I think the nature of the open source OGV is that it can't be used in commercial encoders.
For those who want an open source codec they should be moving to WebM which is available in commercial encoders such as Telestream Episode (and may be in Squeeze as well).
I was wondering if that was the case, but I do see Squeeze added the x264 encoder in version 8, which was surprising.
Yes, Squeeze does support WebM. I may try to suggest a VP8 encode in a WebM container to the client. They are currently requesting an OGV, but I may see if we can convince them that's not what they need.
Would you say WebM format is winning over OGV? Our client is trying to ensure HTML5 compatibility for a national email newsletter, but last time I checked, the HTML5 vid spec isn't even finalized.
IMHO OGV is dead. It's a horrible ancient codec. WebM is quality competitive to H.264 and several browsers are supporting it in HTML5 and others may through plugin.
Personally I'd tell a client that using OGV is a serious mistake. In my opinion it should be avoided.
Basically if they're targeting HTML5 support it would be H.264 and WebM (you may need both if you're not using Flash).
Generally I never assume the client knows current technology (although they certainly may).
Depending on the intent I often recommend Flash with HTML5 H.264 fallback since the same encode can be used for both and it would cover all modern browsers and iOS devices. If they'd prefer to avoid Flash then HTML5 with H.264 and WebM would work.
Keep in mind that nearly all browsers support Flash, even those that support HTML5 WebM.
Also Windows Media Player 12 on Windows 7 supports H.264 playback as well.
Anyone who hasn't updated anything in so long that they can't play H.264 or WebM isn't really a good target for computer outreach.
A Flash compatible H.264 encode with fallback using the same file with HTML5 would pretty much cover every browser and most smart phones. You might need to use Baseline Profile for some older smartphones. I'm not sure how Android phones work with MainProfile. Oder iPhones may need Baseline as well.
I wish I knew someone with an Android phone to test. Ironically, the one person here at Steelehouse who owned an Android just switched to iPhone this week.
I believe iPhone 4 and earlier require Baseline profile for H.264. It seems the 4S offers High profile support.
iPhone 4S Video formats supported (via Apple.com): H.264 video up to 1080p
30 frames per second
High Profile level 4.1 with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file formats
MPEG-4 video up to 2.5 Mbps
640 by 480 pixels
30 frames per second
Simple Profile with AAC-LC audio up to 160 Kbps per channel, 48kHz, stereo audio in .m4v, .mp4, and .mov file format
Motion JPEG (M-JPEG) up to 35 Mbps, 1280 by 720 pixels, 30 frames per second, audio in ulaw, PCM stereo audio in .avi file format
High Profile is not officially supported (although does work on 4S and iPads and may on 4 as well).
Main Profile on 4 up and all iPads.
Baseline 3GS and below.
Android is fractured on OS and hardware. For this reason I take that into any claims about Android market share. "Android" is too generic to have meaning for targeting in many cases IMHO.
Nominally this is the equivalent Android developer doc. http://developer.android.com/guide/appendix/media-formats.html
Much indication of Baseline Profile and nothing higher. Maybe that takes into account that some older or cheaper phones have weak decoders. I'm not sure if it means all Android OSs can decode H.264 but one might guess that.