Yeah, I'm mostly curious how this codec stacks up against WebM/VP8 or whatever other free codecs are out there. It'd be nice to see something take off that's less encumbered by licensing issues.
H.264 is already superior to VP8. I see no reason to suspect that this situation will change.
EDIT: I mean to say, H.264 implementations (particularly x264) are way, way, way out in front of VP8, so even as the H.264 standard is better, the actual facts on the ground are even more so. The only reason to use VP8 (and let me be clear: I think this is a perfectly legitimate reason) is political.
Every generational codec announcement from MPEG manages to attain "50% improvement", so it really remains to be seen. It certainly is a more advanced codec than H.264, which itself is already rather better than VP8 in its present form.
Regarding the other thing, MPEG is running two tracks for a royalty-free spec based on existing patent-free tech and on grants from H.264 patent holders (respectively) which they say they will decide on sometime this year. An option like that from MPEG might not take off but can't hurt.
I think that you probably get 50% at the generation introduction and another 50% over 10 years as the encoders are improved (and more hardware is thrown at the problem).
Double track on licensing makes some sense for a profile that can be served or provided free but I expect the efficiency benefits would mean that for commercial uses you would pay. That would mean that most hardware will support both so really I think most decodes will support both.
At this point, you are talking hardware acceleration is a must because of mobile (and it seems encoding on this one). Chip makers are fairly experienced with licensing, and a bit scarred of the unknown. MPEG-LA is a known.
