Mihajlo, I guess it has to do with a business case and simplicity. For the most part, cloud storage and cloud transfer services are good enough and offer an asynchronous experience (I can send you a file whenever I want and don’t need to be online when you receive it). Then there’s the business case question – what does the service provider has to gain from offering this capability? How does he turn it into a profit, and why would people use it?

Sergio – thanks a bunch for the clarification on this one (and for getting it done)

In some ways, you have.

Safari supports WebRTC as much as can be expected from a new entrant. There are gaps in the implementation but these will be resolved at their own pace now, without the big question “Will Apple support WebRTC”.

VP8 is coming to Safari as well, so that’s behind us.

There are companies already in production who support both desktop and mobile Safari.

Just kinda reading between the digital lines of technology and a couple “wild ass guesses”! 🙂

Lot of stuff buzzin’ around my cranium.

100,000-foot level stuff.

I think WebRTC “really takes off” once all browsers also support either an AV1 software codec, AV1 in embedded mobile GPU (aka Apple mobile processor) and/or AV1 embedded in low power silicon chip.

Also just thinking out loud, WebGPU (Apple tech)
will “rip a direct path” to the Mobile embedded GPU for Mobile Browser apps (True Interactive Distributed Cloud Gaming, AR/VR, Machine Learning, AV1-based 4k UHD Video, etc.) add WebAssembly, RUST programming language and a few other goodies from a browser perspective and I think we will see some very interesting uplifts to WebRTC in the coming Web Epoch….the “Real-Time Web”, in browser platforms. Seems that mobile operating systems are starting to get in the way of progressive innovation on the Web and a few bypasses are required. H.264 served it’s purpose at Apple and now with the web becoming visually focused (i.e. Live Video IP Broadcast, Video on Demand, Cloud-based Game Play, etc.) for its Mobile use base (Billions and Billions) and the crushing demand of compute, memory, network and storage of video applications, video apps will find a “safe refuge” in today’s modern browsers to continue to provide compelling revenue and profits for Apple, Google, Facebook, Amazon and other web properties hangin’ around the edge of the net.

Also, think Google Android may be hitting a wall. Think Chris McKillop’s (Google Engineering Director) Fuchsia OS may be a good candidate for a Modern Google Android to deal with the demands of future WebRTC apps, again just a crazy wild ass guess.

https://twitter.com/chrismckillop?lang=en

Oh yeah, forgot the one critically important value proposition of AV1….”no royalties”. That’s the “kicker” that “will bury the digital needle” in moving the Visual Web forward and help WebRTC a wee bit.

Just plain good business common sense, among many, many other business and technology decisions in the rapidly, evolving web ecosystem. 🙂

Cheers,

Ron

None at all I am afraid.

While acceleration is available in many desktop devices, Google haven’t focused on using them. Main reason is probably the better quality that can be reached by software encoders which are easier to modify and tweak.