpx-vp9 if you don't specify the encoder and have an output file with .webm as its extension. Could end up causing a bit of chaos once this change makes it to a stable release, assuming it hasn't already. Might wanna consider flipping the metaphorical vp9 switch (yes, it probably is that easy) before it happens.
>>352750
It defaults to opus for audio as well, by the way.