[ogg-dev] adwantages of ogg container?

Alexey Fisher bug-track at fisher-privat.net
Fri Aug 27 11:53:59 PDT 2010

Am Freitag, den 27.08.2010, 20:51 +0300 schrieb Sampo Syreeni:
> On 2010-08-27, Ralph Giles wrote:
> >> My question to you, What advantages has ogg vs matroska.
> >
> > They're both free containers, and there isn't a significant 
> > performance difference, so either one works from a free media 
> > perspective. [...]
> Personally I would add the following points/bullets:
> * Ogg has a lesser semantic burden, so that e.g. embedded
>    implementations which necessarily have to be minimal are easier and
>    cheaper to build; this of course means that a conforming Ogg
>    implementation might not be as feature-rich as a Matroska one
> * Ogg is a pure streaming protocol, whereas, IMO, Matroska tries to go a
>    bit beyond that; so I'd argue Ogg is a bit better at "doing just one
>    thing and doing it well"; I'd say it's "cleaner"

Doing one thing seem to be good reason. User normally see just file name
say bla.ogg or bla.mkv . Matroska may contain mp3+x264, this mix will
not work out of the box on really GPLed linux. By ogg you normally know
what it contain. Other thing is reduced matroska -> webm. This container
do one thing too.

Are there any good reason why ogg do not do frame timestamps (or
variable frame rate)? Or your first point, easy/embeded systems, is the

More information about the ogg-dev mailing list