On Dec 2, 2013, at 18:36 , Stephan Wenger <stewe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 1. A reasonably well tuned H.261 codec (including pre/post filters etc.) > will under almost any circumstance produce a better picture than MJPEG. > The intra coding tools of H.261 have a lot in common with JPEG, and H.261 > offers inter picture prediction on top of that. That may be true, but everyone has a JPEG implementation, its status is clear, and it does convey pictures. The RTP carriage is trivial, error resilience is excellent (all I pictures). Yes, you get low frame rates or small pictures, but it’s a fallback. Motion JPEG is not as bad a choice as all that. Anyone could implement it, and we could terminate this endless discussion with a decision that could, in fact, be respected by implementations. I still doubt whether people would consider it worthwhile spending engineer time and so on, on developing an H.261 solution, whereas JPEG (as a codec) is still in heavy use elsewhere. Nonetheless, I still think H.263 deserves a more careful look. I know Stephan is negative, but so far, he’s the only one. For those who DON’T currently implement H.263, could/would you? David Singer Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.