h.264 in mov vs. h.264 in mp4

Question

Level 4

1,335 points

h.264 in mov vs. h.264 in mp4

I find this very confusing. what is the difference between using h.264 in a .mov file and using it in a .mp4 file.
Is MP4 both a container file and a codec?

I am sold on h.264, but now I don't know which to use it in: Export to QT Movie or Export to mp4.

Dual 1.8 G5, Mac OS X (10.4.3), 1.5 GB RAM, iPod, iPod Mini

Posted on Nov 21, 2005 8:13 PM

Reply

Answer 1

Nov 21, 2005 8:33 PM in response to bjw

The difference is that .mov is a container. MPEG-4 is a container with standards.
http://www.mpegif.org/
http://www.mpeg4.net/
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/technologies/mpeg4/
H.264 can be used in both containers but only one of them may be around in ten years time.
.AVI is a container with no rules. DivX is a codec that wants to become a container.

Reply

Answer 2

bjw Author

Level 4

1,335 points

Nov 22, 2005 4:28 AM in response to QuickTimeKirk

Thanks QTK.

I ran the Automator last night to turn a bunch of tv shows into mp4. Pretty cool to wake up and see them all done.

I'll read the links you sent - but is there some major reason Apple is still pushing the mov container instead of the mp4 container?

Reply

Answer 3

Nov 22, 2005 6:30 AM in response to bjw

I don't think Apple is "pushing" the .mov extension over the .mp4 extension. The issue about MPEG-4 (and .mp4 files) is one of Microsoft's refusal to follow the standards and the attempt to create their own.
Many .mp4 files created using Windows software use "proprietary" Microsoft codecs that do not comply. People will soon be very confused (like the way it is today with .avi files).
Another issue is the browser plug-in. Users must "set" the plug-in (MIME Settings) to handle .mp4 extension. It is turned off during a default install of QT.
A Web visitor (first time visit to a page holding an .mp4) may have the file "download", open in a new browser window or even in a different application other than QT.
Whenever I use MPEG-4 settings in my projects destined for Web use I always use the .mov container.
Next year will bring the first MPEG-4 DVD's and some broadcasters are already using H.264 for set top boxes (convertors for HD signals).
One day the .mov format will seem about as relevant as DOS. We aren't there yet.

Reply

Answer 4

bjw Author

Level 4

1,335 points

Nov 22, 2005 9:04 AM in response to QuickTimeKirk

Thanks for all that QTK.

Even when I know my audience I get aggravated with embedding QT for Windows users. Granted, my pages are as simple as possible and I don't have multiple versions of the page for different browsers etc. But when you know specific audience members have recently installed QT7 and the page doesn't invoke QT it makes me want to pull my hair out!
I'm hijacking my own thread.
I don't want to spend a ton of time researching web delivery and sometimes in the end I end up converting content to wmv because the odds are better that my Windows audience will see it. You just never know how much "extra junk" a windows machine will have and what program will have taken the extension types.
It seems like we're so close to being able to reliably deliver video with very little effort, but just far enough away to make it frustrating. So many times people tell me the page didn't open. Others have no trouble whatsoever. I welcome anything that helps standardize it.

Reply

Answer 5

Nov 22, 2005 9:21 AM in response to bjw

Embedding QuickTime content is easy, if you follow the "rules":
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=61011
The plug-in (or lack of it) should trigger a Windows user to either the file or the download page for QuickTime.
Using H.264 is a slightly different matter because the plug-in will "work" but confusing "messages" (component needed) may turn off some PC users (and many Mac users, too).
I place a notice on my pages that says QuickTime 7 required to view and a link to the download page.
Many computers can not install QuickTime 7 (it's not for everyone any longer). If you have the space and the bandwidth an alternative page, file format or download (or stream) may keep your visitors happy.
But you don't see the Apple movie trailer pages apologizing for H.264 content. Viewers either "get it" or move on.
Post a link for your pages and I'll look at the html code for errors. They're easy to spot.

Reply

Answer 6

bjw Author

Level 4

1,335 points

Nov 22, 2005 10:50 AM in response to QuickTimeKirk

Some people have said it didn't load, and I know they have QT7. For most people it works fine.
I put the links to QT7 too. The standalone installer.

Here's the html for a simple page(sorry, I don't want to share the content!): http://thelamargroup.net/sample.txt

Reply

Answer 7

Nov 22, 2005 11:14 AM in response to bjw

The problems PC users are having is caused by your page code.
You've only used the embed tag and it is not supported by many browsers (IE for Windows).
Read this page for more info regarding the "object" tag:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=61011
If your viewers claim the get a "white" video (when you use H.264) but can hear sound they are not using QT 7.
BTW, your example page didn't show a movie (file not found) but maybe you did that on purpose.

Reply

Answer 8

bjw Author

Level 4

1,335 points

Nov 22, 2005 11:33 AM in response to QuickTimeKirk

I left the movie file out on purpose, yeah.

Do you mean only IE for Windows supports the embed tag or or that it doesn't?

Thanks, I'll take a look at the object tag...you've been very helpful.

Reply

Answer 9

Nov 22, 2005 11:40 AM in response to bjw

Not only the "object" tag is required. You must also use the classid line of code and the codebase line to "trigger" ActiveX for a first time IE PC visitor.
Once ActiveX has been "turned on" you only need the param tags. But, since you don't know if the visit is from a first timer, you should include it on any page that calls the plug-in.

Reply

Answer 10

Nov 22, 2005 11:44 AM in response to bjw

Recent versions of Windows (and IE) require you to use the object tags. This freeware app will write both object and embed tags so the html it generates will work with both Mac and Windows browsers, regardless of the Operating System and browser they are using: PAGEot

Reply

Answer 11

bjw Author

Level 4

1,335 points

Nov 22, 2005 2:27 PM in response to Dick Napoli

Excellent, thanks.

Reply

Answer 12

bjw Author

Level 4

1,335 points

Nov 22, 2005 4:39 PM in response to bjw

I'm trying PageOT and the resulting html works fine on the Mac side, but two Windows machines don't like it. I'm getting an error that says there's a problem in my plugin in IE.

I can't believe MS expects people to insert those nasty classid codes into web pages. That is so unfriendly and inconvenient.

Here is the code I am using now...
http://thelamargroup.net/sample2.txt

Reply

Answer 13

Nov 22, 2005 4:55 PM in response to bjw

The code looks fine.
Bookmark the other link I gave you because there are many more tricks you can learn from them.
We Web content creators don't like the extra code either. The blame falls squarely on Microsoft.

Reply

Answer 14

bjw Author

Level 4

1,335 points

Nov 22, 2005 5:00 PM in response to QuickTimeKirk

Thanks again. I'm going to read all those links tonight. My Windows machine must be having an issue.

When you look at how simple an embed tag is it makes the MS tag requirements ridiculous. I guess they didn't learn when everyone with a clue rejected Front Page.

Reply